Narrative:

Conducting operating experience (oe) on a student captain on the divla 2A in llbg; the student started down in VNAV speed for a crossing of solin intersection on the jepp chart of at or below 12;000. The clearance was to descend via the DIVLA2 to 5;000 feet. Cleared for the ILS 21 approach. The MCP was set to 5;000 feet; until the IAF point. The student was below the path in VNAV speed during the descent. Recognizing this; I began monitoring the top altitudes to assure compliance on the approach; as VNAV speed provided bottom altitude protection along the arrival. I let the student continue to highlight that while altitude protection remains on the bottom; the large font crossings will not necessarily be met on the top altitudes. Approaching solin; the FMC indicates solin 120b120b; and the nd shows 120b120a at solin. This presentation is confusing flight crews as its nd presentation appears to conflict with the jepp plate and the legs page with its 120B 120A presentation. After my prompting to stop the descent over solin at 12;000 due to going fairly low on the path; the student continued descent after solin in flch; and was getting low on the path; but not below the arrival restriction of gefen below 90.00; and was going to be below the top altitudes on the arrival; as 5;000 low altitude was assured. ATC made a comment that we appeared to be getting low outside solin; about the same time I told the student to maintain 12;000 at solin to get closer to the path and the controller cleared the aircraft to maintain 9;000. While no deviation appeared to occur; I was concerned; and wanted to highlight to the student that we should be attempting to re-intercept the path as previously briefed. I also confirmed the crossing altitude was in agreement with the jepp plate of solin at or below 12;000 with ATC to assure no deviation took place. I think the controller's concern was the deviation from path; not an issue of non-compliance with the crossings. The controller issued maintain 90;00 feet; after which when approaching gefen; I asked to confirm continued descent to 5;000 feet. To resume the arrival after an off path vector for traffic. The student then set up to intercept VNAV but the td point and aircraft was going to intercept the path late; so I placed the auto flight into flch; speed brake; and a higher speed to assure the 9;000 below crossing was met at gefen; as the auto flight was behind the programming at this point. After the crossing was met; VNAV was re-programmed and the path intercepted for the remainder of the arrival and approach. There was a good de-brief at the gate with all crew members from their perspective and to highlighting root cause; and the improvement opportunity to attain the path early in the arrival and maintain the path as a goal throughout the arrival. The report is being submitted due to ATC stating the condition of being low on the arrival; but within the crossing constraints over the water; and also to highlight the presentation and ambiguity crews are seeing on the llbg arrivals over solin intersection on the various arrivals and how this 12;000 below crossing presents on the FMC legs page (120b120b) and the aircraft nd (120b120a); in that it is creating confusion with the nd showing 120B 120A for solin.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B777 Check Pilot reported the Navigation Display and FMS had different altitudes displayed when compared to the Jeppesen chart for the DIVLA 2A STAR.

Narrative: Conducting Operating Experience (OE) on a student Captain on the DIVLA 2A in LLBG; the student started down in VNAV SPD for a crossing of SOLIN intersection on the Jepp chart of at or below 12;000. The clearance was to descend via the DIVLA2 to 5;000 feet. cleared for the ILS 21 approach. The MCP was set to 5;000 feet; until the IAF point. The student was below the path in VNAV SPD during the descent. Recognizing this; I began monitoring the top altitudes to assure compliance on the approach; as VNAV SPD provided bottom altitude protection along the arrival. I let the student continue to highlight that while altitude protection remains on the bottom; the large font crossings will not necessarily be met on the top altitudes. Approaching SOLIN; the FMC indicates SOLIN 120B120B; and the ND shows 120B120A at SOLIN. This presentation is confusing flight crews as its ND presentation appears to conflict with the Jepp plate and the legs page with its 120B 120A presentation. After my prompting to stop the descent over SOLIN at 12;000 due to going fairly low on the path; the student continued descent after SOLIN in FLCH; and was getting low on the path; but not below the arrival restriction of GEFEN below 90.00; and was going to be below the top altitudes on the arrival; as 5;000 low altitude was assured. ATC made a comment that we appeared to be getting low outside SOLIN; about the same time I told the student to maintain 12;000 at SOLIN to get closer to the path and the controller cleared the aircraft to maintain 9;000. While no deviation appeared to occur; I was concerned; and wanted to highlight to the student that we should be attempting to re-intercept the path as previously briefed. I also confirmed the crossing altitude was in agreement with the Jepp plate of SOLIN at or below 12;000 with ATC to assure no deviation took place. I think the controller's concern was the deviation from path; not an issue of non-compliance with the crossings. The controller issued maintain 90;00 feet; after which when approaching GEFEN; I asked to confirm continued descent to 5;000 feet. to resume the arrival after an off path vector for traffic. The student then set up to intercept VNAV but the TD point and aircraft was going to intercept the path late; so I placed the auto flight into FLCH; speed brake; and a higher speed to assure the 9;000 below crossing was met at GEFEN; as the auto flight was behind the programming at this point. After the crossing was met; VNAV was re-programmed and the path intercepted for the remainder of the arrival and approach. There was a good de-brief at the gate with all crew members from their perspective and to highlighting root cause; and the improvement opportunity to attain the path early in the arrival and maintain the path as a goal throughout the arrival. The report is being submitted due to ATC stating the condition of being low on the arrival; but within the crossing constraints over the water; and also to highlight the presentation and ambiguity crews are seeing on the LLBG arrivals over SOLIN intersection on the various arrivals and how this 12;000 below crossing presents on the FMC legs page (120B120B) and the aircraft ND (120B120A); in that it is creating confusion with the ND showing 120B 120A for SOLIN.

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.