Confusion about the correct altimeter setting; QFE altimetry; fatigue and an incomplete approach briefing resulted in a CFTT incident at UAAA for a widebody flight crew.

Date: 2009-02 · Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing · Phase: approach

Anomalies: deviation-altitude-overshoot|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-clearance|inflight-event-encounter-cftt-cfit

Synopsis

Confusion about the correct altimeter setting; QFE altimetry; fatigue and an incomplete approach briefing resulted in a CFTT incident at UAAA for a widebody flight crew.

Narrative

On approach to UAAA (Almaty Kazakhstan); the following event happened. Kazakhstan uses QFE altimetry procedures. On descent we believe the wrong altimeter setting was applied; causing our flight to descend below the appropriate altitudes for the ILS approach to Runway 5L. We could see the ground; but forward visibility was limited. Upon seeing the ground and noticing our radar altimeter; at the same time the Approach Controller queried our altitude; so we told Approach our altitude and that we were executing an immediate missed approach. Missed approach and second approach was uneventful. A few things led to this event. Number one was the confusing approach procedures in Kazakhstan. The former Soviet States still use QFE procedures. If Kazakhstan would use ICAO standard procedures; there would be less confusion. (China changed from QFE to QNH procedures at their major airports.) Second was the lack of a thorough briefing by the Captain. Fatigue was also a factor as this was a long flight with multiple time zone swaps on an 'around the world' trip. Third was the language barrier. It was difficult to understand the female ATC Controller. She had a thick Russian accent.

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