Narrative:

Aircraft was being hand flown due to stab trim system failure. A long final was requested with ATC as well as approach control. Approach was informed that we need extra room due to system issues; but that no additional help was required at this time. Mco approach placed us on roughly a 20-mile final to runway 18R at mco. Aircraft landing weight was approximately 142;500 pounds. The -800 with gear down and flaps 15 was not slowing nor descending as expected. While on the ILS approach roughly two to three miles north of orl; I instructed the first officer to request a slight s-turn to the right of 18R localizer in order to adjust altitude as well as speed. The clearance was granted by mco tower. At the same time they asked if we had the airport in sight. The first officer stated affirmative. Immediately the tower cleared use for the visual approach to 18R; deviation to the right and to cross orl at 2;500 ft until south and cleared for the visual. The first officer accepted the clearance. I was hand flying the aircraft as well as using manual stab trim inputs. I informed the first officer to tell ATC (tower) unable to maintain 2;500 ft until south of orl due to the current aircraft configuration and descent profile. By the time I tried to correct the flight path of the aircraft; which required additional time to correct any altitude arrest; I had gone below the clearance limit of 2;500 ft until south of orl. I crossed orl at roughly 2;300 to 2;200 ft MSL. Mco tower did inform us to please next time give them more time if a clearance issue cannot be met; so they can make arrangements prior to the deviation. I called mco tower once I arrived at the gate. I apologized for the misunderstanding as well as for any issues. They replied that there was no issue; but to please give them more time.1. I should have provided ATC with more details as to the current aircraft conditions and control issues (trim).2. First officer should not have been so eager to accept the visual approach with altitude crossing restriction over orl; knowing that even with a fully configured aircraft this action puts you high on the glidepath to any of the south runways.3. I should have immediately informed ATC that the 2;500 altitude retraction was not going to work under the current circumstances. 4. ATC should not automatically clear us for the visual just because the first officer stated we had the airport in sight. At no point did we ever request a visual approach or were we flying one. Also; the first officer should not have been so quick to respond.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737-800 Captain describes a visual approach to Runway 18R at MCO with failed horizontal stabilizer electric trim. An emergency is not declared and ATC issues a clearance to cross ORL above 2;500 FT which cannot be accomplished due to the flaps 15 approach configuration. A normal landing ensues.

Narrative: Aircraft was being hand flown due to stab trim system failure. A long final was requested with ATC as well as Approach Control. Approach was informed that we need extra room due to system issues; but that no additional help was required at this time. MCO Approach placed us on roughly a 20-mile final to Runway 18R at MCO. Aircraft landing weight was approximately 142;500 LBS. The -800 with gear down and flaps 15 was not slowing nor descending as expected. While on the ILS Approach roughly two to three miles north of ORL; I instructed the First Officer to request a slight s-turn to the right of 18R Localizer in order to adjust altitude as well as speed. The clearance was granted by MCO Tower. At the same time they asked if we had the airport in sight. The First Officer stated affirmative. Immediately the Tower cleared use for the visual approach to 18R; deviation to the right and to cross ORL at 2;500 FT until south and cleared for the visual. The First Officer accepted the clearance. I was hand flying the aircraft as well as using manual stab trim inputs. I informed the First Officer to tell ATC (Tower) unable to maintain 2;500 FT until south of ORL due to the current aircraft configuration and descent profile. By the time I tried to correct the flight path of the aircraft; which required additional time to correct any altitude arrest; I had gone below the clearance limit of 2;500 FT until south of ORL. I crossed ORL at roughly 2;300 to 2;200 FT MSL. MCO Tower did inform us to please next time give them more time if a clearance issue cannot be met; so they can make arrangements prior to the deviation. I called MCO Tower once I arrived at the gate. I apologized for the misunderstanding as well as for any issues. They replied that there was no issue; but to please give them more time.1. I should have provided ATC with more details as to the current aircraft conditions and control issues (TRIM).2. First Officer should not have been so eager to accept the visual approach with altitude crossing restriction over ORL; knowing that even with a fully configured aircraft this action puts you high on the glidepath to any of the south runways.3. I should have immediately informed ATC that the 2;500 altitude retraction was not going to work under the current circumstances. 4. ATC should not automatically clear us for the visual just because the First Officer stated we had the airport in sight. At no point did we ever request a visual approach or were we flying one. Also; the First Officer should not have been so quick to respond.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.