LANGUAGE BARRIER; TSTMS AND MULTIPLE RWY AND APCH CHANGES CLOSE IN TO THE ARPT RESULTS IN CONFUSION AND POSSIBLE CFIT INCIDENT.

Date: 2006-07 · Aircraft: B747-400 · Phase: approach

Anomalies: deviation-altitude-excursion-from-assigned-altitude|inflight-event-encounter-cftt-cfit|inflight-event-encounter-weather-turbulence

Synopsis

LANGUAGE BARRIER; TSTMS AND MULTIPLE RWY AND APCH CHANGES CLOSE IN TO THE ARPT RESULTS IN CONFUSION AND POSSIBLE CFIT INCIDENT.

Narrative

UPON TURNOVER FROM CTR TO GDL APCH AT 12000 FT MSL; DSNDING; THE APCH CTLR SAID TO INTERCEPT THE 107 DEG RADIAL GDL FOR THE VOR-DME RWY 28 AND TRACK INBOUND TO GDL. WE RE-BRIEFED AND RESET THE FMS FOR SUCH SINCE WE WERE SET UP FOR RWY 10 ILS AS INDICATED FROM THE GDL ATIS. AT THAT POINT WE WERE TOO HIGH; FAST; AND UNCONFIGURED (DSNDING TO 9000 FT MSL) TO SAFELY CONDUCT THE APCH IN MY OPINION. WHILE IN THE MIDDLE OF DETERMINING THIS; THE APCH CTLR GAVE A NEW CLRNC AFTER WE INTERCEPTED THE 107 DEG RADIAL OF GDL. TO INTERCEPT THE RWY 28 LOC. I THEN ASKED IF WE ARE NOW DOING THE RWY 28 LOC OR WHAT? HE THEN REPLIED; YOU ARE NOW DOING THE ILS RWY 28. ANOTHER CHANGE. I THEN REQUESTED A R-HAND 360 DEG TURN DUE TO A TSTM TO THE L SIDE WHICH MIGHT CAUSE A PROB TO TURN THAT WAY; WE WERE ABOVE GS; NEEDED TO SLOW DOWN TO CONFIGURE; AND LOSE ALT DUE TO THE LAST MIN RWY CHANGES/APCHS. THAT WAS APPROVED AND A NEW LOWER ALT WAS ALSO GIVEN TO US 7000 FT MSL. 90 DEGS INTO THE R TURN; THE CTLR ASKED US IF WE WERE TURNING TO HDG 360 DEGS AND THEN I SAID 'NO' WE WERE IN A 360 DEG TURN TO ORBIT FOR SPD REDUCTION AND TO GET DOWN. HE ADVISED US TO CLB BACK UP TO 9000 FT MSL DUE TO TERRAIN. WE WERE VMC ABOVE THE TOPS AT THAT POINT (AT 8800 FT MSL). WE CLBED BACK 200 FT TO 9000 FT MSL. WE COMPLETED THE 360 DEG TURN WITH NO TERRAIN WARNINGS AT ALL FROM GPWS OR INDICATIONS FROM THE RADAR ALTIMETER. THE CTLR ONCE AGAIN DECIDED TO CHANGE RWYS AGAIN BACK TO RWY 10 THAT WE WERE ORIGINALLY GOING TO DO; WHICH WAS ALSO RPTED ON THE ATIS AND WE RE-SETUP FOR RWY 10 ILS. LANGUAGE WAS DEFINITELY A BARRIER BETWEEN THE CTLR AND CREW. THE CHANGE TO A RWY THAT WAS NOT BEING ADVERTISED ON THE ATIS AS BEING USED WHILE WE WERE AT AN ALT MORE SUITABLE FOR THE ORIGINAL RWY 10 DIDN'T HELP FOR A REASONABLE DSCNT TO THE NEWLY ASSIGNED RWY 28 BY THE CTLR. THE CHANGES TO WHAT TYPE OF APCH VOR-DME RWY 28 TO ILS RWY 28 ON TOP OF IT ALL ADDED TO AN UNREASONABLE WORKLOAD TO THE CREW ON TOP OF THAT. THERE SEEMED TO BE NO OTHER ACFT IN THE AREA ALSO. AT LEAST WE SEEMED TO BE THE ONLY ONE ON THE RADIO. FOR SOMETHING SO SIMPLE; IT WAS MADE EXTREMELY HARD BY THE CTLR CHANGING RWYS AND MULTIPLE APCHS IN SUCH A SHORT PERIOD. THE LANGUAGE BARRIER WITH ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE WAS DEFINITELY IN PLAY HERE. IT HELPED LEAD INTO A POSSIBLE CFIT AS ADVISED BY THE CTLR WHEN HE TOLD US TO CLB BACK TO 9000 FT MSL DUE TO TERRAIN. MY CTLR APPROVED REQUEST FOR A R 360 DEG TURN FOR SPD REDUCTION AND TO LOSE ALT WASN'T UNDERSTOOD OBVIOUSLY AFTER THE CTLR GAVE US A NEW LOWER ALT 7000 FT MSL THEN LATER SAW US ON HIS SCREEN IN THE R-HAND TURN AND ASKED US IF WE WERE TURNING TO HDG 360 DEGS FOLLOWED BY A COMMAND FOR US TO CLB BACK TO 9000 FT MSL FOR TERRAIN BY THE CTLR.

More incidents for this aircraft family →

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