An air carrier pilot was slower over the OM than the ATCT local controller expected.

Attributes
ACN	306250
Time
Date	199505
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : lax
State Reference	CA
Altitude	msl bound lower : 4000 msl bound upper : 4000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : lax
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	B757-200
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	Other Other
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	approach : straight in arrival other arrival star : star enroute airway : lax
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : cfi pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 160 flight time total : 14700 flight time type : 3800
ASRS Report	306250
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : clearance other anomaly other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	other
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation
Situations
ATC Facility	procedure or policy : unspecified

Narrative:

Routine arrival into lax on the civet profile. Approach control states, 'after arnes, cleared the ILS runway 25L to lax.' upon contacting the tower, we were told to keep 220 KTS until the marker. About 8 mi from the marker, we began to slow to approach speed. After about 30 KTS of speed reduction, the tower instructed we were 'assigned 220 KTS' in a rather sharp and mandatory voice. We indicated that we have already been cleared for approach and were not able to hold 220 KTS over the marker due to gear to approach speeds (flaps). Landing was uneventful, however the approach still seemed rushed due to the increased speed. I think that some controllers need to be more aware of certain airplane characteristics if they plan on conducting minimum spaced approachs. By reducing the amount of time needed to complete checklist and for proper airplane confign, it only increases the chances for possible human error during a critical phase of flight. Hopefully, controllers in the future should not only be aware of aircraft distances, but also many different operating practices of the various airlines that takes time to perform.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR PLT WAS SLOWER OVER THE OM THAN THE ATCT LCL CTLR EXPECTED.

Narrative: ROUTINE ARR INTO LAX ON THE CIVET PROFILE. APCH CTL STATES, 'AFTER ARNES, CLRED THE ILS RWY 25L TO LAX.' UPON CONTACTING THE TWR, WE WERE TOLD TO KEEP 220 KTS UNTIL THE MARKER. ABOUT 8 MI FROM THE MARKER, WE BEGAN TO SLOW TO APCH SPD. AFTER ABOUT 30 KTS OF SPD REDUCTION, THE TWR INSTRUCTED WE WERE 'ASSIGNED 220 KTS' IN A RATHER SHARP AND MANDATORY VOICE. WE INDICATED THAT WE HAVE ALREADY BEEN CLRED FOR APCH AND WERE NOT ABLE TO HOLD 220 KTS OVER THE MARKER DUE TO GEAR TO APCH SPDS (FLAPS). LNDG WAS UNEVENTFUL, HOWEVER THE APCH STILL SEEMED RUSHED DUE TO THE INCREASED SPD. I THINK THAT SOME CTLRS NEED TO BE MORE AWARE OF CERTAIN AIRPLANE CHARACTERISTICS IF THEY PLAN ON CONDUCTING MINIMUM SPACED APCHS. BY REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF TIME NEEDED TO COMPLETE CHKLIST AND FOR PROPER AIRPLANE CONFIGN, IT ONLY INCREASES THE CHANCES FOR POSSIBLE HUMAN ERROR DURING A CRITICAL PHASE OF FLT. HOPEFULLY, CTLRS IN THE FUTURE SHOULD NOT ONLY BE AWARE OF ACFT DISTANCES, BUT ALSO MANY DIFFERENT OPERATING PRACTICES OF THE VARIOUS AIRLINES THAT TAKES TIME TO PERFORM.

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.