Narrative:

While on the seavu arrival and just inside konzl at 17;000 feet; we were told to descend via the seavu arrival for 25L. We had set up for and briefed 24L. I've been in this situation before like many of us have been; so I did like the reference notes suggest. Page one describes if you are outside of konzl; and page two advises if you are inside of seavu. Problem was I was inside konzl. Nonetheless; I did as it recommends: I selected seavu arrival; transition and runway (which gave me a route discontinuity). At this point I'm behind; high and trying to program the FMC. In short; by the time we had everything programmed and reconnected; we were slightly off course and were instructed to intercept the localizer after gaate. We could have verbalized; verified; monitored and intervened better as a crew. However; ATC puts an undue burden on crews at this point on the arrival to have to program the FMC and be heads down at a busy time. ATC needs to issue a runway prior to us starting the arrival and if they can't (or have to change runways on us well into the arrival); the burden needs to fall on ATC to get us back into position with more simple means: i.e.: a vector to intercept; or direct to a fix on the approach. Sometimes in situations like these I feel we are there to make their jobs easier; instead of the other way around. In the future; I will say; unable; and request a vector or direct a fix.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737 Captain describes a runway change during the SEAVU 2 arrival to LAX that results in some altitude and track deviations when the FMC is switched from 24R to runway 25L.

Narrative: While on the SEAVU Arrival and just inside KONZL at 17;000 feet; we were told to descend via the SEAVU Arrival for 25L. We had set up for and briefed 24L. I've been in this situation before like many of us have been; so I did like the Reference notes suggest. Page one describes if you are outside of KONZL; and page two advises if you are inside of SEAVU. Problem was I was inside KONZL. Nonetheless; I did as it recommends: I selected SEAVU Arrival; transition and runway (which gave me a route discontinuity). At this point I'm behind; high and trying to program the FMC. In short; by the time we had everything programmed and reconnected; we were slightly off course and were instructed to intercept the Localizer after GAATE. We could have Verbalized; Verified; Monitored and Intervened better as a Crew. However; ATC puts an undue burden on Crews at this point on the arrival to have to program the FMC and be heads down at a busy time. ATC needs to issue a runway prior to us starting the arrival and if they can't (or have to change runways on us well into the arrival); the burden needs to fall on ATC to get us back into position with more simple means: i.e.: a vector to intercept; or direct to a fix on the approach. Sometimes in situations like these I feel we are there to make their jobs easier; instead of the other way around. In the future; I will say; unable; and request a vector or direct a fix.

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.