When ATC changed their arrival runway inbound to iad in the vicinity of gibbz; the flight crew of a ...

Narrative:

While descending on the gibbz one RNAV arrival into iad; we were planning on an approach to 19C; but when we had checked on to potomac approach; we were told to expect 19R. I continued the descent on the arrival while asking the pm to set up the new approach and brief it. He did; and we verified the new legs for the approach as well as verifying that the picture on the mfd made sense. We continued on the arrival but; after checking on with potomac final approach; they told us to now expect runway 19C. I had the pm make the change back to runway 19C. We again verified the legs; verified the mfd made sense; and even made sure the first page of the legs page looked correct. After that we executed the [modified route] and continued. After gibbz; I noted that the autopilot didn't do a very good job of making the turn (1/4 dot deviation); and we started looking at the problem. At that point the pm noticed there was a discontinuity after sunyj [that had been hidden on page two of the legs page] and quickly worked to close it. By the time we had the course back in correctly; we were just passing over sunyj as we started our turn; thus performing as if it were a flyover fix as opposed to a flyby fix. We immediately informed ATC we were having a nav issue and they issued us a vector; [and] then informed us that; due to the malfunction; the spacing for 19C was not going to work; and to again expect the visual for 19R. When the pm loaded the new approach again; the same problem happened. We noticed the problem; and made it correct before executing the FMS. The flight then continued; and landed; without incident.I'm really not sure what we could have done better to prevent this. We were especially careful to ensure we had the correct runway with the correct fixes; and also that the [map display] made sense. The discontinuity was hidden because it stopped the arrival at sunyj; but started it again back at gibbz. This made it look ok to us; and there were enough fixes between where we made the change and where the discontinuity was to hide it. From now on; I know that during a runway change; I will not only verify the approach on the map; but will also verify all the remaining legs. It will only take a few moments; and will help prevent future deviations.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: When ATC changed their arrival runway inbound to IAD in the vicinity of GIBBZ; the flight crew of a CRJ-900 failed to note a route discontinuity on the second page of their route subsequent to reprogramming. A modest track deviation and another runway reassignment ensued.

Narrative: While descending on the GIBBZ ONE RNAV ARRIVAL into IAD; we were planning on an approach to 19C; but when we had checked on to Potomac Approach; we were told to expect 19R. I continued the descent on the arrival while asking the PM to set up the new approach and brief it. He did; and we verified the new legs for the approach as well as verifying that the picture on the MFD made sense. We continued on the arrival but; after checking on with Potomac Final Approach; they told us to now expect Runway 19C. I had the PM make the change back to Runway 19C. We again verified the legs; verified the MFD made sense; and even made sure the first page of the legs page looked correct. After that we executed the [modified route] and continued. After GIBBZ; I noted that the autopilot didn't do a very good job of making the turn (1/4 dot deviation); and we started looking at the problem. At that point the PM noticed there was a discontinuity after SUNYJ [that had been hidden on page two of the legs page] and quickly worked to close it. By the time we had the course back in correctly; we were just passing over SUNYJ as we started our turn; thus performing as if it were a flyover fix as opposed to a flyby fix. We immediately informed ATC we were having a Nav issue and they issued us a vector; [and] then informed us that; due to the malfunction; the spacing for 19C was not going to work; and to again expect the visual for 19R. When the PM loaded the new approach again; the same problem happened. We noticed the problem; and made it correct before executing the FMS. The flight then continued; and landed; without incident.I'm really not sure what we could have done better to prevent this. We were especially careful to ensure we had the correct runway with the correct fixes; and also that the [Map display] made sense. The discontinuity was hidden because it stopped the arrival at SUNYJ; but started it again back at GIBBZ. This made it look ok to us; and there were enough fixes between where we made the change and where the discontinuity was to hide it. From now on; I know that during a runway change; I will not only verify the approach on the Map; but will also verify all the remaining legs. It will only take a few moments; and will help prevent future deviations.

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.

Attributes
ACN	1067151
Time
Date	201302
Local Time Of Day	1201-1800
Place
Locale Reference	PCT.TRACON
State Reference	VA
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Descent
Flight Plan	IFR
Component
Aircraft Component	FMS/FMC
Person 1
Function	First Officer Pilot Flying
Qualification	Flight Crew Commercial
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Track / Heading All Types

When ATC changed their arrival runway inbound to iad in the vicinity of gibbz; the flight crew of a crj-900 failed to note a route discontinuity on the second page of their route subsequent to reprogramming. A modest track deviation and another runway reassignment ensued.