Narrative:

Flight ab was cleared for a visual approach to runway 1R at las in good VMC. I was the PF. We were vectored to the final approach course and cleared for a visual approach with the airport environment clearly in sight, approximately 15 mi away. I had selected the visual runway 1R approach from the FMC database and I maneuvered the aircraft to the extended centerline as depicted on the pfd using managed navigation, autoplt engaged. The vertical path indicator on the pfd showed the airplane high on the projected vertical path by about 2000 ft. I configured to flaps 1 degree, followed a bit later by gear down, since I determined that we were high and, moreover, the airplane needed to slow. The runway environment was clearly in sight. The approach controller casually mentioned that he observed '...a low terrain alert.' now, with the approach path still high at about 1100 ft and the runway environment clearly insight and considering that I had conducted this approach path numerous times in the past under identical conditions, I was perplexed. I arrested the descent. I began a climb. I disconnected the autoplt and the flight directors and called for the inbound course in FCU. The GPWS sounded '...terrain, ter...' and was silent. Before I could move to advance thrust and full back stick, the warning ended. The runway environment to runway 1R was clearly in sight to both pilots. I resumed a normal descent and confign to a normal landing in las. Contributing factors may have been that in spite of my experience with the terminal and landing in las, I had not flown for 2 months previous to this flight. Moreover, I should have briefed the PNF for terrain awareness. The approach controller might have been somewhat more forceful with his advisory, although I was ultimately responsible for my terrain clearance. In the future, I plan to use the RNAV approach procedure from the database as a means to ensure adequate terrain clearance and approach monitoring. The area in question is very dark and indistinct to terrain judgement until the last few mi. Also, had the aircraft been equipped with egpws, we would have been aware of some obstacle much sooner. Egpws was made for just such an event.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: GPWS ALERT SOUNDED AT 4800 FT DURING A NIGHT OP VISUAL APCH FOR A DSNDING A320 9 NM S OF RWY 1R AT LAS, NV.

Narrative: FLT AB WAS CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 1R AT LAS IN GOOD VMC. I WAS THE PF. WE WERE VECTORED TO THE FINAL APCH COURSE AND CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH WITH THE ARPT ENVIRONMENT CLRLY IN SIGHT, APPROX 15 MI AWAY. I HAD SELECTED THE VISUAL RWY 1R APCH FROM THE FMC DATABASE AND I MANEUVERED THE ACFT TO THE EXTENDED CTRLINE AS DEPICTED ON THE PFD USING MANAGED NAV, AUTOPLT ENGAGED. THE VERT PATH INDICATOR ON THE PFD SHOWED THE AIRPLANE HIGH ON THE PROJECTED VERT PATH BY ABOUT 2000 FT. I CONFIGURED TO FLAPS 1 DEG, FOLLOWED A BIT LATER BY GEAR DOWN, SINCE I DETERMINED THAT WE WERE HIGH AND, MOREOVER, THE AIRPLANE NEEDED TO SLOW. THE RWY ENVIRONMENT WAS CLRLY IN SIGHT. THE APCH CTLR CASUALLY MENTIONED THAT HE OBSERVED '...A LOW TERRAIN ALERT.' NOW, WITH THE APCH PATH STILL HIGH AT ABOUT 1100 FT AND THE RWY ENVIRONMENT CLRLY INSIGHT AND CONSIDERING THAT I HAD CONDUCTED THIS APCH PATH NUMEROUS TIMES IN THE PAST UNDER IDENTICAL CONDITIONS, I WAS PERPLEXED. I ARRESTED THE DSCNT. I BEGAN A CLB. I DISCONNECTED THE AUTOPLT AND THE FLT DIRECTORS AND CALLED FOR THE INBOUND COURSE IN FCU. THE GPWS SOUNDED '...TERRAIN, TER...' AND WAS SILENT. BEFORE I COULD MOVE TO ADVANCE THRUST AND FULL BACK STICK, THE WARNING ENDED. THE RWY ENVIRONMENT TO RWY 1R WAS CLRLY IN SIGHT TO BOTH PLTS. I RESUMED A NORMAL DSCNT AND CONFIGN TO A NORMAL LNDG IN LAS. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS MAY HAVE BEEN THAT IN SPITE OF MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE TERMINAL AND LNDG IN LAS, I HAD NOT FLOWN FOR 2 MONTHS PREVIOUS TO THIS FLT. MOREOVER, I SHOULD HAVE BRIEFED THE PNF FOR TERRAIN AWARENESS. THE APCH CTLR MIGHT HAVE BEEN SOMEWHAT MORE FORCEFUL WITH HIS ADVISORY, ALTHOUGH I WAS ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR MY TERRAIN CLRNC. IN THE FUTURE, I PLAN TO USE THE RNAV APCH PROC FROM THE DATABASE AS A MEANS TO ENSURE ADEQUATE TERRAIN CLRNC AND APCH MONITORING. THE AREA IN QUESTION IS VERY DARK AND INDISTINCT TO TERRAIN JUDGEMENT UNTIL THE LAST FEW MI. ALSO, HAD THE ACFT BEEN EQUIPPED WITH EGPWS, WE WOULD HAVE BEEN AWARE OF SOME OBSTACLE MUCH SOONER. EGPWS WAS MADE FOR JUST SUCH AN EVENT.

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.