Narrative:

I have been in and out of memphis several times since the implementation of the arrivals. One that really needs to be worked on is the bluzz one arrival. Specifically landing south. Our company only gives a vertical path approach (vpa) for landing north; not south. This arrival is extremely problematic due to crossing bluzz at 280 knots and at or below FL230 then 9.7 miles later having to cross copen at 230 knots and at 10;000 feet. If one is not paying extra attention to this arrival a possible violation or worse could happen. I have thought this for a long time. So much so that as an instructor I used to pull this specific arrival out and show students when talking about complex arrivals and how they can 'bite you in the butt; if not paying attention.' with this in mind I had the opportunity to actually talk to the controller while on this arrival. She was extremely nice; and offered feedback that I thought could help ATC; and our fellow pilots stay safe. While descending via the bluzz one arrival landing south on freq. 125.80 I asked the controller if she had a second for a question (there was possibly 2 other aircraft on frequency and it was very quiet). The controller came back and said sure. I then said that this arrival stinks because of having to cross the two fixes so close together and also having to slow down. She agreed and actually said that she had a friend who is a crj pilot and also has told her the same thing. She then suggested that I [file a report] and she would do the same. From a pilot's point of view this arrival could be better; safer; and more user friendly by simply extending the distance from bluzz and copen intersection. 9.7 miles is simply not enough to lose altitude and slow down. Could it be increased to possibly 20 or 25 miles? The chart states that from copen intersection to the airport is 40NM; surely there is enough room to make this possible. In closing I simply bring up this point again for safety; simplicity; and to reduce error. I hope something can be done. Also I truly wish all arrivals could be 'standardized.' meaning that there is some sort of congruency in the system. Every arrival is different (which I do understand each airport is unique) but why does it seem like there is almost always an 'I gotcha' in every arrival. In memphis it's the bluzz one arrival; in charlotte it's the ivane five; in charleston it's the ospri five arrival and the list could go on and on. Why couldn't a 3 degree glide slope be used for all arrivals like what is utilized across the board for almost all ILS's? Why couldn't there be a specific fix on every arrival (if applicable) that states 10;000 feet at 250 knots. These may seem like simple things but a long day full of weather and other stressful and fatiguing events could save a crew from making mistakes.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CRJ-900 First Officer asked why so many of the new arrivals seem to have traps built into them; usually restrictions that are difficult to make. The reporter cited the BLUZZ 1 at MEM; the IVANE 5 in CLT; and the OSPRI 5 in CHS as examples.

Narrative: I have been in and out of Memphis several times since the implementation of the arrivals. One that really needs to be worked on is the BLUZZ ONE ARRIVAL. Specifically landing south. Our company only gives a Vertical Path Approach (VPA) for landing north; not south. This arrival is extremely problematic due to crossing BLUZZ at 280 knots and at or below FL230 then 9.7 miles later having to cross COPEN at 230 knots and at 10;000 feet. If one is not paying extra attention to this arrival a possible violation or worse could happen. I have thought this for a long time. So much so that as an instructor I used to pull this specific arrival out and show students when talking about complex arrivals and how they can 'bite you in the butt; if not paying attention.' With this in mind I had the opportunity to actually talk to the controller while on this arrival. She was extremely nice; and offered feedback that I thought could help ATC; and our fellow pilots stay safe. While descending via the BLUZZ ONE ARRIVAL landing south on freq. 125.80 I asked the controller if she had a second for a question (there was possibly 2 other aircraft on frequency and it was very quiet). The controller came back and said sure. I then said that this arrival stinks because of having to cross the two fixes so close together and also having to slow down. She agreed and actually said that she had a friend who is a CRJ pilot and also has told her the same thing. She then suggested that I [file a report] and she would do the same. From a pilot's point of view this arrival could be better; safer; and more user friendly by simply extending the distance from BLUZZ and COPEN intersection. 9.7 miles is simply not enough to lose altitude and slow down. Could it be increased to possibly 20 or 25 miles? The chart states that from COPEN intersection to the airport is 40NM; surely there is enough room to make this possible. In closing I simply bring up this point again for safety; simplicity; and to reduce error. I hope something can be done. Also I truly wish all arrivals could be 'standardized.' Meaning that there is some sort of congruency in the system. Every arrival is different (which I do understand each airport is unique) but why does it seem like there is almost always an 'I gotcha' in every arrival. In Memphis it's the BLUZZ ONE ARRIVAL; in Charlotte it's the IVANE FIVE; in Charleston it's the OSPRI FIVE ARRIVAL and the list could go on and on. Why couldn't a 3 degree glide slope be used for all arrivals like what is utilized across the board for almost all ILS's? Why couldn't there be a specific fix on every arrival (if applicable) that states 10;000 feet at 250 knots. These may seem like simple things but a long day full of weather and other stressful and fatiguing events could save a crew from making mistakes.

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.