AirTalk.org Aviation discussions newsgroups   Archives   FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  Embarrassing approach snafu          AirTalk.org Forum Index -> Instrument Flight Rules View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message Dan Luke Guest Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2005 10:13 pm    Post subject: Embarrassing approach snafu Getting mixed up about runways and airports can happen easily, as Roy's post shows, and it happened to me Friday. I was picking up an Angel Flight patient at Jacksonville Craig (CRG). The weather was VMC, I already new from a NOTAM that 14/32 was closed, and the ATIS was advertising visuals to 23, so I don't have much excuse for what happened. Here's how it went: It was about 12:30 local and the airspace around Jacksonville was buzzing with traffic of all kinds. I arrived on a heading of about 100 and The TRACON had me at 4,000' coming into town. The airport was hard to see, but I finally spotted the black strip about 10 mi. out. The freq. was so busy I had a hard time telling the approach controller I had the airport in sight. Now I was getting antsy because I was 5 mi. out and still at 4,000. I was close enough to read the numbers when the controller finally answered, cleared me for the visual and handed me to Craig Tower. Unfortunately, I was looking at the brilliant, freshly painted numbers on closed 32, and I was reading them upside down. Poor old beat up, worn out, active 23 was barely identifiable as a runway. I was seriously fuddled, and didn't even realize it yet. Craig Tower told me to extend my downwind for traffic, which was fine with me since I had altitude to lose, and I made a sharp right for the downwind to what I thought was 23. In about 5 seconds a new, very authoritative-sounding voice came on the freq: "Cutlass '87D you were instructed to enter the downwind for 23. You appear to be making a 360. You were not authorized to make a 360. Turn to heading 050 immediately!" [Oh, dear. Oops. Oh, uh, yeah, 050 *would* be the downwind for 23, wouldn't it? Ever use that heading indicator you've got, sport?] "'87D, wilco." There followed a couple of more careful instructions from the tower to get the clueless dumbass on the ground without his hitting anybody, and that was that. Talk about embarrassing; ugh! Anyhow, that's what I get for taking routine things for granted, like properly identifying your runway and making sure all your position indications make sense. *sigh* Live and learn, I hope. -- Dan C-172RG at BFM Back to top paul kgyy Guest Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:47 pm    Post subject: Re: Embarrassing approach snafu Did something similar last year at Youngstown OH - popped out of the clouds, cleared for visual, getting ready for final and realized I was about 90 degrees off in my orientation. Fortunately, the numbers were clear before I got too close. Back to top Everett M. Greene Guest Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:49 pm    Post subject: Re: Embarrassing approach snafu "Dan Luke" <c172rg (AT) xyz (DOT) net> writes: Quote: Getting mixed up about runways and airports can happen easily, as Roy's post shows, and it happened to me Friday. [snip] Anyhow, that's what I get for taking routine things for granted, like properly identifying your runway and making sure all your position indications make sense. *sigh* Live and learn, I hope. I was VFR into Sioux Falls, SD from the southwest (coming from DEN). I called the tower and they cleared me to land on runway 20 and report over the city. I'm on a heading of about 020 and see a runway straight ahead and figure this is a piece of cake, but what's with the "report over the city" thing? There's nothing but open country between me and the airport. After a few minutes more, the tower calls to ask if I'm the plane heading toward runway 02. Oops! Quick turn to do a left pattern over the city... [I may have the numbers wrong since I write this from memory and don't have an airport directory at hand.] Back to top Newps Guest Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 5:30 pm    Post subject: Re: Embarrassing approach snafu Everett M. Greene wrote: Quote: After a few minutes more, the tower calls to ask if I'm the plane heading toward runway 02. Oops! Quick turn to do a left pattern over the city... To figure out where the approach end of the runway is I use the DG. You were heading northeast, lets say about a 030 heading. Just look on the DG to see where 200 is. Looking at the DG you see you'll have to enter a downwind. Back to top Journeyman Guest Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 6:12 pm    Post subject: Re: Embarrassing approach snafu In article <b8ydnRCfhpczmMHfRVn-rw (AT) bresnan (DOT) com>, Newps wrote: Quote: After a few minutes more, the tower calls to ask if I'm the plane heading toward runway 02. Oops! Quick turn to do a left pattern over the city... To figure out where the approach end of the runway is I use the DG. You were heading northeast, lets say about a 030 heading. Just look on the DG to see where 200 is. Looking at the DG you see you'll have to enter a downwind. But a 020 heading to runway 20 makes _sense_ in a perfectly logical but totally wrong way. KBFI (Boeing Field, Seattle) has parallel runways 13/31 L/R and if you're even slightly dyslexic... Morris Back to top Everett M. Greene Guest Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 7:05 pm    Post subject: Re: Embarrassing approach snafu Newps <nowhere (AT) nowhere (DOT) com> writes: Quote: Everett M. Greene wrote: After a few minutes more, the tower calls to ask if I'm the plane heading toward runway 02. Oops! Quick turn to do a left pattern over the city... To figure out where the approach end of the runway is I use the DG. You were heading northeast, lets say about a 030 heading. Just look on the DG to see where 200 is. Looking at the DG you see you'll have to enter a downwind. The DG was reading 02! This mental error is so common that psychologists even have a standard name for it -- set. You see what you expect to see, not what's there. Back to top G Farris Guest Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2005 11:46 am    Post subject: Re: Embarrassing approach snafu In article <20050413.79ED2F8.9EE2 (AT) mojaveg (DOT) iwvisp.com>, [email]mojaveg (AT) mojaveg (DOT) iwvisp.com[/email] says... Quote: This mental error is so common that psychologists even have a standard name for it -- set. You see what you expect to see, not what's there. This notwithstanding, 02/20 and 13/31 have long been considered mistakes waiting to happen. G Faris (I like the 13/31 L/R thing. Can easily see how that could get confusing)! Back to top Steven P. McNicoll Guest Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2005 10:03 pm    Post subject: Re: Embarrassing approach snafu "G Farris" <farris (AT) nonum (DOT) com> wrote Quote: This notwithstanding, 02/20 and 13/31 have long been considered mistakes waiting to happen. Try 2/20. Can't transpose what isn't there. Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         AirTalk.org Forum Index -> Instrument Flight Rules All times are GMT Page 1 of 1   Jump to: Select a forum Aviation----------------alt.aviationAviation safety EnhancementPlanes, gliders and flying in AustraliaAviation et pilotage (Français)rec.aviationAviation (Aerobatics)Hot air, gas balloons and airshipsHang-gliding, paragliding, foot-launched flightAircraft Design & BuildingInstrument Flight RulesAviation (Classifieds)Military AircraftNaval AviationAviation (Miscellaneous Topics)Owning AirplanesAviators (General Discussions)Aviation related productsAircraft RestorationHelicopters and rotary wing aircraftsFlight SimulationSailplanesAviation (Students)Light aircraftFlying related activities in the UK Airports----------------alt.airportsEdinburgh Airport Glasgow Airport Humberside Airport Luton Airport Aberdeen Airport Glasgow Prestwick Airport  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2006 phpBB Group SEO toolkit © 2004-2006 webmedic.