|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||0601 To 1200|
|Locale Reference||atc facility : cou|
|Altitude||msl bound lower : 3500|
msl bound upper : 3500
|Controlling Facilities||tracon : cou|
|Operator||general aviation : instructional|
|Make Model Name||Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng|
|Flight Phase||descent : approach|
|Function||flight crew : captain|
|Qualification||pilot : atp|
pilot : cfi
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 150|
flight time total : 7000
flight time type : 1200
|Function||flight crew : first officer|
|Qualification||pilot : commercial|
pilot : instrument
|Anomaly||other anomaly other|
|Independent Detector||other flight crewa|
other other : unspecified
|Resolutory Action||flight crew : became reoriented|
flight crew : returned to intended course or assigned course
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
We were on descent into jef and had been earlier cleared direct to jef. The commercial charts available to us on the aircraft were dated as follows. Jef terminal, feb 5, 1988, low altitude en route, #15, #16, feb 5, 1988. All these charts show the 110.2 VOR on the field at jef. We had dialed in 110.2 quite a ways out, receiving a weak, undefined audio identify, but a good signal on the needles. We continued inbound, thinking that the VOR was directly on our destination airport. We called the airport in sight, and we were cleared for a visual approach. What we did not know, due to our recently outdated charts, was that the 110.2 VOR had been placed in service on the field at communication, approximately 15 no of jef. We were approximately 10 mi from communication at 3500 MSL when we realized the airport we had in sight did not appear to be jef. We quickly checked the J aids, airport diagram, for additional reference and it too stated that 110.2 VOR was on the field at jef. We rechked the 110.2 audio identify, then, receiving the morse code that did not match jef. With that confirmed, and overflying the field at approximately 3500 to 4000 MSL to visually confirm it was not jef, we called cou approach control. I think they became aware of the situation right before we called them back. They immediately gave us a heading for jef. We landed at jef 4 to 5 min later, with no further problems. In analysis, 1) I had 3 sources (approved charts, en route chart, j-aids) of normally very accurate information that led me to believe we were headed to jef, with the 110.2 VOR on the field. 2) up to date charts are the responsibility of my company's manuals department. While on the aircraft, we have no means to verify that we have the very latest charts. 3) I have been since told that the jef 110.2 VOR has been decommissioned for over 2 yrs. Why is commercial chart publishing feb 1988 charts that still show it? 4) I feel it was a poor decision by the FAA to use the same frequency on a VOR that has been moved to another nearby airport. People I talked to at jef said this same thing had happened to other people. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following. Reporter says 2 problems. 1) charts remain with the aircraft and are updated by office staff. Aircraft on road for a couple of weeks and updates of current charts had not been made. 2) a non functioning VOR had not been removed from the charts. Had been out of service for 2 yrs, but still indicated on charts. VOR had been moved near another airport nearby with same frequency. Current finally has change.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: APCH TO WRONG ARPT.
Narrative: WE WERE ON DSCNT INTO JEF AND HAD BEEN EARLIER CLRED DIRECT TO JEF. THE COMMERCIAL CHARTS AVAILABLE TO US ON THE ACFT WERE DATED AS FOLLOWS. JEF TERMINAL, FEB 5, 1988, LOW ALT ENRTE, #15, #16, FEB 5, 1988. ALL THESE CHARTS SHOW THE 110.2 VOR ON THE FIELD AT JEF. WE HAD DIALED IN 110.2 QUITE A WAYS OUT, RECEIVING A WEAK, UNDEFINED AUDIO IDENT, BUT A GOOD SIGNAL ON THE NEEDLES. WE CONTINUED INBND, THINKING THAT THE VOR WAS DIRECTLY ON OUR DEST ARPT. WE CALLED THE ARPT IN SIGHT, AND WE WERE CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH. WHAT WE DID NOT KNOW, DUE TO OUR RECENTLY OUTDATED CHARTS, WAS THAT THE 110.2 VOR HAD BEEN PLACED IN SVC ON THE FIELD AT COM, APPROX 15 NO OF JEF. WE WERE APPROX 10 MI FROM COM AT 3500 MSL WHEN WE REALIZED THE ARPT WE HAD IN SIGHT DID NOT APPEAR TO BE JEF. WE QUICKLY CHKED THE J AIDS, ARPT DIAGRAM, FOR ADDITIONAL REF AND IT TOO STATED THAT 110.2 VOR WAS ON THE FIELD AT JEF. WE RECHKED THE 110.2 AUDIO IDENT, THEN, RECEIVING THE MORSE CODE THAT DID NOT MATCH JEF. WITH THAT CONFIRMED, AND OVERFLYING THE FIELD AT APPROX 3500 TO 4000 MSL TO VISUALLY CONFIRM IT WAS NOT JEF, WE CALLED COU APCH CTL. I THINK THEY BECAME AWARE OF THE SITUATION RIGHT BEFORE WE CALLED THEM BACK. THEY IMMEDIATELY GAVE US A HDG FOR JEF. WE LANDED AT JEF 4 TO 5 MIN LATER, WITH NO FURTHER PROBS. IN ANALYSIS, 1) I HAD 3 SOURCES (APPROVED CHARTS, ENRTE CHART, J-AIDS) OF NORMALLY VERY ACCURATE INFO THAT LED ME TO BELIEVE WE WERE HEADED TO JEF, WITH THE 110.2 VOR ON THE FIELD. 2) UP TO DATE CHARTS ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF MY COMPANY'S MANUALS DEPT. WHILE ON THE ACFT, WE HAVE NO MEANS TO VERIFY THAT WE HAVE THE VERY LATEST CHARTS. 3) I HAVE BEEN SINCE TOLD THAT THE JEF 110.2 VOR HAS BEEN DECOMMISSIONED FOR OVER 2 YRS. WHY IS COMMERCIAL CHART PUBLISHING FEB 1988 CHARTS THAT STILL SHOW IT? 4) I FEEL IT WAS A POOR DECISION BY THE FAA TO USE THE SAME FREQ ON A VOR THAT HAS BEEN MOVED TO ANOTHER NEARBY ARPT. PEOPLE I TALKED TO AT JEF SAID THIS SAME THING HAD HAPPENED TO OTHER PEOPLE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING. RPTR SAYS 2 PROBS. 1) CHARTS REMAIN WITH THE ACFT AND ARE UPDATED BY OFFICE STAFF. ACFT ON ROAD FOR A COUPLE OF WKS AND UPDATES OF CURRENT CHARTS HAD NOT BEEN MADE. 2) A NON FUNCTIONING VOR HAD NOT BEEN REMOVED FROM THE CHARTS. HAD BEEN OUT OF SVC FOR 2 YRS, BUT STILL INDICATED ON CHARTS. VOR HAD BEEN MOVED NEAR ANOTHER ARPT NEARBY WITH SAME FREQ. CURRENT FINALLY HAS CHANGE.
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.