Narrative:

While being vectored for the ILS prm 28 at atlanta the controller had slowed us incrementally from 190 to 160 knots prior to issuing a 'fly heading 290 maintain 4000 feet until established; contact the tower now' clearance. At approximately two miles outside the FAF as we were making configuration changes for landing; a second voice queried us as to our airspeed. I responded 145 knots. The controller commented on us being assigned 180 knots to the marker. Slightly unsure of myself; I replied we were cleared 160 knots to the marker; as 160 knots was the last assigned airspeed prior to the approach clearance. We then received a firm reprimand on maintaining our assigned airspeed until the marker; all by the secondary voice on the frequency.as we were at the marker; shooting an instrument approach; we continued the procedure and discussed the event once we got to the gate. Upon review; I am fairly certain there was no additional speed restriction issued at the approach clearance otherwise we both would have verbalized the restriction. While I accept that I could be in error on my recollection of the clearance; the greater concern was for what we as a crew felt was an inappropriate time in which the controller queried and reprimanded us. Focusing on the tasks at hand should be priority; not just for us as flight crew; but the controller as well. I would have much preferred a comment once clear the runway; or a phone call to discuss the matter. The controller's comments were not a solution to any spacing or time sensitive matter; and were instead a distraction during this phase of flight.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737 First Officer reported being reprimanded by ATC related to a speed assignment during a critical phase on approach to ATL.

Narrative: While being vectored for the ILS PRM 28 at Atlanta the Controller had slowed us incrementally from 190 to 160 knots prior to issuing a 'fly heading 290 maintain 4000 feet until established; contact the Tower now' clearance. At approximately two miles outside the FAF as we were making configuration changes for landing; a second voice queried us as to our airspeed. I responded 145 knots. The Controller commented on us being assigned 180 knots to the marker. Slightly unsure of myself; I replied we were cleared 160 knots to the marker; as 160 knots was the last assigned airspeed prior to the approach clearance. We then received a firm reprimand on maintaining our assigned airspeed until the marker; all by the secondary voice on the frequency.As we were at the marker; shooting an instrument approach; we continued the procedure and discussed the event once we got to the gate. Upon review; I am fairly certain there was no additional speed restriction issued at the approach clearance otherwise we both would have verbalized the restriction. While I accept that I could be in error on my recollection of the clearance; the greater concern was for what we as a Crew felt was an inappropriate time in which the Controller queried and reprimanded us. Focusing on the tasks at hand should be priority; not just for us as Flight Crew; but the Controller as well. I would have much preferred a comment once clear the runway; or a phone call to discuss the matter. The Controller's comments were not a solution to any spacing or time sensitive matter; and were instead a distraction during this phase of flight.

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.