Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 2 Eng; Retractable Gear
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 50; Flight Crew Total 5500; Flight Crew Type 2000
Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
On Final Approach to Runway 4R we were cleared for the visual by HNL Approach Control and handed off to HNL Tower. Tower advised us of a low altitude warning and [and also that the] minimum vectoring altitude for the area as 1;500 MSL. [We then noted] [t]he autopilot had not leveled off at the altitude selected of 1;500 [MSL] and continued a vertical speed descent of 500 FPM. The co-pilot indicated that he could not identify the airport repeatedly and I was continuously pointing out Runway 8R and the buildings along Runway 4R. At 700 MSL I noticed the descent and leveled off at 600 MSL prior to the altitude alert from the Tower; only then did I climb to 1;000 MSL which was the appropriate altitude for the aircraft in the landing phase of flight. This was a violation of 14 CFR Part 135.203. The aircraft had no Terrain Warning System capability. I; the Captain; was used to flying single pilot and very rarely flew with another pilot. The situation occurred late at night.
After they had been cleared for a visual approach to Runway 4R at PHNL the flight crew of a teuboprop twin engine medivac flight became emboiled in a dispute over having the airport in sight and failed to note the autopilot had not captured the programmed 1;500 MSL minimum altitude. ATC provided a low altitude alert with which they complied and completed their approach and landing.