Narrative:

The main increase in workload during the critical stage of flight [during which the following event occurred] was the deferral of both the FMS database and the efbs. It seems with advanced cockpits; where we are more dependent on electronic data; perhaps they should not be deferred at the same time. Also; through a brief investigation on my part; it seems like it was a 'workload' issue with maintenance that prevented the [timely] update of the databases. We were originally assigned the dawgg arrival; arg transition; landing [runway] 36L. That arrival was loaded into the FMS. All waypoints were checked per SOP with the hard copy of the STAR charts. Due to facility outages we requested runway 9; but were denied. After making the FL230 restriction at arg the altimeters were set to qnh and 6;000 [ft] was dialed into the altitude select window and the in range checklist accomplished. Shortly thereafter we were pulled off the arrival between arg and dawgg and given a heading for spacing. We then asked what altitude they wanted us to descend [to] since we were no longer cleared via the arrival. They said maintain 10;000 [ft].we were then handed off; cleared direct fnchr and re-cleared via the fnchr RNAV STAR; north transition. That arrival was inserted. I was in the process of checking the arrival with the paper chart when I noticed we were [already] descending through 9;000 ft before reaching loonr; which has a crossing restriction between 11;000 and 9;000.I believe there is about a six day period between when the database is available and when it becomes effective. The FMS has provisions for storing the database until it becomes effective. Why was that not done? Our workload was also increased because the GS; papis and approach lights were out of service OTS and there was a displaced threshold on [runway] 36L.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An A300 flight crew; dispatched with their EFBs MEL'd and both FMC updates deferred; descended below the 9;000 MSL constraint at LOONR while descending via the FNCHR RNAV STAR to MEM. Contributing factors included a vector off the DAWGG STAR; then recleared via the FNCHR and increased flight crew workload due to Dispatch with out of date FMS databases and MEL'd EFBs.

Narrative: The main increase in workload during the critical stage of flight [during which the following event occurred] was the deferral of both the FMS database and the EFBs. It seems with advanced cockpits; where we are more dependent on electronic data; perhaps they should not be deferred at the same time. Also; through a brief investigation on my part; it seems like it was a 'workload' issue with Maintenance that prevented the [timely] update of the databases. We were originally assigned the DAWGG arrival; ARG transition; landing [Runway] 36L. That arrival was loaded into the FMS. All waypoints were checked per SOP with the hard copy of the STAR charts. Due to facility outages we requested Runway 9; but were denied. After making the FL230 restriction at ARG the altimeters were set to QNH and 6;000 [FT] was dialed into the altitude select window and the in range checklist accomplished. Shortly thereafter we were pulled off the arrival between ARG and DAWGG and given a heading for spacing. We then asked what altitude they wanted us to descend [to] since we were no longer cleared via the arrival. They said maintain 10;000 [FT].We were then handed off; cleared direct FNCHR and re-cleared via the FNCHR RNAV STAR; north transition. That arrival was inserted. I was in the process of checking the arrival with the paper chart when I noticed we were [already] descending through 9;000 FT before reaching LOONR; which has a crossing restriction between 11;000 and 9;000.I believe there is about a six day period between when the database is available and when it becomes effective. The FMS has provisions for storing the database until it becomes effective. Why was that not done? Our workload was also increased because the GS; PAPIs and Approach lights were out of service OTS and there was a displaced threshold on [Runway] 36L.

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.