Narrative:

After receiving clearance to land runway 24R at lax; we were asked by the tower if we could sidestep to runway 24L because of a B747 within about 2.5 miles in trail. Another aircraft answered the tower's request given to us about sidestepping and accepted the sidestep to runway 24L. The tower then cleared us to sidestep and we had to tell the tower that we had not responded; and that we could not accept the sidestep clearance to runway 24L. There would have been no visual flight guidance from a PAPI (not installed) and I did not want the first officer to go heads down to select a different runway that late in the landing phase. We had already activated the secondary flight plan on arrival after approach control had cleared us for runway 24R via the mitts. The tower then asked the B747 if they could sidestep to runway 24L and they said; 'no it's too late.' the tower then said; 'well then prepare to go around.' then the B747 flight said; 'in that case we can sidestep to runway 24L.' we were about half a mile out at this point; which made the B747 about 2 miles out and probably around 1000 ft. I estimate that that made their approach unstable. I don't know where they were coming from and don't remember their flight number; but if they were coming from overseas; they probably had a long day and for tower to force them into that situation at the last minute was not safe. At the gate; I called tower to explain that we had not accepted the sidestep clearance and to explain that we can't just simply change frequencys on the radio for an ILS and scoot over like the old days and explained the FMS procedures to change runways. I'm sure he was not the actual controller and he said that he had no idea that we have to go heads down to select a different runway if we want flight guidance from an ILS. I think the regulations require that if a runway is served by an ILS that it be referenced on visual apches to remain at or above the glideslope until a point that a safe landing can be made. If I would have accepted the sidestep clearance; I would have been in violation for doing so if we had not selected runway 24L in the FMS. And to select the new runway that late would have been dangerous to do so in my opinion. And what if the B747 would have had a serious landing incident? Educate ATC on what it takes to conduct sidestep lndgs in the new version glass cockpits.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ATC LCL CTLR REQUESTED A LATE SIDESTEP MANEUVER TO LAX RWY 24L. THE A319 CREW REFUSED BECAUSE OF THE HEADS DOWN ATTENTION DIVERSION LATE IN APCH.

Narrative: AFTER RECEIVING CLRNC TO LAND RWY 24R AT LAX; WE WERE ASKED BY THE TOWER IF WE COULD SIDESTEP TO RWY 24L BECAUSE OF A B747 WITHIN ABOUT 2.5 MILES IN TRAIL. ANOTHER ACFT ANSWERED THE TWR'S REQUEST GIVEN TO US ABOUT SIDESTEPPING AND ACCEPTED THE SIDESTEP TO RWY 24L. THE TWR THEN CLRED US TO SIDESTEP AND WE HAD TO TELL THE TWR THAT WE HAD NOT RESPONDED; AND THAT WE COULD NOT ACCEPT THE SIDESTEP CLRNC TO RWY 24L. THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO VISUAL FLT GUIDANCE FROM A PAPI (NOT INSTALLED) AND I DID NOT WANT THE FO TO GO HEADS DOWN TO SELECT A DIFFERENT RWY THAT LATE IN THE LNDG PHASE. WE HAD ALREADY ACTIVATED THE SECONDARY FLT PLAN ON ARR AFTER APCH CTL HAD CLRED US FOR RWY 24R VIA THE MITTS. THE TWR THEN ASKED THE B747 IF THEY COULD SIDESTEP TO RWY 24L AND THEY SAID; 'NO IT'S TOO LATE.' THE TWR THEN SAID; 'WELL THEN PREPARE TO GO AROUND.' THEN THE B747 FLT SAID; 'IN THAT CASE WE CAN SIDESTEP TO RWY 24L.' WE WERE ABOUT HALF A MILE OUT AT THIS POINT; WHICH MADE THE B747 ABOUT 2 MILES OUT AND PROBABLY AROUND 1000 FT. I ESTIMATE THAT THAT MADE THEIR APCH UNSTABLE. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY WERE COMING FROM AND DON'T REMEMBER THEIR FLT NUMBER; BUT IF THEY WERE COMING FROM OVERSEAS; THEY PROBABLY HAD A LONG DAY AND FOR TWR TO FORCE THEM INTO THAT SITUATION AT THE LAST MINUTE WAS NOT SAFE. AT THE GATE; I CALLED TWR TO EXPLAIN THAT WE HAD NOT ACCEPTED THE SIDESTEP CLRNC AND TO EXPLAIN THAT WE CAN'T JUST SIMPLY CHANGE FREQS ON THE RADIO FOR AN ILS AND SCOOT OVER LIKE THE OLD DAYS AND EXPLAINED THE FMS PROCS TO CHANGE RWYS. I'M SURE HE WAS NOT THE ACTUAL CTLR AND HE SAID THAT HE HAD NO IDEA THAT WE HAVE TO GO HEADS DOWN TO SELECT A DIFFERENT RWY IF WE WANT FLT GUIDANCE FROM AN ILS. I THINK THE REGULATIONS REQUIRE THAT IF A RWY IS SERVED BY AN ILS THAT IT BE REFERENCED ON VISUAL APCHES TO REMAIN AT OR ABOVE THE GLIDESLOPE UNTIL A POINT THAT A SAFE LNDG CAN BE MADE. IF I WOULD HAVE ACCEPTED THE SIDESTEP CLRNC; I WOULD HAVE BEEN IN VIOLATION FOR DOING SO IF WE HAD NOT SELECTED RWY 24L IN THE FMS. AND TO SELECT THE NEW RWY THAT LATE WOULD HAVE BEEN DANGEROUS TO DO SO IN MY OPINION. AND WHAT IF THE B747 WOULD HAVE HAD A SERIOUS LNDG INCIDENT? EDUCATE ATC ON WHAT IT TAKES TO CONDUCT SIDESTEP LNDGS IN THE NEW VERSION GLASS COCKPITS.

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.