Narrative:

On arrival into atlanta; atl approach control often gives steep dscnts and tight turns in the radar pattern (slam dunk); even in IMC. In good WX; they also routinely space aircraft so tightly that there is little room for even the slightest error on their part or on the part of air crews. Our arrival was day VMC and atl approach gave us an even steeper and tighter than normal 'slam dunk' to runway 26R. First officer was flying. We were told to maintain 180 KTS. The controller apparently expected us to see the runway and when we did not; he issued a late 90 degree turn from base to final that would have resulted in an overshoot even with an immediate; perfectly executed 30-degree banked turn. First officer was slow to initiate turn; resulting in significant overshoot and TCAS RA due to traffic to parallel runway. I took the airplane and complied with TCAS RA for level flight to 300 FPM rate of climb. RA lasted about 3 seconds. After establishing stable final; I returned aircraft control to the first officer and he completed final approach and landing. Of all the approach controls in the united states; atl approach is by far the most aggressive in minimizing spacing in the pattern and on final. My bet is that they would be able to show atl approach that they could increase aircraft separations significantly and still process almost the same number of arrs in the same amount of time. Whatever the increase in through-put they think they get; it is negated by the considerably higher numbers of gars generated by their regularly overestimating the performance capabilities of the aircraft they control.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B727 FLT CREW EXPERIENCE CONFLICT WITH PARALLEL RWY TFC WHILE ON VISUAL APCH TO ATL; INDICATING ATC VECTORING TECHNIQUES WERE A CAUSAL FACTOR.

Narrative: ON ARR INTO ATLANTA; ATL APCH CTL OFTEN GIVES STEEP DSCNTS AND TIGHT TURNS IN THE RADAR PATTERN (SLAM DUNK); EVEN IN IMC. IN GOOD WX; THEY ALSO ROUTINELY SPACE ACFT SO TIGHTLY THAT THERE IS LITTLE ROOM FOR EVEN THE SLIGHTEST ERROR ON THEIR PART OR ON THE PART OF AIR CREWS. OUR ARR WAS DAY VMC AND ATL APCH GAVE US AN EVEN STEEPER AND TIGHTER THAN NORMAL 'SLAM DUNK' TO RWY 26R. FO WAS FLYING. WE WERE TOLD TO MAINTAIN 180 KTS. THE CTLR APPARENTLY EXPECTED US TO SEE THE RWY AND WHEN WE DID NOT; HE ISSUED A LATE 90 DEG TURN FROM BASE TO FINAL THAT WOULD HAVE RESULTED IN AN OVERSHOOT EVEN WITH AN IMMEDIATE; PERFECTLY EXECUTED 30-DEG BANKED TURN. FO WAS SLOW TO INITIATE TURN; RESULTING IN SIGNIFICANT OVERSHOOT AND TCAS RA DUE TO TFC TO PARALLEL RWY. I TOOK THE AIRPLANE AND COMPLIED WITH TCAS RA FOR LEVEL FLT TO 300 FPM RATE OF CLB. RA LASTED ABOUT 3 SECONDS. AFTER ESTABLISHING STABLE FINAL; I RETURNED ACFT CTL TO THE FO AND HE COMPLETED FINAL APCH AND LNDG. OF ALL THE APCH CTLS IN THE UNITED STATES; ATL APCH IS BY FAR THE MOST AGGRESSIVE IN MINIMIZING SPACING IN THE PATTERN AND ON FINAL. MY BET IS THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO SHOW ATL APCH THAT THEY COULD INCREASE ACFT SEPARATIONS SIGNIFICANTLY AND STILL PROCESS ALMOST THE SAME NUMBER OF ARRS IN THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME. WHATEVER THE INCREASE IN THROUGH-PUT THEY THINK THEY GET; IT IS NEGATED BY THE CONSIDERABLY HIGHER NUMBERS OF GARS GENERATED BY THEIR REGULARLY OVERESTIMATING THE PERFORMANCE CAPABILITIES OF THE ACFT THEY CTL.

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.