Narrative:

I am writing not only in reference to the incident which occurred today; but also to call attention to what I have observed to be a consistent and recurring problem which I feel is a considerable safety threat. I feel very strongly that further investigation is warranted. The matter at hand is that there seems to be ongoing issues with localizer reception especially during IMC and rain. Today we came very close to executing a go around/missed approach on account of this issue; as has happened on multiple occasions. We received vectors to the final approach course; however we were completely unable to receive the localizer signal whatsoever until we were within about 3 miles of the FAF. We used RNAV guidance on the monitoring pilot's side and followed the vectors as long as we could. However; as we are unable to use RNAV beyond the FAF; we discussed and both agreed that if the signal hadn't been received and identified by 1NM to the FAF; that we would execute a go around. Fortunately the signal came in just in time; and we were able to continue. I have noticed that this a consistent issue which if anything is getting worse. I'm not sure whether the issue lies with the airplane itself or with the ground equipment; but I can say that other airplane types typical don't seem to report similar issues. I know that the aircraft tends to experience large amounts of radio/com static during precipitation; so perhaps this is a related problem. However I really only see it in this airport. Just to make sure; I wrote up the airplane in question; but as I've said this happens all the time. Although nothing bad happened; this is an ongoing issue. To me; the big threat here is that crews have come to accept this condition and 'push' approaches farther than they should. We're all guilty of it. This is one of my main motivations for writing this report to call attention to this matter.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: EMB-145 Captain reported they did not receive localizer signal until 3 miles from the FAF. Reporter stated this was a common occurrence on this approach at EWR.

Narrative: I am writing not only in reference to the incident which occurred today; but also to call attention to what I have observed to be a consistent and recurring problem which I feel is a considerable safety threat. I feel very strongly that further investigation is warranted. The matter at hand is that there seems to be ongoing issues with localizer reception especially during IMC and rain. Today we came very close to executing a go around/missed approach on account of this issue; as has happened on multiple occasions. We received vectors to the final approach course; however we were completely unable to receive the localizer signal whatsoever until we were within about 3 miles of the FAF. We used RNAV guidance on the monitoring pilot's side and followed the vectors as long as we could. However; as we are unable to use RNAV beyond the FAF; we discussed and both agreed that if the signal hadn't been received and identified by 1NM to the FAF; that we would execute a go around. Fortunately the signal came in just in time; and we were able to continue. I have noticed that this a consistent issue which if anything is getting worse. I'm not sure whether the issue lies with the airplane itself or with the ground equipment; but I can say that other airplane types typical don't seem to report similar issues. I know that the aircraft tends to experience large amounts of radio/com static during precipitation; so perhaps this is a related problem. However I really only see it in this airport. Just to make sure; I wrote up the airplane in question; but as I've said this happens all the time. Although nothing bad happened; this is an ongoing issue. To me; the big threat here is that crews have come to accept this condition and 'push' approaches farther than they should. We're all guilty of it. This is one of my main motivations for writing this report to call attention to this matter.

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.