Narrative:

I submitted a 'debrief' last week regarding the new ILS DME runway 11 at mdst (page 11-1) because data associated with fixes on the final approach segment are in conflict with each other. I received a reply to that debrief and then apparently the A300 fleet manager sent an announcement to all pilots making a general reference to 'some confusion about the approach.' the fact is that the published approach is defective and cannot be flown as published. There is a point podix on the approach which is idented as 6.7 DME on the ILS with a 3200 ft altitude on the profile view. Then; just 1/10 of a mi later; at 6.6 DME on the ILS; the FAF is depicted as having a 2600 ft altitude restr. This 6.6 idme fix is also shown as the GS intercept altitude. Perhaps someone who is a better pilot than me can explain how I can be no lower than 3200 ft at 6.7 DME and then descend 2600 ft in 1/10 of a mi to intercept the GS. In the fleet manager's notice he says; 'the actual GS is correct' while this sounds reassuring; it is misleading because there are no reasonable means to know you are on the actual GS (ie; no way to reliably check the FAF crossing altitude while on GS). Again; I strongly recommend that pilots not even attempt to fly this approach until the specific errors are positively idented and corrected in some manner so that pilots can ensure safe operation and avoid conflict with the terrain. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter reviewed the approach with the analyst and explained what appears to be an obvious discrepancy in altitude descent constraints.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN A300 PLT RPTS AN ALT DISCREPANCY ON THE SANTIAGO; DOMINICAN REPUBLIC (MDST-STI) 11-1 ILS DME RWY 11 APCH AT THE 6 PT 7 AND 6 PT 6 ILS DME FIXES.

Narrative: I SUBMITTED A 'DEBRIEF' LAST WK REGARDING THE NEW ILS DME RWY 11 AT MDST (PAGE 11-1) BECAUSE DATA ASSOCIATED WITH FIXES ON THE FINAL APCH SEGMENT ARE IN CONFLICT WITH EACH OTHER. I RECEIVED A REPLY TO THAT DEBRIEF AND THEN APPARENTLY THE A300 FLEET MGR SENT AN ANNOUNCEMENT TO ALL PLTS MAKING A GENERAL REF TO 'SOME CONFUSION ABOUT THE APCH.' THE FACT IS THAT THE PUBLISHED APCH IS DEFECTIVE AND CANNOT BE FLOWN AS PUBLISHED. THERE IS A POINT PODIX ON THE APCH WHICH IS IDENTED AS 6.7 DME ON THE ILS WITH A 3200 FT ALT ON THE PROFILE VIEW. THEN; JUST 1/10 OF A MI LATER; AT 6.6 DME ON THE ILS; THE FAF IS DEPICTED AS HAVING A 2600 FT ALT RESTR. THIS 6.6 IDME FIX IS ALSO SHOWN AS THE GS INTERCEPT ALT. PERHAPS SOMEONE WHO IS A BETTER PLT THAN ME CAN EXPLAIN HOW I CAN BE NO LOWER THAN 3200 FT AT 6.7 DME AND THEN DSND 2600 FT IN 1/10 OF A MI TO INTERCEPT THE GS. IN THE FLEET MGR'S NOTICE HE SAYS; 'THE ACTUAL GS IS CORRECT' WHILE THIS SOUNDS REASSURING; IT IS MISLEADING BECAUSE THERE ARE NO REASONABLE MEANS TO KNOW YOU ARE ON THE ACTUAL GS (IE; NO WAY TO RELIABLY CHK THE FAF XING ALT WHILE ON GS). AGAIN; I STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT PLTS NOT EVEN ATTEMPT TO FLY THIS APCH UNTIL THE SPECIFIC ERRORS ARE POSITIVELY IDENTED AND CORRECTED IN SOME MANNER SO THAT PLTS CAN ENSURE SAFE OP AND AVOID CONFLICT WITH THE TERRAIN. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR REVIEWED THE APCH WITH THE ANALYST AND EXPLAINED WHAT APPEARS TO BE AN OBVIOUS DISCREPANCY IN ALT DSCNT CONSTRAINTS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.