Air carrier medium large transport unauthorized landing when flight crew failed to call tower on second approach from a go around caused by slat disagreement light.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	96089
Time
Date	198810
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : den
State Reference	CO
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 2000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : den
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Navigation In Use	Other
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : flight engineer
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 30 flight time total : 10300 flight time type : 2400
ASRS Report	96089
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe incursion : landing without clearance non adherence : far
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : declared emergency none taken : detected after the fact other
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Aircraft

Narrative:

Approaching runway 26L den, about 3 mi final, we had a slat disagree light. Executed a go around to review checklist. After reviewing checklist on downwind and repositioning flaps, disagree light went out. We thought: this will be a normal landing now, no problem. Turned about a 4 mi final for runway 26L. Slat disagree light came on again with stick shaker. Captain called for checklist again and I went through it as quickly as I could. Was hurriedly trying to find a vref speed for him to set from the chart in the book. We landed flaps 28 degrees with vref about 151 KTS. Only problem: I forgot to call den tower for permission to land. Upon landing slat disagree light went out. I think it was an indicator problem and not an actual disagreement. We should have done another go around or possible extended our downwind leg to give ourselves more time to digest the checklist. Company checklist is almost 2 pages long and takes a while to digest. Had I not been rushed I would have had time to call den tower. In a 2-M cockpit, the first officer acts as first officer and F/east and he can get overloaded easily.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MLG UNAUTH LNDG WHEN FLT CREW FAILED TO CALL TWR ON SECOND APCH FROM A GO AROUND CAUSED BY SLAT DISAGREEMENT LIGHT.

Narrative: APCHING RWY 26L DEN, ABOUT 3 MI FINAL, WE HAD A SLAT DISAGREE LIGHT. EXECUTED A GO AROUND TO REVIEW CHKLIST. AFTER REVIEWING CHKLIST ON DOWNWIND AND REPOSITIONING FLAPS, DISAGREE LIGHT WENT OUT. WE THOUGHT: THIS WILL BE A NORMAL LNDG NOW, NO PROB. TURNED ABOUT A 4 MI FINAL FOR RWY 26L. SLAT DISAGREE LIGHT CAME ON AGAIN WITH STICK SHAKER. CAPT CALLED FOR CHKLIST AGAIN AND I WENT THROUGH IT AS QUICKLY AS I COULD. WAS HURRIEDLY TRYING TO FIND A VREF SPD FOR HIM TO SET FROM THE CHART IN THE BOOK. WE LANDED FLAPS 28 DEGS WITH VREF ABOUT 151 KTS. ONLY PROB: I FORGOT TO CALL DEN TWR FOR PERMISSION TO LAND. UPON LNDG SLAT DISAGREE LIGHT WENT OUT. I THINK IT WAS AN INDICATOR PROB AND NOT AN ACTUAL DISAGREEMENT. WE SHOULD HAVE DONE ANOTHER GO AROUND OR POSSIBLE EXTENDED OUR DOWNWIND LEG TO GIVE OURSELVES MORE TIME TO DIGEST THE CHKLIST. COMPANY CHKLIST IS ALMOST 2 PAGES LONG AND TAKES A WHILE TO DIGEST. HAD I NOT BEEN RUSHED I WOULD HAVE HAD TIME TO CALL DEN TWR. IN A 2-M COCKPIT, THE F/O ACTS AS F/O AND F/E AND HE CAN GET OVERLOADED EASILY.

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.