Narrative:

I was informed several days after aug/xx/96, that my aircraft may have been showing 7200 ft MSL on approach control's radar at the fuelr fix on the ILS runway 25L at lax. The required altitude is 8000 ft MSL. Neither my first officer nor myself remember being 800 ft low at fuelr fix nor was this possible deviation brought to our attention at the time. Recommend approach control indicate to the pilot at the time of the event if there appears to be a deviation. This way the pilot may correct, possibly change xponders, or inform approach of possible radar problems. It's difficult to go back several days and try to find/correct possible problems. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: this captain was flying a B737-300 inbound to runway 25L at lax. He said that he does not think that he was very low at fuelr, but since he was not told of the accusation until some time later he and his company have requested the voice and radar tapes of the incident. He said that he is concerned that if aircraft are flying low at this point and the controllers are not calling it to the flight crew's attention some sort of safety problem may develop. The captain talked to his chief pilot about the incident and there will be a notice sent to their pilot group regarding the fuelr restr. Supplmental information from acn 344444: flight #yy slc-lax, aug/xa/96, time: XA30. On the lax ILS runway 25L approach, alleged low altitude crossing at fuelr intersection, was said to have crossed at 7200 ft. I was notified by company chief pilot on aug/xg/96, per this matter. On aug/xa/96, we were never notified by socal that there was a problem. The entire flight seemed to go as standard as normal. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter could not recall if the aircraft had been flown below the crossing altitude restr. Notification came 6 days later by way of their chief pilot. There was no other comment from TRACON or tower to indicate their altitude was low. Pilot was counseled as to what causes the restr which was new information to her. Pilot stated that a change in the way the clearance for the ILS is issued would be of great help. If the controller would say, 'cleared for the ILS approach, comply with all altitudes,' it would alert all flight crew members that the crossing altitudes are still in force and the aircraft must be flown accordingly.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR FLC IS LOW OVER FUELR DURING AN APCH TO RWY 25L AT LAX.

Narrative: I WAS INFORMED SEVERAL DAYS AFTER AUG/XX/96, THAT MY ACFT MAY HAVE BEEN SHOWING 7200 FT MSL ON APCH CTL'S RADAR AT THE FUELR FIX ON THE ILS RWY 25L AT LAX. THE REQUIRED ALT IS 8000 FT MSL. NEITHER MY FO NOR MYSELF REMEMBER BEING 800 FT LOW AT FUELR FIX NOR WAS THIS POSSIBLE DEV BROUGHT TO OUR ATTN AT THE TIME. RECOMMEND APCH CTL INDICATE TO THE PLT AT THE TIME OF THE EVENT IF THERE APPEARS TO BE A DEV. THIS WAY THE PLT MAY CORRECT, POSSIBLY CHANGE XPONDERS, OR INFORM APCH OF POSSIBLE RADAR PROBS. IT'S DIFFICULT TO GO BACK SEVERAL DAYS AND TRY TO FIND/CORRECT POSSIBLE PROBS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THIS CAPT WAS FLYING A B737-300 INBOUND TO RWY 25L AT LAX. HE SAID THAT HE DOES NOT THINK THAT HE WAS VERY LOW AT FUELR, BUT SINCE HE WAS NOT TOLD OF THE ACCUSATION UNTIL SOME TIME LATER HE AND HIS COMPANY HAVE REQUESTED THE VOICE AND RADAR TAPES OF THE INCIDENT. HE SAID THAT HE IS CONCERNED THAT IF ACFT ARE FLYING LOW AT THIS POINT AND THE CTLRS ARE NOT CALLING IT TO THE FLC'S ATTN SOME SORT OF SAFETY PROB MAY DEVELOP. THE CAPT TALKED TO HIS CHIEF PLT ABOUT THE INCIDENT AND THERE WILL BE A NOTICE SENT TO THEIR PLT GROUP REGARDING THE FUELR RESTR. SUPPLMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 344444: FLT #YY SLC-LAX, AUG/XA/96, TIME: XA30. ON THE LAX ILS RWY 25L APCH, ALLEGED LOW ALT XING AT FUELR INTXN, WAS SAID TO HAVE CROSSED AT 7200 FT. I WAS NOTIFIED BY COMPANY CHIEF PLT ON AUG/XG/96, PER THIS MATTER. ON AUG/XA/96, WE WERE NEVER NOTIFIED BY SOCAL THAT THERE WAS A PROB. THE ENTIRE FLT SEEMED TO GO AS STANDARD AS NORMAL. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR COULD NOT RECALL IF THE ACFT HAD BEEN FLOWN BELOW THE XING ALT RESTR. NOTIFICATION CAME 6 DAYS LATER BY WAY OF THEIR CHIEF PLT. THERE WAS NO OTHER COMMENT FROM TRACON OR TWR TO INDICATE THEIR ALT WAS LOW. PLT WAS COUNSELED AS TO WHAT CAUSES THE RESTR WHICH WAS NEW INFO TO HER. PLT STATED THAT A CHANGE IN THE WAY THE CLRNC FOR THE ILS IS ISSUED WOULD BE OF GREAT HELP. IF THE CTLR WOULD SAY, 'CLRED FOR THE ILS APCH, COMPLY WITH ALL ALTS,' IT WOULD ALERT ALL FLC MEMBERS THAT THE XING ALTS ARE STILL IN FORCE AND THE ACFT MUST BE FLOWN ACCORDINGLY.

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.