Narrative:

This is an example of an arrival that should be simplified. There are too many crossing restrictions and to properly brief it takes time; especially when changes occur. In our situation we were expecting; according to the ATIS either runway 36R or runway 5 off the [tailored for the air carrier] STAR. We briefed both at altitude; verifying the fixes against what was in the FMS. During initial descent; however; we were told to pick up a new ATIS and to now expect the runway 23 ILS with the appropriate transition. (Note: the weather was also minimums for the ILS and had a tailwind so we took some extra time making sure we thoroughly briefed and understood the approach) loading the box with the new runway/approach/arrival transition; picking up the new ATIS; re-briefing the entire arrival; cross checking the restrictions; all while flying the airplane; frequency changes; etc. Creates a huge workload and makes it easy to miss any discrepancies. In addition; during the descent we were told to cross majic at 13;000 instead of between 13;000 and 17;000 as charted. No problem if you have plenty of time; but in the real world often you don't. It is easy to miss that seemingly small distinction in the box which could lead to a deviation. Bottom line: either simplify the arrivals or stick to them without changes; which is not realistic in the real world with frequent weather and traffic challenges.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: The Captain of a ERJ-190 expressed his concern regarding the complexity of a tailored STAR arrival at CLT. He believes it should either be simplified or utilized only in its entirety without ATC directed modifications or interruptions. He believes this arrival is an 'example' of other complex STARs as well.

Narrative: This is an example of an arrival that should be simplified. There are too many crossing restrictions and to properly brief it takes time; especially when changes occur. In our situation we were expecting; according to the ATIS either Runway 36R or Runway 5 off the [tailored for the air carrier] STAR. We briefed both at altitude; verifying the fixes against what was in the FMS. During initial descent; however; we were told to pick up a new ATIS and to now expect the Runway 23 ILS with the appropriate transition. (Note: The weather was also minimums for the ILS and had a tailwind so we took some extra time making sure we thoroughly briefed and understood the approach) Loading the box with the new runway/approach/arrival transition; picking up the new ATIS; re-briefing the entire arrival; cross checking the restrictions; all while flying the airplane; frequency changes; etc. creates a huge workload and makes it easy to miss any discrepancies. In addition; during the descent we were told to cross MAJIC at 13;000 instead of between 13;000 and 17;000 as charted. No problem if you have plenty of time; but in the real world often you don't. It is easy to miss that seemingly small distinction in the box which could lead to a deviation. Bottom line: Either simplify the arrivals or stick to them without changes; which is not realistic in the real world with frequent weather and traffic challenges.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.