MLG CREW HAD A RWY CHANGE WHICH RESULTED IN AN UNSTABILIZED APCH AT ANC.

Date: 2001-04 · Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng · Phase: approach

Anomalies: deviation-speed-all-types|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-far|inflight-event-encounter-unstabilized-approach|other-crew-concept-crm

Synopsis

MLG CREW HAD A RWY CHANGE WHICH RESULTED IN AN UNSTABILIZED APCH AT ANC.

Narrative

AN ACFT HAD DECLARED AN EMER AND WAS BEING VECTORED TO ANC FOR PRIORITY LNDG. UPON TURNING FINAL; THE ACFT WITH THE PROB WAS ALREADY ON THE GND; AND TWR TOLD US TO ANTICIPATE LNDG CLRNC ON SHORT FINAL TO RWY 6R. THE RWY WAS CLR AND ABOUT 600 FT AGL TWR CALLED US TO SEE IF WE COULD ACCEPT A LNDG CLRNC FOR RWY 32. I LOOKED AT MY CAPT TO SEE IF HE WOULD ACCEPT IT. HE NODDED YES. PERSONALLY; I WOULD HAVE NOT ACCEPTED IT BUT FELT THAT IT WAS NOT THE TIME TO ARGUE WITH HIM SINCE WE WERE SO CLOSE TO THE TERRAIN AND IF DONE JUST RIGHT THE MANEUVER COULD HAVE BEEN DONE SAFELY WITHIN THE CONFINES OF OUR FLT HANDBOOK. I HAD FLOWN WITH HIM FOR THE LAST MONTH AND DEEMED HIM CAPABLE TO DO IT WELL (THE MANEUVER). HE TURNED THE ACFT SLIGHTLY TO THE R TO GIVE HIMSELF A LITTLE MORE ROOM TO MANEUVER AND THEN WENT ON TO PROCEED IN A 40 DEG BANK TO THE L TO ALIGN THE AIRPLANE WITH THE RWY 32. THE AIRSPD WAS MAINTAINED ABOVE VREF AND BELOW VREF +10 THROUGHOUT THE MANEUVER. WE; HOWEVER; LANDED LONG ON RWY 32. WE TOUCHED DOWN PAST THE 3000 FT MARKS. THE REST OF THE FLT WAS UNEVENTFUL. IN HINDSIGHT; I SHOULD HAVE JUST TOLD THE TWR THAT WE WERE GOING AROUND INSTEAD OF ACCEPTING A CLRNC THAT WE HAD NOT BRIEFED. WE DO NOT KNOW WHY THE TWR CANCELED THE LNDG CLRNC ON RWY 6R SINCE THE RWY WAS CLR.

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