Narrative:

At the end of a long day; we were flying into clt; we had originally filed for the majic 2 STAR; but were subsequently cleared for the chsly 3 STAR. Passing chsly; ATC (washington center) cleared us to 'descend via the chsly 3 arrival.' we had previously briefed it and accepted that clearance. After a few queries from ATC (both washington center and charlotte TRACON) for us to verify that we could accept a 'descend via' clearance; we told them yes. They conveyed their understanding that company was not allowed to accept descend via clearances. We of course assured them that we accept such clearances all the time all over the country.about that time; we realized that something was clearly out of the ordinary due to their queries. We discussed the fact that we remembered something about certain stars not being filed going into clt. We rechecked and sure enough; there is a directive [to] not accept ATC clearances for [several stars]. These stars are not useable because many of the approaches required to fly the STAR cannot be loaded in the FMC.' we realized that we were at this point; already flying this STAR; and the alternative STAR (majic 2) was not even close to the chsly. We carefully rechecked all the points and restrictions; re-verified that the aircraft was on path and would stay on path.clt was landing north; and the chsly would bring us to vectors on a right downwind. The ILS to 36R was loaded and briefed; seemingly the same as any other RNAV stars. We maintained the correct path all the way through the arrival; got vectors to the visual to 36R; and landed uneventfully. Clearly; we did in fact accept a STAR that says that we should not have.we had no problem flying this STAR and loading this approach. Perhaps there would have been a problem loading a different approach had the runway configuration been different. If this is the case; then why make these stars unavailable to all approaches? I feel there needs to be research done about this; because it seems no other airlines are having this issue; and it is clearly an issue for the local ATC when company has to have a special arrival different from most other airlines.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air carrier Captain reported flying an arrival to CLT that company had directed not to accept.

Narrative: At the end of a long day; we were flying into CLT; we had originally filed for the MAJIC 2 STAR; but were subsequently cleared for the CHSLY 3 STAR. Passing CHSLY; ATC (Washington Center) cleared us to 'Descend via the CHSLY 3 Arrival.' We had previously briefed it and accepted that clearance. After a few queries from ATC (both Washington Center and Charlotte TRACON) for us to verify that we could accept a 'descend via' clearance; we told them yes. They conveyed their understanding that Company was not allowed to accept descend via clearances. We of course assured them that we accept such clearances all the time all over the country.About that time; we realized that something was clearly out of the ordinary due to their queries. We discussed the fact that we remembered something about certain STARs not being filed going into CLT. We rechecked and sure enough; there is a directive [to] not accept ATC clearances for [several STARs]. These STARs are not useable because many of the approaches required to fly the STAR cannot be loaded in the FMC.' We realized that we were at this point; already flying this STAR; and the alternative STAR (MAJIC 2) was not even close to the CHSLY. We carefully rechecked all the points and restrictions; re-verified that the aircraft was on path and would stay on path.CLT was landing north; and the CHSLY would bring us to vectors on a right downwind. The ILS to 36R was loaded and briefed; seemingly the same as any other RNAV STARs. We maintained the correct path all the way through the arrival; got vectors to the visual to 36R; and landed uneventfully. Clearly; we did in fact accept a STAR that says that we should not have.We had no problem flying this STAR and loading this approach. Perhaps there would have been a problem loading a different approach had the runway configuration been different. If this is the case; then why make these STARs unavailable to all approaches? I feel there needs to be research done about this; because it seems no other airlines are having this issue; and it is clearly an issue for the local ATC when Company has to have a special arrival different from most other airlines.

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.