Fact or satirical fiction?

Didn't see 3/8 mile anywhere.

NASDAC BRIEF REPORT

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GENERAL INFORMATION

Data Source: AVIATION SAFETY REPORTING SYSTEM
Report Number: 294800
Local Date(Yr/Mon): 199501
Local Day:
Local Quarter Time: 0601 To 1200
Facilty ID Nr Aircraft: ATL
State of Facility Nr Acft: GA
Magnetic Bearing (deg):
Facility Distance (nm):
Altitude AGL - LO(ft) 0
Altitude AGL - HI(ft) 200
Altitude MSL - LO(ft)
Altitude MSL - HI(ft)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental/Location Information

Weather Conditions: IMC
Ceiling: 200
Light Condition: Daylight
Runway Vis - LO(ft): 5000
Runway Vis - HI(ft): 5000
Visual Range - LO (sm): .5
Visual Range - HI (sm): .5



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SYNOPSIS

ACFT DEVIATED FROM LOC (FULL-SCALE DEFLECTION), AND
CONTINUED BELOW DECISION HEIGHT TO LNDG, AFTER SEVERAL WILD
BANKS.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NARRATIVE

ON APCH INTO ATL, 2700 FT MSL, 1 MI OUTSIDE FINAL APCH FIX,
THE ACFT WAS STABILIZED. CAPT FLYING FLEW THROUGH THE LOC,
OVER COMPENSATED AND FLEW BACK THROUGH THE LOC AGAIN AT THE
MARKER. ONCE THE MARKER LIGHT ILLUMINATED, THE 'GEAR
DOWN/LNDG CHKLIST, TO THE LINE, WAS CALLED. I PROCEEDED WITH
THE LNDG CHKLIST AND CALLED OUT THE MAJOR DEVS. SEVERAL WILD
EXCURSIONS ENSUED. AT 400 FT AGL, WE WERE FULL-SCALE R OF
LOC AND ON GS. I CALLED GAR, AT THAT POINT, NOW 200 FT AGL,
WE BROKE OUT WELL R OF THE RWY AND ADJACENT TO THE TOUCHDOWN
ZONE. THE CAPT CALLED GAR. I PUSHED UP THE PWR, TO WHICH HE
CALLED, 'NO, I GOT THE RWY MADE.' LNDG WAS MADE AFTER
SEVERAL WILD BANKS AND AN ENSUING JEST BY THE TWR. I SHOULD
HAVE BEEN MORE ASSERTIVE AS AN FO AND NEVER ALLOWED THE APCH
TO PASS THE FIRST DEV AFTER MISSING THE LOC.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft Information



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Findings For Aircraft Sequence 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

General Info

Acft Make/Model Desc: Brasilia EMB-120 All Series
Crew Count: 2
Passenger Count:
Aircraft Involved: Unique Event
Flight Conduct Rule: Part 121
Flight Purpose: Passenger

Operation Type

Carrier Operation: Air Carrier
GA Operation:
Other Operation:

Phase of Flight

Climbout:
Climbout Other:
Cruise:
Other Cruise:
Descent: Approach
Other Descent:
Ground:
Other Ground:
Landing
Other Landing: Landing
Other Flight Phase:

Airspace Info

Class A:
Class B: ATL
Class C:
Class D: ATL
Class E:
Class G:
Special Use:
Temp Use:




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Findings


Anomaly Descriptors

Acft Equip Anomaly:
ASP Anomaly:
Alt Dev Anomaly:
Cabin Event Anomaly:
Conflict Anomaly:
Excursion Anomaly:
Ground Encounter Anomaly:
Incursion Anomaly:
In-Flight Anomaly:
Maintenance Anomaly:
Non-Adherence Anomaly: Published Procedure
Non-Adherence Other Anomaly:
Other Anomaly:
Other Spatial Dev. Anomaly: Track Or Heading
Deviation

Anomaly Consequences

Consequence Desc:
Other Consequence Desc:
Misc. Consequence Desc:

Anomaly Detected By

Controller A: Unspecified
Controller B:
Crew A: Unspecified
Crew B:

Anomaly Resolution

Aircraft:
Controller:
Crew:
Other Action:
No Action: Anomaly Accepted
Event Type: Unique Event




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reporter Information



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Findings For Reporter Sequence 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reporter Function

Controller:
Flight Attendant:
Flight Crew: First Officer
Instructor:
Maintenance:
Observer:
Other Personell:
Oversight:
Reporter Activity: Monitoring

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Findings For Reporter Sequence 2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reporter Function

Controller:
Flight Attendant:
Flight Crew: Captain
Instructor:
Maintenance:
Observer:
Other Personell:
Oversight: PIC
Reporter Activity: Pilot Flying

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Findings For Reporter Sequence 3

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reporter Function

Controller: Local
Flight Attendant:
Flight Crew:
Instructor:
Maintenance:
Observer:
Other Personell:
Oversight:
Reporter Activity: Controlling




