Narrative:

First of all; both myself and the first officer received and understood a clearance specifying a turn direct to karla (I believe) below a certain altitude on the BYP5 arrival into dfw. Exactly why both of us missed doing it; I would have to attribute to timing. In other words; we received the instruction well in advance of the point; but were busy when it needed to be done. It is not my intention to use 'busy' as a dodge; I am trying to understand how and why we missed it. The reason the BYP5 arrival has non-depicted procedures that I and many others often receive is due to parachute activity near the byp VOR. I have had other odd-ball adjustments to this arrival on many other occasions. Obviously; this is not the ideal place; either for the arrival path or the parachuting; but that is not up to me. The transition from the altitude; center's airspace to approach's and the landing setup/checklist/briefs often seems to come together right about the worst place. That; I suppose is the challenge. I would like to suggest that some alternate printed procedure that avoids the parachute area be developed and distributed to help eliminate makeshift clrnces. This would give both crews and ATC a better system for the safe flow of traffic near this difficult to handle area.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MD80 CAPT EXPRESSED CONCERN REGARDING THE FREQUENT ATC AMENDMENTS TO PUBLISHED PROCS ON THE BYP5 STAR INTO DFW BECAUSE OF PARACHUTE ACTIVITY.

Narrative: FIRST OF ALL; BOTH MYSELF AND THE FO RECEIVED AND UNDERSTOOD A CLRNC SPECIFYING A TURN DIRECT TO KARLA (I BELIEVE) BELOW A CERTAIN ALT ON THE BYP5 ARR INTO DFW. EXACTLY WHY BOTH OF US MISSED DOING IT; I WOULD HAVE TO ATTRIBUTE TO TIMING. IN OTHER WORDS; WE RECEIVED THE INSTRUCTION WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE POINT; BUT WERE BUSY WHEN IT NEEDED TO BE DONE. IT IS NOT MY INTENTION TO USE 'BUSY' AS A DODGE; I AM TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW AND WHY WE MISSED IT. THE REASON THE BYP5 ARR HAS NON-DEPICTED PROCS THAT I AND MANY OTHERS OFTEN RECEIVE IS DUE TO PARACHUTE ACTIVITY NEAR THE BYP VOR. I HAVE HAD OTHER ODD-BALL ADJUSTMENTS TO THIS ARR ON MANY OTHER OCCASIONS. OBVIOUSLY; THIS IS NOT THE IDEAL PLACE; EITHER FOR THE ARR PATH OR THE PARACHUTING; BUT THAT IS NOT UP TO ME. THE TRANSITION FROM THE ALT; CTR'S AIRSPACE TO APCH'S AND THE LNDG SETUP/CHKLIST/BRIEFS OFTEN SEEMS TO COME TOGETHER RIGHT ABOUT THE WORST PLACE. THAT; I SUPPOSE IS THE CHALLENGE. I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT SOME ALTERNATE PRINTED PROC THAT AVOIDS THE PARACHUTE AREA BE DEVELOPED AND DISTRIBUTED TO HELP ELIMINATE MAKESHIFT CLRNCES. THIS WOULD GIVE BOTH CREWS AND ATC A BETTER SYSTEM FOR THE SAFE FLOW OF TFC NEAR THIS DIFFICULT TO HANDLE AREA.

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.