Near CFIT at Medford, Oregon

[aterpster]

Surprised this one hasn't been brought up:

Incident: Skywest CRJ9 at Medford on Dec 24th 2017, GPWS alert on approach

[Airbubba]

Another EGPWS save :

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/...020Z/KSLC/KMFR

http://archive-server.liveatc.net/km...2017-0200Z.mp3

That clearance to cross CEGAN at or above 7800 feet is a nearly fatal gotcha.

[Oakape]

Why would ATC even say that? Talk about a setup. Even so, cleared for the approach & the approach says not below 10,000 at CEGAN.

[LeadSled]

Folks,
Last time I looked, the US AIP/AIM specified three specific instances of how descent clearances are to be interpreted.

What ATC (apparently) did was in conformity with the AIP/AIM and presumably any manual of ATC instructions.

These three specific forms/interpretations of descent clearances are notified to ICAO as differences to Annex X/Vol.II and PANS/RAC Doc.4444.

As a pilot with non-US operator, I always made certain my fellow crew members or trainees always knew and understood such clearances.

Pilots are expected to conform to any LSA on a procedure. This is a pilot responsibility, not ATC, unless you are on radar vector, then still be very careful about ATC descent instruction in any area where terrain might be an issue.

[vapilot2004]

ATC garden paths aside, the MSA should have been covered in the crew's approach briefing. Any deviation outside the of the corridor should have raised the red flag prior to altitude selection. Luckily, the CFIT squawk woke everybody up and they reacted accordingly.

[aterpster]

Here is the approach procedure and the MVA chart. When cleared for the approach the flight was in a 7,800' MVA sector. But, as they progressed on the DME arc to the intermediate fix BRKET, they entered an 8,700' MVA sector. That violates any ATC standard or policy of which I am aware. Further, the approach doesn't exist below 10,000' along the DME arc used.

[ironbutt57]

Originally Posted by vapilot2004

ATC garden paths aside, the MSA should have been covered in the crew's approach briefing. Any deviation outside the of the corridor should have raised the red flag prior to altitude selection. Luckily, the CFIT squawk woke everybody up and they reacted accordingly.

the DME arc is outside the entire MSA "pie"

[Fly26]

Well that's flipping stupid. There's no need to mention 7800', it clearly shows 10000' for terrain on the arc. Easily avoidable with better communication.

[aterpster]

And, not the least: training.

[fleigle]

Kind of like the recent SFO incidents IMHO, crew not actually having their heads in the situation.
Also, evening approach, dark, how many legs had they flown that day?, how many different destinations?, how many times have they actually been there?.
I was chatting with one of their pilots in Denver last year and he showed me a sampling of their various destinations one a daily basis, they go to a lot!.
Lucky !

[aterpster]

I'm surprised that KMFR isn't a FAR 121.445 special quals airport. Yet, KSFO is.

[pilotguy1222]

Wow. Just wow. That would have been the rare radio call where the crew ask ATC if THEY have a phone number.
Yes, I agree that the crew should have caught that, but those clearance words should not come out of an ATC radio ever again.

[RAT 5]

aterpster: please help, I might be being thick. I agree with the MORA altitudes but I don't see 10,000' you mentioned. Is it coincidence that 8700' can easily be transposed into 7800'? Easier to mis-read than mis-speak, perhaps, unless the speaker is thinking about the 7800' for some reason, and mouth doesn't co-ordinate with the correct part of the brain; i.e. it is thinking about 7800' and should be saying 8700', but the mouth connects to the wrong segment of grey matter.
Wive's & girlfriend's names get mixed up with each other, on occasions, but there is no EGPWS to save the day.

[misd-agin]

CEGAN is roughly 41 nm from the runway. Why would you be 6500'(?) AGL (7,800') 41 nm from the runway, especially in hills/mountainous terrain?

[aterpster]

RAT 5

Those are minimum vectoring altitudes (MVAs) not MORAs. The 10,000 is shown on the approach chart.

[Vessbot]

Originally Posted by Fly26

Well that's flipping stupid. There's no need to mention 7800', it clearly shows 10000' for terrain on the arc. Easily avoidable with better communication.

The problem lied not with the communication, but rather its content.

[KelvinD]

I wonder: at what altitude above ground does the GPWS issue a warning? Looking at the approach plate, there seems to be nothing above 4,000 to 5,000ft along that arc. So, if the aircraft was at 7,800ft, why the alert?
Also, the pie chart shows 10,700ft if approaching from the East, which this flight presumably was.
Puzzling!
By the way, the approach plate shows the arc with a note "NoPT". What does that mean?

[autoflight]

Arrogance

Unbelievable that ATC should give such a call, and even more unbelievable that a crew should follow it.

Such a crew, despite their apparent view that they are God's gift to aviation, appear to be an unacceptable liability. And what about an airline that allows such arrogance?

[Jim59]

By the way, the approach plate shows the arc with a note "NoPT". What does that mean?

No Procedure Turn.

[KelvinD]

Thanks Jim.