Narrative:

While being vectored for ILS runway 29R approach to bjc, controller assigned 7000 ft. The commercial chart page shows 7200 ft as the approach procedure and GS intercept altitude. As we were turned towards the localizer course, the controller reassigned the altitude as 7200 ft. As PNF, I reset the fgp altitude selector to 7200 ft and verbally confirmed with the captain. The captain did not immediately respond or acknowledge the new altitude. I restated to him the revised altitude while pointing to the altitude selector on the fgp. We were at that time approaching the turn to intercept the localizer course. The captain reached for the fgp, and I assumed that he would use it to make the altitude correction. I diverted my attention down to tune the tower frequency on the communications. As I completed this task and returned focus to the flight instruments, the approach controller called saying we were showing 6800 ft -- 400 ft below our assigned altitude. I observed that we were out of 6900 ft and climbing slightly. I responded that we were out of 7000 ft for 7200 ft (as we were by then). We leveled at 7200 ft. The controller asked for our home base, then released us to tower. The balance of the approach and landing was uneventful. I believe that the captain felt we were close enough to the approach course that by the time he could climb to 7200 ft, we would intercept the GS, and so may have not responded. I do not know. I dislike flying with this captain because of my uncertainty about this procedure and his ability to absorb and react to changing sits. My attempts to discuss this event with him were rebuffed. Indeed all attempts at rational discussion and debate with him lead only to frustration. This event has brought me to the point of concern that I must now bring this to the attention of the director of operations.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CHARTER FLC FLYING GIV ON VECTORS TO INTERCEPT THE LOC AT BJC FAILS TO MAINTAIN ALT AS ASSIGNED BY ATC.

Narrative: WHILE BEING VECTORED FOR ILS RWY 29R APCH TO BJC, CTLR ASSIGNED 7000 FT. THE COMMERCIAL CHART PAGE SHOWS 7200 FT AS THE APCH PROC AND GS INTERCEPT ALT. AS WE WERE TURNED TOWARDS THE LOC COURSE, THE CTLR REASSIGNED THE ALT AS 7200 FT. AS PNF, I RESET THE FGP ALT SELECTOR TO 7200 FT AND VERBALLY CONFIRMED WITH THE CAPT. THE CAPT DID NOT IMMEDIATELY RESPOND OR ACKNOWLEDGE THE NEW ALT. I RESTATED TO HIM THE REVISED ALT WHILE POINTING TO THE ALT SELECTOR ON THE FGP. WE WERE AT THAT TIME APCHING THE TURN TO INTERCEPT THE LOC COURSE. THE CAPT REACHED FOR THE FGP, AND I ASSUMED THAT HE WOULD USE IT TO MAKE THE ALT CORRECTION. I DIVERTED MY ATTN DOWN TO TUNE THE TWR FREQ ON THE COMS. AS I COMPLETED THIS TASK AND RETURNED FOCUS TO THE FLT INSTS, THE APCH CTLR CALLED SAYING WE WERE SHOWING 6800 FT -- 400 FT BELOW OUR ASSIGNED ALT. I OBSERVED THAT WE WERE OUT OF 6900 FT AND CLBING SLIGHTLY. I RESPONDED THAT WE WERE OUT OF 7000 FT FOR 7200 FT (AS WE WERE BY THEN). WE LEVELED AT 7200 FT. THE CTLR ASKED FOR OUR HOME BASE, THEN RELEASED US TO TWR. THE BAL OF THE APCH AND LNDG WAS UNEVENTFUL. I BELIEVE THAT THE CAPT FELT WE WERE CLOSE ENOUGH TO THE APCH COURSE THAT BY THE TIME HE COULD CLB TO 7200 FT, WE WOULD INTERCEPT THE GS, AND SO MAY HAVE NOT RESPONDED. I DO NOT KNOW. I DISLIKE FLYING WITH THIS CAPT BECAUSE OF MY UNCERTAINTY ABOUT THIS PROC AND HIS ABILITY TO ABSORB AND REACT TO CHANGING SITS. MY ATTEMPTS TO DISCUSS THIS EVENT WITH HIM WERE REBUFFED. INDEED ALL ATTEMPTS AT RATIONAL DISCUSSION AND DEBATE WITH HIM LEAD ONLY TO FRUSTRATION. THIS EVENT HAS BROUGHT ME TO THE POINT OF CONCERN THAT I MUST NOW BRING THIS TO THE ATTN OF THE DIRECTOR OF OPS.

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.