 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Airbus flight crew reported they failed to make a crossing restriction when mcdu's 1 and 2 disagreed on projected vertical path performance.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1318107 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201512 |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | D10.TRACON |
| State Reference | TX |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Descent |
| Route In Use | Direct STAR KLNDR2 |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Component | |
| Aircraft Component | FMS/FMC |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Pilot Not Flying Captain |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
| Person 2 | |
| Function | Pilot Flying First Officer |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Altitude Undershoot Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met Deviation - Procedural Clearance |
Narrative:
Strange readouts on the #1 and #2 mcdu's. For instance; the #1 mcdu and #2 mcdu were showing the same altitude and speed targets at crossing fixes; but #1 showed amber while #2 showed magenta. First officer (first officer) was by far the more experienced in the airbus and was flying. Cleared out of FL250 direct klndr and to descend via the rest of the KLNDR2. 11;000 set in the altitude selector. Managed descent. Although both primary flight displays (pfd) were showing on glide path (green dot); it was obvious that the aircraft would be too high at wardz. First officer intervened with speed brakes; and neither of us understood why the aircraft was responding by adding power [crew resource management]. The altitude restriction was between 11;000 feet and 13;000 feet. Crossed at 13;520 feet.must be an airbus idiosyncrasy. I only have around 40 hours P.I.C. Do not recall ever seeing a zig zag arrow during any part of the arrival (arrow that indicates beginning of glide path). Aircraft had altcrz (something I regularly check for) when at cruise altitude (FL320) so it must have been descent mode at the proper time.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Airbus flight crew reported they failed to make a crossing restriction when MCDU's 1 and 2 disagreed on projected vertical path performance.
Narrative: Strange readouts on the #1 and #2 MCDU's. For instance; the #1 MCDU and #2 MCDU were showing the same altitude and speed targets at crossing fixes; but #1 showed amber while #2 showed magenta. First Officer (FO) was by far the more experienced in the Airbus and was flying. Cleared out of FL250 direct KLNDR and to descend via the rest of the KLNDR2. 11;000 set in the altitude selector. Managed descent. Although both Primary Flight Displays (PFD) were showing on glide path (green dot); it was obvious that the aircraft would be too high at WARDZ. FO intervened with speed brakes; and neither of us understood why the aircraft was responding by adding power [Crew Resource Management]. The altitude restriction was between 11;000 feet and 13;000 feet. Crossed at 13;520 feet.Must be an Airbus idiosyncrasy. I only have around 40 hours P.I.C. Do not recall ever seeing a zig zag arrow during any part of the arrival (arrow that indicates beginning of glide path). Aircraft had ALTCRZ (something I regularly check for) when at cruise altitude (FL320) so it must have been descent mode at the proper time.
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.