Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Research: Incidents involving navaids and instrument approaches..

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Flying Illini said:
Mini beat me to it. They did indeed have the VOR tuned instead of the ILS. The CVR is interesting reading.
Any specifics on that one? Searching Houston didn't turn up anything.

Was it the GIII crash? The NTSB doesn't have a report on it yet, so no actual data.
 
Last edited:
Flying Illini said:
The CVR is interesting reading.

Yep...If my memory serves me they were BSin about all sorts of stuff...how many times they'd done this, etc.

gk: can't remember where I read it at and don't remember the aircraft type but it was last year and they crashed close to the airport (can't remember how close) if that helps.

-mini
 
If you know anyone with a few copies of "IFR Refresher" that might be helpful. They detail a lot of accidents due to these kind of operational errors. Mostly outside of 121 flying though, but may be helpful. Lots of 135 and 91 accidents - I guess thats where a lot of them occur unfortunately.
 
what about that post about the family that's suing ATC b/c they didn't spoon-feed the pilot his approach on an ILS?
 
Here's a good one.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19920608-0

This page has links to the CVR and the complete accident report.

Briefly, loss of Situational Awareness, crew tracks outbound on the backcourse, thinks they're inbound on the front course, begins descent.

Significant accident because it's one of the very first where the NTSB primarily blamed management for this crew pairing.
 
The Korean Airlines crash in Guam involved the VOR with mis-identification of distance to the airport. The Flying Tigers crash in Kuala Lumpur involved an NDB and again, mis-identification of distance remaining to the airport. Both very good examples for any paper you are writing.

TP
 
I don't think the Kuala Lampur event was so much not knowing how much distance to the airpport as it was misunderstanding the descent clearance. The controller said "descend 2 400" and the crew heard "descend to 400". TO be sure there were many other factors involved (confusion as to which NDBs to use for what, by whom, & where, not having the apporach properly briefed, and ignoring eight GPWS warnings), but the most significant, IMHO, was the descent altitude.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top