Narrative:

An important lesson at a cheap price: we were on the julian 2 arrival for lax. Center began vectoring us and said to expect runway 25L ILS. We requested runway 24L and were told the request would be forwarded to approach. When switched to approach, we were cleared for 'the profile descent.' we had not been expecting that and so had to look for it. I found the runway 24/25 profile descent but that starts from north of the airport, not south, where we were. As I was about to question it, approach said we had flown through the course. We were turned back to the left and told we were supposed to be on the 'civit profile, intercept the ILS at 10000 (for 25L) and continue the civet profile.' I could not get the computer to accept the clearance, and we flew through the localizer again while I was trying. Approach called us again and turned us back. At this time, we turned visually to the airport, tuned the ILS and flew manually with no further difficulties. Errors made: very late clearance from approach. We were almost on course when it was received. Also, we were inside the starting point and not on an appropriate altitude. Since it was unexpected, it was difficult to correlate actions to be taken. Incomplete/incorrect clearance. 'Civit' not initially mentioned, so we wasted time looking at the wrong profile. Failure to navigation. We should have tuned the ILS first and intercepted that rather than waste time with the computer at that point. The computer didn't show proper information because we were past the initial point of the profile before we got it programmed, so it was giving misleading information. If we had the ILS tuned early, our situational awareness would have been better.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LGT TRACK HDG DEV WHILE THE FLC WAS TRYING TO PROGRAM A PROFILE DSCNT INTO LAX.

Narrative: AN IMPORTANT LESSON AT A CHEAP PRICE: WE WERE ON THE JULIAN 2 ARR FOR LAX. CENTER BEGAN VECTORING US AND SAID TO EXPECT RWY 25L ILS. WE REQUESTED RWY 24L AND WERE TOLD THE REQUEST WOULD BE FORWARDED TO APCH. WHEN SWITCHED TO APCH, WE WERE CLRED FOR 'THE PROFILE DSCNT.' WE HAD NOT BEEN EXPECTING THAT AND SO HAD TO LOOK FOR IT. I FOUND THE RWY 24/25 PROFILE DSCNT BUT THAT STARTS FROM N OF THE ARPT, NOT S, WHERE WE WERE. AS I WAS ABOUT TO QUESTION IT, APCH SAID WE HAD FLOWN THROUGH THE COURSE. WE WERE TURNED BACK TO THE L AND TOLD WE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE ON THE 'CIVIT PROFILE, INTERCEPT THE ILS AT 10000 (FOR 25L) AND CONTINUE THE CIVET PROFILE.' I COULD NOT GET THE COMPUTER TO ACCEPT THE CLRNC, AND WE FLEW THROUGH THE LOC AGAIN WHILE I WAS TRYING. APCH CALLED US AGAIN AND TURNED US BACK. AT THIS TIME, WE TURNED VISUALLY TO THE ARPT, TUNED THE ILS AND FLEW MANUALLY WITH NO FURTHER DIFFICULTIES. ERRORS MADE: VERY LATE CLRNC FROM APCH. WE WERE ALMOST ON COURSE WHEN IT WAS RECEIVED. ALSO, WE WERE INSIDE THE STARTING POINT AND NOT ON AN APPROPRIATE ALT. SINCE IT WAS UNEXPECTED, IT WAS DIFFICULT TO CORRELATE ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN. INCOMPLETE/INCORRECT CLRNC. 'CIVIT' NOT INITIALLY MENTIONED, SO WE WASTED TIME LOOKING AT THE WRONG PROFILE. FAILURE TO NAV. WE SHOULD HAVE TUNED THE ILS FIRST AND INTERCEPTED THAT RATHER THAN WASTE TIME WITH THE COMPUTER AT THAT POINT. THE COMPUTER DIDN'T SHOW PROPER INFO BECAUSE WE WERE PAST THE INITIAL POINT OF THE PROFILE BEFORE WE GOT IT PROGRAMMED, SO IT WAS GIVING MISLEADING INFO. IF WE HAD THE ILS TUNED EARLY, OUR SITUATIONAL AWARENESS WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.