Lack of good communication skills between DC8 and approach controllers at phl and less than complete...

Attributes
ACN	451734
Time
Date	199910
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	199910
Place
Locale Reference	airport : phl.airport
State Reference	PA
Altitude	msl bound lower : 8000 msl bound upper : 10000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : phl.tracon
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	DC-8 70
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	descent : approach descent : intermediate altitude descent : vacating altitude
Route In Use	arrival star : bunts one arrival
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : flight engineer pilot : commercial pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 10000 flight time type : 6000
ASRS Report	451734
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : multi engine pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Events
Anomaly	altitude deviation : crossing restriction not met non adherence other other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera other controllerb other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	controller : issued advisory controller : issued new clearance
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Environmental Factor Flight Crew Human Performance ATC Human Performance
Primary Problem	Ambiguous

Narrative:

While descending to phl we were cleared for the 'bunts 1 arrival.' the arrival states to 'expect to cross bunts at 8000 ft,' while approaching bunts level at 10000 ft just 5 mi to bunts we were told to cross bunts at 8000 ft. We informed at that we were unable, and his response was to then cross at or below 9000 ft and contact phl approach. We changed frequency and descended to cross bunts at 9000 ft. A short while later approach called back in an angered voice inquiring why we hadn't crossed bunts at 8000 ft. We informed him what the previous controller stated. There was no further response. Note: at this time we had approximately 80 KTS of tailwind. Then, while being vectored for the ILS runway 27R we were told to descend to 2100 ft and cleared for the approach. At approximately 7 mi to the airport we were at 3300 ft and slowing to configure the aircraft (flaps, gear, etc) and turning into about 40 KTS of headwind. We were told that we were too high and it was unsafe to continue the approach. Conditions were VFR and we had visual contact with the runway. However, before I could inform ATC that we had the runway in sight and landing would be normal, we were told to break off the approach and were vectored around to the right of course, which resulted in roughly a 360 degree turn. I can only state that perhaps the controller was unfamiliar with the characteristics of the DC8 and was siding with what he thought was safe. However, he may have not been aware of the high wind conditions that were present at the time that I had taken in account for. Also, I believe the controller was angry from the moment of our first contact and may not have listened even if I had a chance to reason with him. I can also say that all instructions were complied with and at no time were we unsafe.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LACK OF GOOD COM SKILLS BTWN DC8 AND APCH CTLRS AT PHL AND LESS THAN COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING OF CURRENT WX WIND AND ACFT PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS ON THE PART OF ATC LED TO ADDITIONAL VECTORING, WORKLOADS AND CONFUSION.

Narrative: WHILE DSNDING TO PHL WE WERE CLRED FOR THE 'BUNTS 1 ARR.' THE ARR STATES TO 'EXPECT TO CROSS BUNTS AT 8000 FT,' WHILE APCHING BUNTS LEVEL AT 10000 FT JUST 5 MI TO BUNTS WE WERE TOLD TO CROSS BUNTS AT 8000 FT. WE INFORMED AT THAT WE WERE UNABLE, AND HIS RESPONSE WAS TO THEN CROSS AT OR BELOW 9000 FT AND CONTACT PHL APCH. WE CHANGED FREQ AND DSNDED TO CROSS BUNTS AT 9000 FT. A SHORT WHILE LATER APCH CALLED BACK IN AN ANGERED VOICE INQUIRING WHY WE HADN'T CROSSED BUNTS AT 8000 FT. WE INFORMED HIM WHAT THE PREVIOUS CTLR STATED. THERE WAS NO FURTHER RESPONSE. NOTE: AT THIS TIME WE HAD APPROX 80 KTS OF TAILWIND. THEN, WHILE BEING VECTORED FOR THE ILS RWY 27R WE WERE TOLD TO DSND TO 2100 FT AND CLRED FOR THE APCH. AT APPROX 7 MI TO THE ARPT WE WERE AT 3300 FT AND SLOWING TO CONFIGURE THE ACFT (FLAPS, GEAR, ETC) AND TURNING INTO ABOUT 40 KTS OF HEADWIND. WE WERE TOLD THAT WE WERE TOO HIGH AND IT WAS UNSAFE TO CONTINUE THE APCH. CONDITIONS WERE VFR AND WE HAD VISUAL CONTACT WITH THE RWY. HOWEVER, BEFORE I COULD INFORM ATC THAT WE HAD THE RWY IN SIGHT AND LNDG WOULD BE NORMAL, WE WERE TOLD TO BREAK OFF THE APCH AND WERE VECTORED AROUND TO THE R OF COURSE, WHICH RESULTED IN ROUGHLY A 360 DEG TURN. I CAN ONLY STATE THAT PERHAPS THE CTLR WAS UNFAMILIAR WITH THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DC8 AND WAS SIDING WITH WHAT HE THOUGHT WAS SAFE. HOWEVER, HE MAY HAVE NOT BEEN AWARE OF THE HIGH WIND CONDITIONS THAT WERE PRESENT AT THE TIME THAT I HAD TAKEN IN ACCOUNT FOR. ALSO, I BELIEVE THE CTLR WAS ANGRY FROM THE MOMENT OF OUR FIRST CONTACT AND MAY NOT HAVE LISTENED EVEN IF I HAD A CHANCE TO REASON WITH HIM. I CAN ALSO SAY THAT ALL INSTRUCTIONS WERE COMPLIED WITH AND AT NO TIME WERE WE UNSAFE.

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.

Lack of good communication skills between DC8 and approach controllers at phl and less than complete understanding of current WX wind and aircraft performance characteristics on the part of ATC led to additional vectoring, workloads and confusion.