Less than standard separation and close proximity between departing commuter and arriving GA-twin. Both IFR and opposite direction operation on same runway. Operational error.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	87979
Time
Date	198805
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mry
State Reference	CA
Altitude	msl bound lower : 1000 msl bound upper : 1500
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : mry
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Light Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude climbout : initial
Route In Use	departure sid : sid
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	general aviation : corporate
Make Model Name	Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Recip Eng
Flight Phase	descent : approach descent other
Route In Use	approach : straight in
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 250 flight time total : 1600 flight time type : 300
ASRS Report	87979
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe non adherence : required legal separation
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	none taken : insufficient time none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 3000 vertical : 500
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Operational Error

Narrative:

This is concerning an incident on flight from mry. I was the PNF and we were cleared for takeoff on runway 28L, west/O being told of opp traffic on the ILS for runway 1OR. We started our turn at 1000' to a heading of 330 degrees, which is what the mry 4 departure SID calls for. According to the controller (which was the tower), we missed the oncoming traffic by a few hundred ft, west/O even knowing its whereabouts. The supervisor of the facility said we didn't start our turn, which is not correct. We started our turn at the proper altitude with a standard rate turn. The person working the tower told us that it is purely a judgement call on his part. Why should the controller take full responsibility for our safety?!!! The opp traffic was a GA twin Y, and I'm sure the closure rate was quite high. If we had known of the traffic, we could have declined the takeoff clearance.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LESS THAN STANDARD SEPARATION AND CLOSE PROX BETWEEN DEPARTING COMMUTER AND ARRIVING GA-TWIN. BOTH IFR AND OPPOSITE DIRECTION OPERATION ON SAME RWY. OPERATIONAL ERROR.

Narrative: THIS IS CONCERNING AN INCIDENT ON FLT FROM MRY. I WAS THE PNF AND WE WERE CLRED FOR TKOF ON RWY 28L, W/O BEING TOLD OF OPP TFC ON THE ILS FOR RWY 1OR. WE STARTED OUR TURN AT 1000' TO A HDG OF 330 DEGS, WHICH IS WHAT THE MRY 4 DEP SID CALLS FOR. ACCORDING TO THE CTLR (WHICH WAS THE TWR), WE MISSED THE ONCOMING TFC BY A FEW HUNDRED FT, W/O EVEN KNOWING ITS WHEREABOUTS. THE SUPVR OF THE FAC SAID WE DIDN'T START OUR TURN, WHICH IS NOT CORRECT. WE STARTED OUR TURN AT THE PROPER ALT WITH A STANDARD RATE TURN. THE PERSON WORKING THE TWR TOLD US THAT IT IS PURELY A JUDGEMENT CALL ON HIS PART. WHY SHOULD THE CTLR TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR OUR SAFETY?!!! THE OPP TFC WAS A GA TWIN Y, AND I'M SURE THE CLOSURE RATE WAS QUITE HIGH. IF WE HAD KNOWN OF THE TFC, WE COULD HAVE DECLINED THE TKOF CLRNC.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.