 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Air carrier flight crew reported that the first portion of the approach was unstable due to not slowing early enough on final approach.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1761665 |
| Time | |
| Date | 202009 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Final Approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | First Officer |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Instrument |
| Person 2 | |
| Function | Captain |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach |
Narrative:
During an ILS approach to runway xxr; the PF failed to slow early enough on final approach. PF configured later than desired considering the situation (fast due to earlier ATC request) resulting in the aircraft becoming high on glide path while slowing to configure for landing. PF needed to use a sink rate higher than desired to return to glide slope. We met the published parameters at all of our approach gates; but the first portion of the approach was unstable. We landed safely on xxr and proceeded routinely to the gate.the main lesson learned was to slow earlier on final approach to allow a more stable approach. We accomplished all checklists and procedures and landed safely; but the crew would have been more able to look for potential threats if the PF had flown a more stable approach during the first portion of the approach. PNF was just back from several months off - take away for PNF was to address a rapidly evolving situation sooner and prompt the PF to configure sooner.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Air carrier flight crew reported that the first portion of the approach was unstable due to not slowing early enough on final approach.
Narrative: During an ILS approach to Runway XXR; the PF failed to slow early enough on final approach. PF configured later than desired considering the situation (fast due to earlier ATC request) resulting in the aircraft becoming high on glide path while slowing to configure for landing. PF needed to use a sink rate higher than desired to return to glide slope. We met the published parameters at all of our approach gates; but the first portion of the approach was unstable. We landed safely on XXR and proceeded routinely to the gate.The main lesson learned was to slow earlier on final approach to allow a more stable approach. We accomplished all checklists and procedures and landed safely; but the crew would have been more able to look for potential threats if the PF had flown a more stable approach during the first portion of the approach. PNF was just back from several months off - take away for PNF was to address a rapidly evolving situation sooner and prompt the PF to configure sooner.
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.