http://www.nationalpost.com/home/story.html?id=3DBEF550EE-8874-4E85-A564-=20= 02697EF3B94C This one takes the cake. I didn't know the compass was part of an instrument approach. ;-) The Vernon field could hardly be confused with the Kelowna field, as =20 they are both at about 60' to each other. Matthew 'Lost' Air Canada plane nearly hits B.C. Cessna Impeded by fires, Airbus approaches too-short airstrip =A0 Tom Blackwell National Post Officials are trying to determine why an Air Canada jetliner with 87 =20 passengers on board appeared on the verge of landing at the wrong =20 airport, head-on toward another plane, after becoming "lost" over =20 mountainous British Columbia terrain recently. A small Cessna was attempting to touch down at the opposite end of the =20= same runway at tiny Vernon airport and veered out of the way, in an =20 incident one aviation insider called a "huge embarrassment." Had the Airbus A319 from Toronto landed, it would have faced major =20 problems, because the strip is too short for such planes. The Air Canada pilots, who were making a visual approach because of =20 restrictions imposed by nearby forest fires, finally pulled back up. =20 After air traffic controllers informed them they were in the wrong =20 place, the pilots flew 60 kilometres south to Kelowna, the correct =20 destination, and landed safely. "The pilots descended low enough that, for all intents and purposes, =20 they appeared to be lost, and that's a concern," said Bill Yearwood, =20 regional manager of the Transportation Safety Board. "It is important for aircraft and pilots and operations to always know =20= where they are and where they're going." The safety board has launched an investigation into the incident, which =20= occurred just before 7 p.m. on Aug. 23, concerned about how and why the =20= plane got so low that it lost sight of its intended destination. Mr. =20 Yearwood said it is unlikely the incident could have resulted in an =20 accident, because visibility was good and the crew would have been able =20= to avoid any obstacles, even if they were lost. They also would have eventually noticed they were at the wrong airport =20= and avoided landing at Vernon, he said. But one airline industry source called the episode unheard of for =20 pilots of a modern plane with cutting-edge navigational systems. "It's a huge embarrassment," said the source, a pilot who asked not to =20= be identified. "My guess is the guys just had their heads out the window and weren't =20= aware of where they were ... Truth is, this could have been very =20 serious." The flight management system aboard an Airbus has a "moving map" =20 display that shows the plane's position relative to airports. It should =20= have made it clear Air Canada Flight 183 was in the wrong spot, the =20 pilot said. Runway 23 at Vernon is 3,360 feet long, less than the minimum of about =20= 3,800 feet needed to land such a plane, a discrepancy that could have =20= led to an over-run of the strip, the source said. Laura Cooke, an Air Canada spokeswoman, said she could offer few =20 comments about the incident while it is under investigation, except =20 that the plane made one approach, did a "go around," meaning the =20 approach was aborted, then landed safely. The raging forest fires in the region helped set up the incident. The =20= flight carrying 87 passengers and a crew of five would normally have =20 landed at Kelowna using instruments. But using instruments could have =20= led the plane into restricted airspace, where water bombers and =20 firefighting helicopters need to fly unimpeded, Mr. Yearwood said. For that reason, the Air Canada crew was told to make a visual =20 approach. While airlines have pre-set procedures for visual landings at =20= different airports, Air Canada has no such guidelines for approaching =20= Kelowna runway 15 in that direction. The crew had to come up with its =20= own plan. For reasons yet to be determined, the pilots descended so low, to about =20= 2,100 feet eventually, that they lost sight of Kelowna airport, Mr. =20 Yearwood said. They were soon "lined up" with the runway at Vernon airport, and pilots =20= at that airfield reported the Air Canada jet appeared on the approach =20= to land there, he said. However, the board has not determined whether =20= the crew did try to touch down at the wrong airport. An occurrence report filed with Transport Canada by air traffic =20 controllers said they got a call moments later from the pilot of a =20 Cessna 152 who said he had been preparing to land at one end of Vernon =20= runway 23 when he saw the Airbus coming in from the other direction. The Cessna pilot with Okanagan Aviation Services "gave way and observed =20= the aircraft in the missed approach," the report said. Mr. Yearwood said it is unclear how close the aircraft were to each =20 other. "Certainly it would make a big impression on a little pilot that =20 doesn't normally see big airplanes in the area, coming at him from the =20= other side," he said. The Cessna pilot declined to comment. tblackwell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx =A9=A0Copyright=A02003=A0National Post=