A commercial fixed wing flight crew received an EGPWS TERRAIN and a Low Altitude Alert warning from MGW Tower while descending to cross UDDOV Intersection at 2;800 MSL on the VOR-A approach. Reporter believes the crossing altitude is in conflict with a charted 2;409 MSL obstruction (a tower) along the course from MGW VOR to UDDOV.

Date: 2010-12 · Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing · Phase: approach

Anomalies: inflight-event-encounter-cftt-cfit

Synopsis

A commercial fixed wing flight crew received an EGPWS TERRAIN and a Low Altitude Alert warning from MGW Tower while descending to cross UDDOV Intersection at 2;800 MSL on the VOR-A approach. Reporter believes the crossing altitude is in conflict with a charted 2;409 MSL obstruction (a tower) along the course from MGW VOR to UDDOV.

Narrative

We were flying the VOR-A to MGW for landing on Runway 36. Visual with the airport was observed at 1.0 DME from MGW VOR and 2;900 MSL. At MGW 337 degrees/1.0 DME and 2;800 MSL; EGPWS (obstacle; pull up) warning annunciated in cockpit with a subsequent low altitude alert warning from MGW Tower. There is a radio tower at 2;425 [2;409] MSL along the final approach course and it was in sight. A turn correction to the right was performed to avoid the tower. Visual with the ground was maintained from 3;000 MSL and below. VOR-A approach altitudes and final approach course were followed. No further warnings were annunciated or observed and the aircraft landed safely on Runway 36.I suggest the company and/or FAA review[s] the published altitudes for this particular approach and the approach itself. There is only slightly less than a 300 FT clearance between the tower/obstacle along the final approach course and the published step down altitude (2;720 FT) (for which 2;800 FT must be entered into the Altitude Pre-Selector). Previous GPWS warnings have occurred on this approach. Also; this is the only approach that is available for a non-circling landing on Runway 36 for aircraft not equipped with GPS or RNAV.

NASA callback

The reporter stated that he believed his narrative comment about having 'Visual with the airport at 1.0 DME from MGW VOR and 2;900 MSL' must have been in error and that they had; instead; complied with all altitude restrictions on the approach which would include the restriction to cross MGW inbound at 3;500 MSL; and only then to descend to 2;720 MSL (2;800 in the altitude alert as required by company policy). Reporter further advised that the rate of descent inside of MGW was limited to -1;000 FPM per company policy. He continues to believe the minimums on the approach conflict with known obstacles.

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