Originally Posted by
USMCFLYR
Was there any actual investigation into this event? Again - any chance of such a thing happening with a shred of question whether the ILS was producing a False LOC indication would trigger a shut down and inspection.
The LOC service volumes between the ILSs between RWYs 23 and 31 barely overlap between the 90hz side of RWY 23 and the 150hz side of 31. Not the area that you would generally received a false .
I type all of this not to dispute that an A-320 had an aborted approach to RWY 23 when they thought they were lined up on RWY 31, but to dispute that it was because of FALSE LOC indications.
Filed an FSAP, as one should in such a situation. Also notified tower of the lack of proper localizer guidance on RWY 31 (we did have glideslope). For the record, we didn't abort an approach to RWY 23 thinking we were on RWY 31; we aborted the RWY 31 approach because the jet did not have proper localizer guidance to RWY 31 and subsequently made an approach to RWY 23 due to concerns about the RWY 31 navaid. Absent localizer guidance, one could find themselves in non-TERPSd area around an approach and thus not have obstacle clearance, which would be muy bad.
Again, I think this is all a pointless bunny hole regarding the original intent of the thread. We aren't about to turn the national aerospace system over to robots anytime in the near-to-mid future. While demand for our services is currently low, it won't stay that way for too long. Consider this when the company/union floats concessions now that could last well into when demand for our services returns in earnest.