|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||1801 To 2400|
|Locale Reference||airport : eau|
|Altitude||msl bound lower : 3000|
msl bound upper : 3000
|Controlling Facilities||artcc : zmp|
|Operator||common carrier : air taxi|
|Make Model Name||Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Recip Eng|
|Flight Phase||descent : approach|
|Affiliation||company : air taxi|
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
|Qualification||pilot : atp|
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 280|
flight time total : 4000
|Affiliation||government : faa|
|Function||controller : radar|
|Qualification||controller : radar|
|Anomaly||aircraft equipment problem : critical|
non adherence : published procedure
non adherence : clearance
other spatial deviation
|Independent Detector||other controllera|
other flight crewa
|Resolutory Action||flight crew : returned to intended course or assigned course|
|Air Traffic Incident||other|
Approach runway 22 ILS eau position (11 mi arc) eau. Localizer did not come in (indicate passage). Noticed compass locator passage, turned towards locator. Requested missed approach because of navigation problem. ZMP asked position. Switched to #1 navigation. Gave position. All frequencys were tuned and idented. There was no navigation flag. Navigation difficulty (CDI no sensing) was discovered. Switched to #2 navigation. At this time center lectured about potential problem because of error in position report. Minimums approach was made using #2 navigation and G/south. I feel that center, as soon as it was made known that there was a navigation problem on the final approach, should have given a vector away from any other aircraft in the approach airspace. Asking to give a position report when on a minimums approach with malfunctioning navigation equipment is time ill spent if there is a known navigation problem. Note: navigation flag did not show until the beginning of the second approach. It was later found that water leaked in on #1 navigation on the top of the radio stack. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: the aircraft was transponder equipped but that they are sometimes lost by ARTCC when at low altitude. The WX was at minimums. There was a jet small transport to the southeast to follow him. He was on a DME arc transition to the approach. He wanted ARTCC to give him a specific heading. A hard altitude was issued by ARTCC sometime later.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: SMT HAS NAVIGATION PROBLEM AND SHOOTS MISSED APCH.
Narrative: APCH RWY 22 ILS EAU POS (11 MI ARC) EAU. LOC DID NOT COME IN (INDICATE PASSAGE). NOTICED COMPASS LOCATOR PASSAGE, TURNED TOWARDS LOCATOR. REQUESTED MISSED APCH BECAUSE OF NAV PROB. ZMP ASKED POS. SWITCHED TO #1 NAV. GAVE POS. ALL FREQS WERE TUNED AND IDENTED. THERE WAS NO NAV FLAG. NAV DIFFICULTY (CDI NO SENSING) WAS DISCOVERED. SWITCHED TO #2 NAV. AT THIS TIME CENTER LECTURED ABOUT POTENTIAL PROB BECAUSE OF ERROR IN POS RPT. MINIMUMS APCH WAS MADE USING #2 NAV AND G/S. I FEEL THAT CENTER, AS SOON AS IT WAS MADE KNOWN THAT THERE WAS A NAV PROB ON THE FINAL APCH, SHOULD HAVE GIVEN A VECTOR AWAY FROM ANY OTHER ACFT IN THE APCH AIRSPACE. ASKING TO GIVE A POS RPT WHEN ON A MINIMUMS APCH WITH MALFUNCTIONING NAV EQUIP IS TIME ILL SPENT IF THERE IS A KNOWN NAV PROB. NOTE: NAV FLAG DID NOT SHOW UNTIL THE BEGINNING OF THE SECOND APCH. IT WAS LATER FOUND THAT WATER LEAKED IN ON #1 NAV ON THE TOP OF THE RADIO STACK. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: THE ACFT WAS TRANSPONDER EQUIPPED BUT THAT THEY ARE SOMETIMES LOST BY ARTCC WHEN AT LOW ALT. THE WX WAS AT MINIMUMS. THERE WAS A JET SMT TO THE SE TO FOLLOW HIM. HE WAS ON A DME ARC TRANSITION TO THE APCH. HE WANTED ARTCC TO GIVE HIM A SPECIFIC HDG. A HARD ALT WAS ISSUED BY ARTCC SOMETIME LATER.
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.