Unstabilized approach to mem. ATC doesn't like the way he set it up so he starts over. Crew is miffe...

Attributes
ACN	470208
Time
Date	200004
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mem.airport
State Reference	TN
Altitude	msl bound lower : 2700 msl bound upper : 6000
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : mem.tracon
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Widebody Transport
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	approach : instrument precision arrival : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 50 flight time total : 12000 flight time type : 600
ASRS Report	470208
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : multi engine
Events
Anomaly	altitude deviation : overshoot non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllerb other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance flight crew : returned to assigned altitude
Supplementary
Problem Areas	ATC Human Performance Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance

Narrative:

We were being vectored for a visual approach to mem. We were kind of high, close in (6000 ft MSL, approximately 7-8 mi out on localizer), but we felt we could make a safe approach and landing. The controller cleared us initially for the visual, then said 'turn left 090 degrees, you're too close to make it.' I replied that we could make it if he would let us continue. At this time, we had speed brakes and slats extended and were about 6 mi and 4000 ft. He said 'no, it won't be a stabilized approach.' I replied that we should be the ones to determine that, not him. He said 'I'm concerned about safety,' implying, I guess, we weren't. Meanwhile, first officer overrode the autoplt, tripping it off, trying to level off at 3000 ft and turn as directed. I saw an altitude of 2700 ft before he corrected back to 3000 ft. I believe that the controller caused the destabilization when he broke off the approach. We do this all the time and are quite capable of judging a safe approach. I was offended by his presumption of our capabilities and his implication that we were being reckless.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: UNSTABILIZED APCH TO MEM. ATC DOESN'T LIKE THE WAY HE SET IT UP SO HE STARTS OVER. CREW IS MIFFED.

Narrative: WE WERE BEING VECTORED FOR A VISUAL APCH TO MEM. WE WERE KIND OF HIGH, CLOSE IN (6000 FT MSL, APPROX 7-8 MI OUT ON LOC), BUT WE FELT WE COULD MAKE A SAFE APCH AND LNDG. THE CTLR CLRED US INITIALLY FOR THE VISUAL, THEN SAID 'TURN L 090 DEGS, YOU'RE TOO CLOSE TO MAKE IT.' I REPLIED THAT WE COULD MAKE IT IF HE WOULD LET US CONTINUE. AT THIS TIME, WE HAD SPD BRAKES AND SLATS EXTENDED AND WERE ABOUT 6 MI AND 4000 FT. HE SAID 'NO, IT WON'T BE A STABILIZED APCH.' I REPLIED THAT WE SHOULD BE THE ONES TO DETERMINE THAT, NOT HIM. HE SAID 'I'M CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY,' IMPLYING, I GUESS, WE WEREN'T. MEANWHILE, FO OVERRODE THE AUTOPLT, TRIPPING IT OFF, TRYING TO LEVEL OFF AT 3000 FT AND TURN AS DIRECTED. I SAW AN ALT OF 2700 FT BEFORE HE CORRECTED BACK TO 3000 FT. I BELIEVE THAT THE CTLR CAUSED THE DESTABILIZATION WHEN HE BROKE OFF THE APCH. WE DO THIS ALL THE TIME AND ARE QUITE CAPABLE OF JUDGING A SAFE APCH. I WAS OFFENDED BY HIS PRESUMPTION OF OUR CAPABILITIES AND HIS IMPLICATION THAT WE WERE BEING RECKLESS.

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.

Unstabilized approach to mem. ATC doesn't like the way he set it up so he starts over. Crew is miffed.