 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
On RNAV approach; A320 flight crew was issued a speed restriction along with a modified altitude to maintain on the arrival. As a result of maintaining the airspeed; crew failed to meet the fix crossing restriction.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1299616 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201510 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZTL.ARTCC |
| State Reference | GA |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | A320 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Descent |
| Route In Use | STAR IVANE5 |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Pilot Not Flying First Officer |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
| Person 2 | |
| Function | Captain Pilot Flying |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met Deviation - Procedural Clearance |
Narrative:
While descending via the IVANE5 RNAV arrival with an ATC issued airspeed restriction of 280 KTS; ATC then altered our altitude restriction over mayos to descend to FL220. After inserting FL220 into the mcdu both the captain's and first officer's instruments showed us on profile. Subsequently; the first officer's profile started showing a 'high' prediction over mayos while the captain's instruments showed 'on profile'. The captain applied speed brakes to increase the descent rate while attempting to maintain the 280 KT restriction. We crossed mayos at FL232 and alerted ATC. ATC made no comment and proceeded to clear us to descend via the IVANE5 arrival. The flight proceeded to landing without incident.the event occurred because of the amended clearance of a hard altitude and airspeed given once on an RNAV arrival. The hard altitude of FL220 at mayos followed by a subsequent altitude of fl 220 or above at the next fix appears to confuse the airbus navigation. Compounding the event was the discrepancy between the captain's and first officer's flight instruments. My profile doughnut showed us right on and his showed us right on until crossing mstrd.the company should work with ATC to limit these amended clearances and if they are going to be given then issue them with plenty of time to prepare. Company should put out a read file on this particular situation and if it can't be corrected through software updates than it should be trained. I will be very cognizant in the future when given this clearance and as another barrier have the progress page up.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: On RNAV approach; A320 flight crew was issued a speed restriction along with a modified altitude to maintain on the arrival. As a result of maintaining the airspeed; crew failed to meet the fix crossing restriction.
Narrative: While descending via the IVANE5 RNAV arrival with an ATC issued airspeed restriction of 280 KTS; ATC then altered our altitude restriction over MAYOS to descend to FL220. After inserting FL220 into the MCDU both the Captain's and FO's instruments showed us on profile. Subsequently; the FO's profile started showing a 'high' prediction over MAYOS while the Captain's instruments showed 'on profile'. The captain applied speed brakes to increase the descent rate while attempting to maintain the 280 KT restriction. We crossed MAYOS at FL232 and alerted ATC. ATC made no comment and proceeded to clear us to descend via the IVANE5 arrival. The flight proceeded to landing without incident.The event occurred because of the amended clearance of a hard altitude and airspeed given once on an RNAV arrival. The hard altitude of FL220 at MAYOS followed by a subsequent altitude of FL 220 or above at the next fix appears to confuse the Airbus navigation. Compounding the event was the discrepancy between the Captain's and FO's flight instruments. My profile doughnut showed us right on and his showed us right on until crossing MSTRD.The company should work with ATC to limit these amended clearances and if they are going to be given then issue them with plenty of time to prepare. Company should put out a read file on this particular situation and if it can't be corrected through software updates than it should be trained. I will be very cognizant in the future when given this clearance and as another barrier have the progress page up.
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.