Narrative:

On an early morning arrival into lax; lax was switching from a landing east direction to a west landing; but not before my flight first landed on runway 6L; the last flight to make the easterly landing. Understandably; ATC expedited our arrival from konzl on the seavu 2 arrival; and then re-cleared us to the redeye 2 (landing east). Sct then cleared us directly to smo at 310 knots or greater in the descent; then cleared; 'after smo; I'm going to need a good rate down to 4000 feet.' sct turned us to a 160 heading and said descend to 2000 feet; maintain 210 knots. Further cleared fly heading 110; maintain 2000 feet until established; cleared ILS runway 6L approach; maintain 180 knots or better to a five mile final.' under fom 11.1 general; it states 'an ATC-issued approach clearance releases the pilot from all previously assigned ATC speed restrictions.' ATC asked 'say airspeed?' I responded 180 knots; upon which the controller said he found that hard to believe as he had our groundspeed as 154 knots (there was only a 5 knot wind vector at 2000 ft). While he was saying that; we slowed to 177 knots and stated we were now indicating 177 knots (our intent was to slow to 170 knots to a five-mile final per company policy). ATC then said; 'I gave you a 180 knots speed restriction; I am going to now need 190 knots (or words to that effect); you are my last east landing.' I said; 'negative; we cannot exceed 170 knots to a five-mile final.' he responded I need 180 knots or better to alisn (DME 4.6); then handed us over to tower frequency. Once on tower frequency; we received a TCAS TA from a departing westbound flight on the south complex.it is a pilot's responsibility and prerogative to refuse speed adjustments once cleared for an approach if the pilot considers the speed assignment excessive or contrary to the aircraft's operating specs. The 180 knot speed restriction was unacceptable once we intercepted the ILS; but before we could decline the 180 knot speed restriction; socal approach controller radioed 'say airspeed?' once we advised the controller the speed assignment was now unacceptable; he insisted his speed assignment was governing (that is ATC non-standard phraseology). I feel this controller needs to be shown that company (in fact all airlines); is (are) granted an FAA exemption to the high minimums requirements of 14 crash fire rescue equipment part 121; as it pertains to declining excessive speed assignments once cleared on an ATC issued approach; if the pilot determines the speed adjustment may lead to a unstabilized approach (speed over 170 knots to a five mile final). This as soon as possible is to draw attention to a safety issue; I understand what he was trying to accomplish; but he was in the wrong. In the interests of safety for my aircraft; this was an ATC error/threat.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737 Captain reported a Controller assigned them a speed to ALISN which is on a 4.6 mile final at LAX.

Narrative: On an early morning arrival into LAX; LAX was switching from a landing east direction to a west landing; but not before my flight first landed on Runway 6L; the last flight to make the easterly landing. Understandably; ATC expedited our arrival from KONZL on the SEAVU 2 Arrival; and then re-cleared us to the REDEYE 2 (landing east). SCT then cleared us directly to SMO at 310 knots or greater in the descent; then cleared; 'After SMO; I'm going to need a good rate down to 4000 feet.' SCT turned us to a 160 heading and said descend to 2000 feet; maintain 210 knots. Further cleared fly heading 110; maintain 2000 feet until established; cleared ILS Runway 6L Approach; maintain 180 knots or better to a five mile final.' Under FOM 11.1 General; it states 'An ATC-issued approach clearance releases the Pilot from all previously assigned ATC speed restrictions.' ATC asked 'Say airspeed?' I responded 180 knots; upon which the Controller said he found that hard to believe as he had our groundspeed as 154 knots (there was only a 5 knot wind vector at 2000 ft). While he was saying that; we slowed to 177 knots and stated we were now indicating 177 knots (our intent was to slow to 170 knots to a five-mile final per Company policy). ATC then said; 'I gave you a 180 knots speed restriction; I am going to now need 190 knots (or words to that effect); you are my last east landing.' I said; 'Negative; we cannot exceed 170 knots to a five-mile final.' He responded I need 180 knots or better to ALISN (DME 4.6); then handed us over to Tower frequency. Once on Tower frequency; we received a TCAS TA from a departing westbound flight on the south complex.It is a Pilot's responsibility and prerogative to refuse speed adjustments ONCE CLEARED FOR AN APPROACH if the pilot considers the speed assignment excessive or contrary to the aircraft's operating specs. The 180 knot speed restriction was unacceptable once we intercepted the ILS; but before we could decline the 180 knot speed restriction; SoCal Approach Controller radioed 'Say airspeed?' Once we advised the Controller the speed assignment was now unacceptable; he insisted his speed assignment was governing (that is ATC non-standard phraseology). I feel this Controller needs to be shown that Company (in fact all airlines); is (are) granted an FAA exemption to the high minimums requirements of 14 CFR Part 121; as it pertains to declining excessive speed assignments once cleared on an ATC issued approach; if the pilot determines the speed adjustment may lead to a unstabilized approach (speed over 170 knots to a five mile final). This ASAP is to draw attention to a safety issue; I understand what he was trying to accomplish; but he was in the wrong. In the interests of safety for my aircraft; this was an ATC error/threat.

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.