Narrative:

We were initially given a vector direct to arsot and progressive dscnts to 5000 ft. We questioned the controller repeatedly about which approach we could expect. ATIS was giving ILS runway 35 approachs with a circle to land on runway 11. The wind was 160 degrees at 14 KTS, and we were not very happy with that prospect. We had scattered to broken clouds at about 1300-1500 ft. I was having a very difficult time understanding the controller, and the first officer and so were not doing much better. The ILS for runway 11 was notamed OTS. At the last min, after we were vectored direct toward the outer locator 'oc', we were cleared for a 'straight in landing on runway 11' and told to report over 'oc.' I had #1 VOR DME on eze and the first officer initially set up his radio on the localizer 110.1, but there was no localizer or anything on that frequency. The first officer kept asking me to get the type of approach and altitude from the controller. The controller said to fly the altitudes of the approach. We had briefed both the ILS to runway 35 with a circle to land and the localizer-VOR-DME runway 11 approach, but not a straight in approach. The only straight in approach was an ADF locator approach, with DME. Our minimum sector altitude was 3000 ft and we were at 5000 ft. When we were instructed to fly the altitudes on the approach, first officer (PF) set the altitude window to 2150 ft which was the altitude for 10 DME on the 11-1 page for a VOR approach. Meanwhile I was trying to find an appropriate approach page. We settled on 11-2 chart since the controller had called the approach a 'straight-in approach.' the so was helping the first officer with his chart and radio setup, and we were descending. I said 'I am confused.' I didn't understand why we were descending and the first officer had all flags with his radio on the ILS frequency. I couldn't figure out which approach he was using, and I had trouble reading his chart from across the cockpit. Then the so mentioned that we had a 3000 ft MSA. We were at 2650 ft, and I told the first officer to fly at 3150 ft which was the altitude for this point on the ADF locator approach. He climbed back up. We got the 2500 ft lights on the GPWS. I had some ground contact intermittently, but I could not see the runway. Then the first officer switched his radio over to the VOR frequency 116.5 eze and continued the 11-1 approach using the 11-2 page. I think the major problems with this approach were: no early knowledge of which runway or approach we would use. The approach we were finally given, or flew anyway, did not conform to any of the plates. We did not maintain our MSA between arsot and 10 DME eze. We were confused about what ground equipment was available to us. I accepted the clearance for a straight-in approach, not knowing which approach. The SOP was not followed in that the PF (first officer) reset the altitude window. I should have gotten clarification or refused the approach until we were sure of what we were doing, instead we found no altitude shown for what we were doing.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR WDB FLC FLEW AN APCH WITHOUT APPROPRIATE OPERATIONAL NAV EQUIP FOR THAT APCH. THE ACFT WAS DSNDED BELOW CORRECT MINIMUM PUBLISHED ALTS AS A RESULT.

Narrative: WE WERE INITIALLY GIVEN A VECTOR DIRECT TO ARSOT AND PROGRESSIVE DSCNTS TO 5000 FT. WE QUESTIONED THE CTLR REPEATEDLY ABOUT WHICH APCH WE COULD EXPECT. ATIS WAS GIVING ILS RWY 35 APCHS WITH A CIRCLE TO LAND ON RWY 11. THE WIND WAS 160 DEGS AT 14 KTS, AND WE WERE NOT VERY HAPPY WITH THAT PROSPECT. WE HAD SCATTERED TO BROKEN CLOUDS AT ABOUT 1300-1500 FT. I WAS HAVING A VERY DIFFICULT TIME UNDERSTANDING THE CTLR, AND THE FO AND SO WERE NOT DOING MUCH BETTER. THE ILS FOR RWY 11 WAS NOTAMED OTS. AT THE LAST MIN, AFTER WE WERE VECTORED DIRECT TOWARD THE OUTER LOCATOR 'OC', WE WERE CLRED FOR A 'STRAIGHT IN LNDG ON RWY 11' AND TOLD TO RPT OVER 'OC.' I HAD #1 VOR DME ON EZE AND THE FO INITIALLY SET UP HIS RADIO ON THE LOC 110.1, BUT THERE WAS NO LOC OR ANYTHING ON THAT FREQ. THE FO KEPT ASKING ME TO GET THE TYPE OF APCH AND ALT FROM THE CTLR. THE CTLR SAID TO FLY THE ALTS OF THE APCH. WE HAD BRIEFED BOTH THE ILS TO RWY 35 WITH A CIRCLE TO LAND AND THE LOC-VOR-DME RWY 11 APCH, BUT NOT A STRAIGHT IN APCH. THE ONLY STRAIGHT IN APCH WAS AN ADF LOCATOR APCH, WITH DME. OUR MINIMUM SECTOR ALT WAS 3000 FT AND WE WERE AT 5000 FT. WHEN WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO FLY THE ALTS ON THE APCH, FO (PF) SET THE ALT WINDOW TO 2150 FT WHICH WAS THE ALT FOR 10 DME ON THE 11-1 PAGE FOR A VOR APCH. MEANWHILE I WAS TRYING TO FIND AN APPROPRIATE APCH PAGE. WE SETTLED ON 11-2 CHART SINCE THE CTLR HAD CALLED THE APCH A 'STRAIGHT-IN APCH.' THE SO WAS HELPING THE FO WITH HIS CHART AND RADIO SETUP, AND WE WERE DSNDING. I SAID 'I AM CONFUSED.' I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE WERE DSNDING AND THE FO HAD ALL FLAGS WITH HIS RADIO ON THE ILS FREQ. I COULDN'T FIGURE OUT WHICH APCH HE WAS USING, AND I HAD TROUBLE READING HIS CHART FROM ACROSS THE COCKPIT. THEN THE SO MENTIONED THAT WE HAD A 3000 FT MSA. WE WERE AT 2650 FT, AND I TOLD THE FO TO FLY AT 3150 FT WHICH WAS THE ALT FOR THIS POINT ON THE ADF LOCATOR APCH. HE CLBED BACK UP. WE GOT THE 2500 FT LIGHTS ON THE GPWS. I HAD SOME GND CONTACT INTERMITTENTLY, BUT I COULD NOT SEE THE RWY. THEN THE FO SWITCHED HIS RADIO OVER TO THE VOR FREQ 116.5 EZE AND CONTINUED THE 11-1 APCH USING THE 11-2 PAGE. I THINK THE MAJOR PROBS WITH THIS APCH WERE: NO EARLY KNOWLEDGE OF WHICH RWY OR APCH WE WOULD USE. THE APCH WE WERE FINALLY GIVEN, OR FLEW ANYWAY, DID NOT CONFORM TO ANY OF THE PLATES. WE DID NOT MAINTAIN OUR MSA BTWN ARSOT AND 10 DME EZE. WE WERE CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT GND EQUIP WAS AVAILABLE TO US. I ACCEPTED THE CLRNC FOR A STRAIGHT-IN APCH, NOT KNOWING WHICH APCH. THE SOP WAS NOT FOLLOWED IN THAT THE PF (FO) RESET THE ALT WINDOW. I SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN CLARIFICATION OR REFUSED THE APCH UNTIL WE WERE SURE OF WHAT WE WERE DOING, INSTEAD WE FOUND NO ALT SHOWN FOR WHAT WE WERE DOING.

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.