 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Air carrier captain reported refusing a last-minute clearance change to the rnp approach at mdw; citing workload and the high possibility of programming errors.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1588194 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201809 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | MDW.Airport |
| State Reference | IL |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | Mixed |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Captain Pilot Not Flying |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 50 Flight Crew Type 10000 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types |
Narrative:
Chicago approach was very; very busy our entire time on frequency. Runway 13C ops likely made this more challenging. Some aircraft were given to expect the rnp Y; while some were being vectored to ILS final. We were set up for the ILS as expected but also reviewed the rnp. Approach control suddenly assigned us direct tinly to fly the full rnp procedure. I refused as we were only a mile or so away and not prepared (I wonder if that was even legal under their rules?). I could see the first officer (first officer) instantly go heads down and start the FMC re-programming. I have been in this situation too many times before when we try so hard to comply that we rush beyond our capabilities and likely make critical mistakes. Ironically I was showing the first officer earlier how to not succumb to the double discontinuity trap with changing approaches so close in. ATC was a bit miffed and that was disappointing to see as there was no way we could have pulled this off. We then were given vectors to final and landed uneventfully all the while staying in the green. Chicago approach has some of the most talented controllers; but they were trying too hard this day with too much traffic. They were in the red whether they realized it or not.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Air carrier Captain reported refusing a last-minute clearance change to the RNP approach at MDW; citing workload and the high possibility of programming errors.
Narrative: Chicago Approach was very; very busy our entire time on frequency. Runway 13C Ops likely made this more challenging. Some aircraft were given to expect the RNP Y; while some were being vectored to ILS final. We were set up for the ILS as expected but also reviewed the RNP. Approach Control suddenly assigned us direct TINLY to fly the full RNP procedure. I refused as we were only a mile or so away and not prepared (I wonder if that was even legal under their rules?). I could see the First officer (F/O) instantly go heads down and start the FMC re-programming. I have been in this situation too many times before when we try so hard to comply that we rush beyond our capabilities and likely make critical mistakes. Ironically I was showing the F/O earlier how to not succumb to the double discontinuity trap with changing approaches so close in. ATC was a bit miffed and that was disappointing to see as there was no way we could have pulled this off. We then were given vectors to final and landed uneventfully all the while staying in the Green. Chicago Approach has some of the most talented Controllers; but they were trying too hard this day with too much traffic. They were in the Red whether they realized it or not.
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.