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
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 Bottom