Narrative:

I was flying from the right seat during the second leg of a line check administered by me. We were placed on a radar downwind leg for runway 12L at st louis at 6000 ft MSL. About 10 mi northwest of the airport, we were given a heading of 210 degrees at 200 KTS. Once established, we were asked if we saw company traffic at 5000 ft MSL making an approach to runway 12R. We said we had the aircraft and the airport. We were cleared for the visual to runway 12L. I tuned in the runway 12L ILS for GS reference knowing we were well above. I slowed to about 130 KTS in order to descend to the GS. Approach, seemingly concerned about the aircraft on the right runway, kept asking if we were proceeding to the airport. We were, in fact, headed straight toward the runway 12L threshold. The runway 12R traffic was well below us. My concern is that stl is issuing visuals to aircraft in position requiring high dscnts because of an approach to a parallel runway less than 1300 ft centerline to centerline. Asking the crews to perform high descent maneuvers while maintaining visual contact on traffic is most difficult in a transport aircraft. We have some very new crews flying and I'm concerned they will be talked into unstabilized, dangerous approachs much like the salt lake B727 accident of yrs past. As a manager, I emphasize to our instructors to educate the crews about the importance of stable approachs. ATC is issuing some very iffy clrncs and I see problems ahead. Approach should get the aircraft far enough from the runway to issue the visual on no more than a 3 1/2 - 4 degree slope.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CREW INTO STL RPTS TFC AND ARPT IN SIGHT AND IS CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH. RPTR CLAIMS BECAUSE HE WAS CLRED WHILE VERY HIGH, IT WAS DIFFICULT TO MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION FROM THE OTHER ACFT LNDG ON THE PARALLEL RWY.

Narrative: I WAS FLYING FROM THE R SEAT DURING THE SECOND LEG OF A LINE CHK ADMINISTERED BY ME. WE WERE PLACED ON A RADAR DOWNWIND LEG FOR RWY 12L AT ST LOUIS AT 6000 FT MSL. ABOUT 10 MI NW OF THE ARPT, WE WERE GIVEN A HDG OF 210 DEGS AT 200 KTS. ONCE ESTABLISHED, WE WERE ASKED IF WE SAW COMPANY TFC AT 5000 FT MSL MAKING AN APCH TO RWY 12R. WE SAID WE HAD THE ACFT AND THE ARPT. WE WERE CLRED FOR THE VISUAL TO RWY 12L. I TUNED IN THE RWY 12L ILS FOR GS REF KNOWING WE WERE WELL ABOVE. I SLOWED TO ABOUT 130 KTS IN ORDER TO DSND TO THE GS. APCH, SEEMINGLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE ACFT ON THE R RWY, KEPT ASKING IF WE WERE PROCEEDING TO THE ARPT. WE WERE, IN FACT, HEADED STRAIGHT TOWARD THE RWY 12L THRESHOLD. THE RWY 12R TFC WAS WELL BELOW US. MY CONCERN IS THAT STL IS ISSUING VISUALS TO ACFT IN POS REQUIRING HIGH DSCNTS BECAUSE OF AN APCH TO A PARALLEL RWY LESS THAN 1300 FT CTRLINE TO CTRLINE. ASKING THE CREWS TO PERFORM HIGH DSCNT MANEUVERS WHILE MAINTAINING VISUAL CONTACT ON TFC IS MOST DIFFICULT IN A TRANSPORT ACFT. WE HAVE SOME VERY NEW CREWS FLYING AND I'M CONCERNED THEY WILL BE TALKED INTO UNSTABILIZED, DANGEROUS APCHS MUCH LIKE THE SALT LAKE B727 ACCIDENT OF YRS PAST. AS A MGR, I EMPHASIZE TO OUR INSTRUCTORS TO EDUCATE THE CREWS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF STABLE APCHS. ATC IS ISSUING SOME VERY IFFY CLRNCS AND I SEE PROBS AHEAD. APCH SHOULD GET THE ACFT FAR ENOUGH FROM THE RWY TO ISSUE THE VISUAL ON NO MORE THAN A 3 1/2 - 4 DEG SLOPE.

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.