Narrative:

Arriving ewr from stt via A-300, we were given clearance direct to rbv shortly after being radar identify. The next controller gave us clearance to cross 60 mi from the rbv VORTAC at 10000 ft MSL. Upon being cleared to rbv initially, the captain had entered rbv into his CDU as the active waypoint, selected abeam points, and executed. The FMC then initiated a turn direct to rbv saving waypoint references which were abeam fixes on our previously cleared route. These appear as active waypoints along the new active (in this case direct) route. When we were given the clearance to cross 60 mi from rbv at 10000 ft, I entered rbv on the fix page followed by 160 (DME/brg) giving a green 60 DME arc around rbv on our HSI's. The captain thought the arc 'cluttered' the HSI display. One of the 'abeam' waypoints appeared to fall on the 60 DME arc so the captain elected to enter a 10000 ft altitude restraint on this fix and erase the rbv fix and arc. This would have worked fine except the altitude constraint was apparently entered on a later waypoint by mistake. I did not notice as I was obtaining ATIS and talking to the company with in-range information. The controller asked us once if we would make the crossing restr and we said 'yes' when it was obvious to him we would not be able to comply, he issued an off-course vector for traffic. No loss of separation was apparent. I feel that had 'abeam points' not been selected on the initial clearance direct rbv or if the fix page 60 DME arc had been saved, our position relative rbv would have been more readily apparent.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ALTDEV XING RESTR.

Narrative: ARRIVING EWR FROM STT VIA A-300, WE WERE GIVEN CLRNC DIRECT TO RBV SHORTLY AFTER BEING RADAR IDENT. THE NEXT CTLR GAVE US CLRNC TO CROSS 60 MI FROM THE RBV VORTAC AT 10000 FT MSL. UPON BEING CLRED TO RBV INITIALLY, THE CAPT HAD ENTERED RBV INTO HIS CDU AS THE ACTIVE WAYPOINT, SELECTED ABEAM POINTS, AND EXECUTED. THE FMC THEN INITIATED A TURN DIRECT TO RBV SAVING WAYPOINT REFS WHICH WERE ABEAM FIXES ON OUR PREVIOUSLY CLRED RTE. THESE APPEAR AS ACTIVE WAYPOINTS ALONG THE NEW ACTIVE (IN THIS CASE DIRECT) RTE. WHEN WE WERE GIVEN THE CLRNC TO CROSS 60 MI FROM RBV AT 10000 FT, I ENTERED RBV ON THE FIX PAGE FOLLOWED BY 160 (DME/BRG) GIVING A GREEN 60 DME ARC AROUND RBV ON OUR HSI'S. THE CAPT THOUGHT THE ARC 'CLUTTERED' THE HSI DISPLAY. ONE OF THE 'ABEAM' WAYPOINTS APPEARED TO FALL ON THE 60 DME ARC SO THE CAPT ELECTED TO ENTER A 10000 FT ALT RESTRAINT ON THIS FIX AND ERASE THE RBV FIX AND ARC. THIS WOULD HAVE WORKED FINE EXCEPT THE ALT CONSTRAINT WAS APPARENTLY ENTERED ON A LATER WAYPOINT BY MISTAKE. I DID NOT NOTICE AS I WAS OBTAINING ATIS AND TALKING TO THE COMPANY WITH IN-RANGE INFO. THE CTLR ASKED US ONCE IF WE WOULD MAKE THE XING RESTR AND WE SAID 'YES' WHEN IT WAS OBVIOUS TO HIM WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO COMPLY, HE ISSUED AN OFF-COURSE VECTOR FOR TFC. NO LOSS OF SEPARATION WAS APPARENT. I FEEL THAT HAD 'ABEAM POINTS' NOT BEEN SELECTED ON THE INITIAL CLRNC DIRECT RBV OR IF THE FIX PAGE 60 DME ARC HAD BEEN SAVED, OUR POS RELATIVE RBV WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE READILY APPARENT.

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.