An air carrier F100 flight crew failed to descend to an assigned altitude while executing a visual a...

Attributes
ACN	432350
Time
Date	199901
Day	Sun
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
State Reference	CA
Altitude	msl single value : 29000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zla.artcc
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	A320
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	other
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : multi engine pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 11000 flight time type : 200
ASRS Report	426241
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : clearance other anomaly other other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	atc equipment other atc equipment : radar other controllera
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Aircraft Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Aircraft

Narrative:

We were at 3000 ft MSL. The approach controller asked if we would like to do the 'sound visual' or just a close in visual to runway 34, to which we replied we did not have a preference. The controller then said descend and maintain 2000 ft and cleared for the visual approach to runway 34. Being cleared for the visual approach we assumed it was our discretion to descend for the runway. The captain decided to stay at 3000 ft for a short time as he extended the downwind toward the shoreline and then was going to make the base leg turn. The controller then asked if we were back at 3000 ft. We said yes, but were just beginning the descent for we were cleared for the visual approach. The controller said she needed us to descend to 2000 ft. We continued the visual approach to landing and once on the ground and parked at the gate, the captain made a phone call to new york approach to discuss the misunderstanding. The supervisor said it was a strange clearance and no problem occurred, but the controller did want us to descend to 2000 ft because of doing approachs to runway 22 at lga.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR F100 FLC FAILED TO DSND TO AN ASSIGNED ALT WHILE EXECUTING A VISUAL APCH.

Narrative: WE WERE AT 3000 FT MSL. THE APCH CTLR ASKED IF WE WOULD LIKE TO DO THE 'SOUND VISUAL' OR JUST A CLOSE IN VISUAL TO RWY 34, TO WHICH WE REPLIED WE DID NOT HAVE A PREFERENCE. THE CTLR THEN SAID DSND AND MAINTAIN 2000 FT AND CLRED FOR THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 34. BEING CLRED FOR THE VISUAL APCH WE ASSUMED IT WAS OUR DISCRETION TO DSND FOR THE RWY. THE CAPT DECIDED TO STAY AT 3000 FT FOR A SHORT TIME AS HE EXTENDED THE DOWNWIND TOWARD THE SHORELINE AND THEN WAS GOING TO MAKE THE BASE LEG TURN. THE CTLR THEN ASKED IF WE WERE BACK AT 3000 FT. WE SAID YES, BUT WERE JUST BEGINNING THE DSCNT FOR WE WERE CLRED FOR THE VISUAL APCH. THE CTLR SAID SHE NEEDED US TO DSND TO 2000 FT. WE CONTINUED THE VISUAL APCH TO LNDG AND ONCE ON THE GND AND PARKED AT THE GATE, THE CAPT MADE A PHONE CALL TO NEW YORK APCH TO DISCUSS THE MISUNDERSTANDING. THE SUPVR SAID IT WAS A STRANGE CLRNC AND NO PROB OCCURRED, BUT THE CTLR DID WANT US TO DSND TO 2000 FT BECAUSE OF DOING APCHS TO RWY 22 AT LGA.

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.

An air carrier F100 flight crew failed to descend to an assigned altitude while executing a visual approach.