WDB ACFT GIVES ETO FOR WRONG WAYPOINT ON OVERWATER FLT.

Date: 1995-01 · Aircraft: MD-11

Anomalies: deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-clearance|other-unspecified

Synopsis

WDB ACFT GIVES ETO FOR WRONG WAYPOINT ON OVERWATER FLT.

Narrative

WE WERE FLT SJC-NRT FL370; .83 MACH OUT OF RADAR COVERAGE; BUT STILL IN RADIO CONTACT WITH ZAN. WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO GIVE POS RPT AT SYA TO ZAN. WAYPOINTS TO CROSS WERE SYA; POWAL PASRO. POWAL WAS A NON MANDATORY RPTING POINT. FOB GAVE SYA POS RPT TO ZAN AND GAVE THE ETO FOR POWAL INADVERTENTLY FOR PASRO. THIS ETO WAS 36 MINS BEFORE PASRO. WE WERE 6 MINS BEHIND FLT PLAN SO WHEN WE ARRIVED AT POWAL I DOUBLE-CHKED NUMBERS I NOTICED FOB HAD GIVEN INCORRECT ETO FOR PASRO. XING POWAL; ZAN WAS TOLD WE WOULD BE XING PASRO. I SHOULD HAVE CAUGHT THIS AT THE SYA POS RPT; BUT I DID NOT. WE ATTEMPTED CONTACT WITH ZAN BUT WERE UNABLE TO GET THEM; WHICH IS A COMMON OCCURRENCE. WE HAD BEEN INSTRUCTED TO CONTACT TYO RADIO AT PASRO; SO WE CALLED THEM UP AND INFORMED THEM ALTHOUGH WE WERE NOT TECHNICALLY IN THEIR AIRSPACE YET. THE FOB WAS DOING THE RADIO AND THE AIREP FORM AND I WAS DOING THE PLOTTING; BUT YOU MUST DOUBLE-CHK EACH OTHER. I DO DOUBLE-CHK; BUT MISSED THIS ONE. SO ARRIVING AT THE NON MANDATORY RPTING POINT; POWAL; PRIOR TO PASRO; THE WAYPOINT; WE THOUGHT WE HAD GIVEN THE ETO FOR; WE NOTICED THE MISTAKE AND REALIZED ATC THOUGHT WE WOULD BE AT THE NEXT WAYPOINT; PASRO (A MANDATORY WAYPOINT) AT THAT SPECIFIED TIME. WE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFIED TOKYO RADIO. DOUBLE-CHK; DOUBLE-CHK; DOUBLE-CHK. I AM GOING TO BE MORE CAREFUL TO DESIGNATE ON MY MISC 14 FLT PLANS WHICH WAYPOINTS ARE MANDATORY AND NON MANDATORY RPTING POINTS.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.