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
END REPORT

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim Macklin" wrote
in message
| news:9MLVf.913$t22.188@dukeread08...
| I can't answer that because I never saw the airport or
| approach identified, so I can't look it up. Was it in
the
| USA or Europe? But if there was an accident, the
current
| reported weather would be reported.
|
|
|
|
|
https://extranet.nasdac.faa.gov/pls/portal/STAGE.ASRS_BRIEF_REPORT?RPT_NBR=294800&AC_VAR=TRUE &RPRT_VAR=TRUE&ANMLY_VAR=TRUE&SYN_VAR=TRUE&NARR_VA R=TRUE&NARR_SRCH=''
|
|

An interesting sidelight. Instructing China airlines pilots in the MD-80
flight simulator. The procedure is to have the FO be the "pilot flying"
even though he is really just monitoring the autopilot. The Captain is
looking for the runway as they approach minimums. We brief them that if the
Captain doesn't see the runway and call that out and assume control by
minimums, the FO is to execute a go around.

We had a hard time with their culture to convince the Captain that this is
OK. The Captains thought this violated the Captain's authority by allowing
the FO to make the go around just because the Captain hadn't said anything
by minimums. We finally got around that by telling the Captain that HE has
briefed the FO to go around under those conditions so the FO is only
following the Captain's instruction.

--

Darrell R. Schmidt
B-58 Hustler History: http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/
-

"Jon Woellhaf" wrote in message
. ..
I guess it's time to repost this:

(A recent update to the British Airways Flight Operations Manual)
Flight Operations Department Notice, Operational
Origin: Operational Standards Group to: All fleets - long and short haul.
Eff. Date: 01-05-95.
Subject: Pilot Role Reversal During PICUS.

There appears to be some confusion over the new pilot role titles. This
notice hopefully will clear up any misunderstandings.

The titles P1, P2 and copilot will now cease to have any meaning within
the BA operations manuals. They are to be replaced by Handling Pilot,
Non-Handling Pilot, Handling Landing Pilot, Non-Handling Landing Pilot,
Handling Non-Landing Pilot and Non-Handling Non-Landing Pilot.

The Landing Pilot is initially the Handling Pilot and will handle the
takeoff and landing, except in role reversal when he is the Non-Handling
Pilot for taxi until the Handling Non-Landing Pilot hands the handling to
the Landing Pilot at 80 knots.

The Non-Landing (Non-Handling, since the Landing Pilot is handling) pilot
reads the checklists to the Handling Landing Pilot until after the Before
Descent Checklist completion, when the Handling Landing Pilot hands the
handling to the Non-Handling Non-Landing Pilot who then becomes the
Handling Non-Landing Pilot.

The Landing Pilot is the Non-Handling Pilot until the "Decision Altitude"
call, when the Handling Non-Landing Pilot hands the handling to the
Non-Handling Landing Pilot, unless the latter calls "Go Around," in which
case the Handling Non-Landing Pilot continues handling and the
Non-Handling Landing Pilot continues non-handling until the next call of
"Land" or "Go Around," as appropriate.

In view of recent confusion over these roles, it was deemed necessary to
restate them clearly.

Authority: Operational Standards Group S 4220 H3 TBA,OPS12/A34/0595

"Jim Macklin" wrote in

I can't answer that because I never saw the airport or
approach identified, so I can't look it up. Was it in the
USA or Europe? But if there was an accident, the current
reported weather would be reported.

here's the first segment of the original post in this thread:
********************
NASA ASRS Incident #294800, Atlanta, GA (ATL):
------------------------------------
Crew: Two-man crew, Captain (CAPT) and First Officer (FO); report
submitted
by FO
Aircraft: MDT (Medium Transport, 30,001 - 60,000 lbs); large turboprop
Flight Conditions: IMC; apparent ceiling 200 ft
ILS Approach Min: 200 ft ceiling and 3/8 mi visibility
*****************************

Note: "Atlanta, GA (ATL)" and "ILS Approach Min: 200 ft ceiling and 3/8 mi
visibility"

That's what I'm referring to. I've never seen an ILS with these minimums,
and I've flown lotsa lotsa ILSs into ATL (although, some were Cat II and
III) Maybe a typo, but that's why I asked.

"Jim Macklin" wrote in

Didn't see 3/8 mile anywhere.

here's the first segment of the original post in this thread:
********************
NASA ASRS Incident #294800, Atlanta, GA (ATL):
------------------------------------
Crew: Two-man crew, Captain (CAPT) and First Officer (FO); report
submitted
by FO
Aircraft: MDT (Medium Transport, 30,001 - 60,000 lbs); large turboprop
Flight Conditions: IMC; apparent ceiling 200 ft
ILS Approach Min: 200 ft ceiling and 3/8 mi visibility
*****************************