2023-07 · NASA ASRS report 2017012
CRJ-900 air carrier crew reported a terrain obstacle alert on a visual approach at night when they descended to FAF altitude on a non-published portion of the approach. The flight crew climbed to correct altitude and continued the approach to a landing.
On Day 0; at approximately XA:50 we were in a right base for the visual approach to Runway XX into ZZZ. Due to heavy thunderstorm activity; just off to the north end of the approach course we briefed the approach deciding that we were going to intercept the approach course inside the final approach fix. We were clear down to 3;000 feet initially been told cleared for the visual. Then the First Officer (FO) and I determined if we went down to 2;000 feet; it would keep us clear of the weather after the north; and at the correct altitude inside the marker for a stable approach. As the Pilot Monitoring (PM) I asked the Tower If we could come down to 2;000 feet and he said that we could that there was no obstacles or terrain. We were visual; so I could see there was nothing between us; and where we were going to intercept. As we leveled off at 2;000 feet shortly after that; we received a caution obstacle and climbed slightly for situational awareness and due to our training. I went back and reviewed the VFR low altitude charts. There were a couple of towers; but they were off to the north of us. There was a much smaller tower in front of us; but we were well above it to my understanding. We continued and shot the approach landing without further incident.Suggestions - Moving forward I will stay at the altitude until I we are established inbound on the final approach course. I believe the weather caused us to deviate slightly to ensure a safe approach. Other factors that played out here was fatigue setting in from a very long day after commuting.
Operating Aircraft X ZZZ1-ZZZ Day 0. I was Pilot Flying (PF). Coming into ZZZ just before nightfall; we were worried about a line of severe storms just north of the FAF for the RNAV XX. With the crossing runway closure; we would have to fly north of the field towards the storm line; then turn south for the approach. Conditions were visual with ~12 kts winds out of the southeast. When about 5 miles WNW of the field; we decided to intercept the final approach course by pointing the aircraft at the FAF and then turning final just inside of it. We had already been cleared the visual; and ATC had last instructed us to maintain 3;100 ft. We decided to descend in order to ensure that we were properly stable and did not wind up high when turning final. We checked our approach charts and saw no obstacles charted between our location and the final approach course. We also did not see any obstacles visually. I had terrain mode on my side and it appeared safe on the MFD. We then asked ZZZ tower if there were any uncharted obstacles and if it was safe to descend to 2;000 ft. at our current location. He said that was safe and reiterated that we were cleared the visual. Upon reaching 2;000 ft.; we received an obstacle caution. I immediately disconnected the autopilot and climbed back to 3;100 ft. The landing and approach from that point on was normal.Cause - This was classic get-there-itis on my part. The desire to maintain distance from the storm created an external pressure to get in to ZZZ before the storm arrived at the field and led to a poor decision on my part to descend. While we did check with ATC to ensure what we were doing provided adequate obstacle clearance; we should have stayed at 3;000 ft. until intercepting the final approach course. An additional factor that was not a cause but certainly did not contribute to good decision-making was that it was leg 4 at XA:30 and the van the day before in ZZZ2 departed at XB:00; so there was certainly some minor fatigue; although I did not feel that it impaired my flying abilities in any way that was unsafe.Suggestions - I'm not sure there is any further training that could be done to prevent this from happening. It just boils down to a poor decision on my part due to external pressures. The flight was already delayed due to a plane swap in ZZZ1 after the radar altimeter glitched on the previous leg in from ZZZ3. With storms rolling into the route; we were forced to pick our way through the storms and race along the front side of them into ZZZ. The flight would have been uneventful but for the decision to descend early when intercepting the approach; and after the caution was received; we reacted promptly and correctly; then debriefed it on the ground.
More incidents for this aircraft family
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.
Loading the flight search…
Pick an aircraft model — Boeing 737, Airbus A320, A380, Boeing 787 Dreamliner and more — enter your origin airport, and FlightFinder shows every route that plane flies from there with live fares.
We support Boeing 737/747/757/767/777/787, the full Airbus A220/A319/A320/A321/A330/A340/A350/A380 family, Embraer E170/E175/E190/E195, Bombardier CRJ and Dash 8, and the ATR 42/72 turboprops.
Search and schedules are free. Pro ($4.99/month, $39/year, or $99 one-time lifetime) unlocks the enriched flight card — on-time stats, CO₂ per passenger, amenities, live gate & weather — plus My Trips with push alerts.
Live schedules come from Amadeus, AeroDataBox and Travelpayouts. Observed routes (which aircraft actually flew a given city pair) are crowdsourced from adsb.lol ADS-B data under the Open Database License.