Narrative:

Recently the 'csx cardinal' VOR was installed on stl. As a result, some stars were revised. Having flown the rivers arrival hundreds of times, I had a very strong expectation concerning the layout of the arrival. I had not flown this arrival since it was changed. I was using a commercial chart 10-2A dated may/xx/98 for st louis. At the bottom, it read: 'changes: see other side.' since I realized that there were changes in the st louis arrs, I said out loud to the first officer 'lorle is 28 DME.' this was an incorrect reading of the map (see chart to understand how this could happen) but unfortunately the first officer confirmed it. Our clearance was to cross lorle at 15000 ft. At approximately 45 NM, FL190 and 320 KIAS, ATC asked 'will you make lorle at 15000 ft?' I immediately increased descent rate and checked the chart realizing my error at a glance. We were level at 15000 ft no more than 3-4 mi past lorle, if that. This excitement led to less than perfect lateral tracking toward csx cardinal. Approach control gave us a heading to improve our track inbound. 1) charts with major changes should have changes indicated boldly for more than 1 revision. 2) ATC should not wait until last min to ask about operation and should include specific information such as lorle is 40 DME from cardinal, I show your altitude as FL190, can you make lorle at 15000 ft? 3) I should have challenged first officer with 'what do you show as DME for lorle?' instead, I said a number which put a number in his head. In general, when I want a xchk, I never say the information out loud, instead I ask for it. This time I did not follow my own policy and the result was not good. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the first officer was doing all the flying. The captain had flown the arrival many times before when it was associated with the stl VOR. Because this arrival was connected with the csx VOR he wasn't as familiar with it. He had to look at the arrival chart to remember distances of intxns from the VOR. The captain read how far the lorle intersection was from csx and stated to the first officer that it was 28 DME. The captain had misread the distance. He repeated the incorrect distance to the flying first officer, which was never corrected nor challenged by the first officer. When ATC inquired if they were going to make the crossing restr, it was then the captain realized the error. He looked at the figure for distance between intxns and did not look at the figure for how far the assigned crossing distance was from csx. Captain is interested in having the numerical figures better idented on the chart as to which distance is total distance and which one is distance between intersection.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN MD80 DSNDING INTO STL MISSES THE XING RESTR BECAUSE THE FLC DOES NOT READ THE STAR CHART CORRECTLY.

Narrative: RECENTLY THE 'CSX CARDINAL' VOR WAS INSTALLED ON STL. AS A RESULT, SOME STARS WERE REVISED. HAVING FLOWN THE RIVERS ARR HUNDREDS OF TIMES, I HAD A VERY STRONG EXPECTATION CONCERNING THE LAYOUT OF THE ARR. I HAD NOT FLOWN THIS ARR SINCE IT WAS CHANGED. I WAS USING A COMMERCIAL CHART 10-2A DATED MAY/XX/98 FOR ST LOUIS. AT THE BOTTOM, IT READ: 'CHANGES: SEE OTHER SIDE.' SINCE I REALIZED THAT THERE WERE CHANGES IN THE ST LOUIS ARRS, I SAID OUT LOUD TO THE FO 'LORLE IS 28 DME.' THIS WAS AN INCORRECT READING OF THE MAP (SEE CHART TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS COULD HAPPEN) BUT UNFORTUNATELY THE FO CONFIRMED IT. OUR CLRNC WAS TO CROSS LORLE AT 15000 FT. AT APPROX 45 NM, FL190 AND 320 KIAS, ATC ASKED 'WILL YOU MAKE LORLE AT 15000 FT?' I IMMEDIATELY INCREASED DSCNT RATE AND CHKED THE CHART REALIZING MY ERROR AT A GLANCE. WE WERE LEVEL AT 15000 FT NO MORE THAN 3-4 MI PAST LORLE, IF THAT. THIS EXCITEMENT LED TO LESS THAN PERFECT LATERAL TRACKING TOWARD CSX CARDINAL. APCH CTL GAVE US A HDG TO IMPROVE OUR TRACK INBOUND. 1) CHARTS WITH MAJOR CHANGES SHOULD HAVE CHANGES INDICATED BOLDLY FOR MORE THAN 1 REVISION. 2) ATC SHOULD NOT WAIT UNTIL LAST MIN TO ASK ABOUT OP AND SHOULD INCLUDE SPECIFIC INFO SUCH AS LORLE IS 40 DME FROM CARDINAL, I SHOW YOUR ALT AS FL190, CAN YOU MAKE LORLE AT 15000 FT? 3) I SHOULD HAVE CHALLENGED FO WITH 'WHAT DO YOU SHOW AS DME FOR LORLE?' INSTEAD, I SAID A NUMBER WHICH PUT A NUMBER IN HIS HEAD. IN GENERAL, WHEN I WANT A XCHK, I NEVER SAY THE INFO OUT LOUD, INSTEAD I ASK FOR IT. THIS TIME I DID NOT FOLLOW MY OWN POLICY AND THE RESULT WAS NOT GOOD. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE FO WAS DOING ALL THE FLYING. THE CAPT HAD FLOWN THE ARR MANY TIMES BEFORE WHEN IT WAS ASSOCIATED WITH THE STL VOR. BECAUSE THIS ARR WAS CONNECTED WITH THE CSX VOR HE WASN'T AS FAMILIAR WITH IT. HE HAD TO LOOK AT THE ARR CHART TO REMEMBER DISTANCES OF INTXNS FROM THE VOR. THE CAPT READ HOW FAR THE LORLE INTXN WAS FROM CSX AND STATED TO THE FO THAT IT WAS 28 DME. THE CAPT HAD MISREAD THE DISTANCE. HE REPEATED THE INCORRECT DISTANCE TO THE FLYING FO, WHICH WAS NEVER CORRECTED NOR CHALLENGED BY THE FO. WHEN ATC INQUIRED IF THEY WERE GOING TO MAKE THE XING RESTR, IT WAS THEN THE CAPT REALIZED THE ERROR. HE LOOKED AT THE FIGURE FOR DISTANCE BTWN INTXNS AND DID NOT LOOK AT THE FIGURE FOR HOW FAR THE ASSIGNED XING DISTANCE WAS FROM CSX. CAPT IS INTERESTED IN HAVING THE NUMERICAL FIGURES BETTER IDENTED ON THE CHART AS TO WHICH DISTANCE IS TOTAL DISTANCE AND WHICH ONE IS DISTANCE BTWN INTXN.

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.