曝光臺(tái) 注意防騙 網(wǎng)曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費(fèi)者

approach and upon established, [I] descended to 2,300
feet per the chart…At DECOT intersection, I commanded
the autopilot to descend to 1,500. The autopilot descended
to 2,000 feet and did not descend any further. I then was
looking at my other instruments and then [was] asked
to contact Tower. At 2.0 miles from MAPVV intersection,
I commanded the autopilot to descend to the minimum
decision altitude and noticed that the altitude was still
2,000 feet. I re-attempted to command the autopilot to
descend, but it did not respond and the autopilot continued
to hold 2,000 feet over the field. After approaching
MAPVV, Tower issued a descent to 1,500 feet and continue
southbound then re-establish contact with Approach.
I believe there was too much reliance on the autopilot and
not recognizing that it may not have been in the right
mode (vertical speed) when issuing the descend command.
ASRS Research Studies on the Web!
Did you know…that ASRS has over 30 Research Studies on our website?
Topics include: De-Icing/Anti-Icing, Rejected Takeoffs, Clearances,
General Aviation Weather Encounters, Landing Incidents, Runway
Transgressions, Crossing Restrictions, Communication, Memory,
Confusion, Time Pressure, Judgment, Training, Crew Performance,
Flight Crew Monitoring, ASRS Cross Industry Applications, etc. A recent
study looked at General Aviation Weather Encounters and includes technology
related events that are relevant to this CALLBACK issue. All studies are available at:
http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/publications/research.html
A Monthly Safety Bulletin from
The Office of the NASA
Aviation Safety Reporting
System,
P.O. Box 189,
Moffett Field, CA
94035-0189
http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/
July 2009 Report Intake
Air Carrier/Air Taxi Pilots 2943
General Aviation Pilots 982
Controllers 42
Cabin/Mechanics/Military/Other 419
TOTAL 4386
ASRS Alerts Issued in July 2009
Subject of Alert No. of Alerts
Aircraft or aircraft equipment 12
Airport facility or procedure 4
ATC equipment or procedures 5
Maintenance procedure 2
TOTAL 23
Training is a constant activity in almost every aviation
environment, from instruction of pilots to training of
mechanics and air traffic controllers. This month we look
at a selection of recent ASRS reports that involve common
training dilemmas. These include:
• Letting the student go too far
• Instructor loss of focus
• Student over-reliance on the instructor.
Letting the Student Go Too Far
Situation #1: An instructor walks a fine line in knowing
when to intervene to prevent a hazardous situation. If the
instructor takes charge too soon or too often, the student
may never learn the skills and judgment needed to be a
safe pilot or controller. In the case of a Regional Jet 200
Check Captain, a strong desire to teach backfired during
an approach sequence with a First Officer.
n I was performing IOE [Initial Operating Experience]
with my First Officer and we were on final approach in
visual conditions. We were doing training and my First
Officer had been consistently high on his approaches and
this was debriefed beforehand on several legs. During
this approach, he remained high and I let it go as far as
I thought was safe before I started talking him down. We
were about 1 mile outside the FAF at about 4,000 feet and
at 200 knots with flaps at 20 degrees. I suggested that he
slow and get more flaps out and he extended the spoilers
halfway. I then reached down and extended them fully as
he slowed further. Since we were still high, I suggested he
remain at or near flight idle to get down to the glide slope.
As we descended, he configured gear down, flaps 30 degrees,
then flaps 45 degrees with a reference speed of around 140
knots. As we approached reference speed, I realized that the
spoilers were still out and that we were below the minimum
spoiler extended speed…Just as I reached out to retract the
spoilers, we got the shaker for a duration of about 1 second.
Looking back on this event, I realized that my desire to
train and talk to the student through this approach was
a contributing factor to the incident…I should have taken
control of the airplane when I realized that we were too
high on the approach and flown the approach. My desire to
teach and show the student the consequences of being high
on the approach backfired and led to 2 limitations being
violated. In the future, I will take the controls much earlier
when a student is high on final, and be much more aware
　
中國航空網(wǎng) www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：CALL BACK 3(72)