Narrative:

Approaching clt on the johns 1 arrival; ATIS reporting ILS approachs to runways 18L; 18R; and 23. Actual conditions north and west of the airport were VMC except for a scattered to broken cloud deck about 2000 ft MSL. First officer; PF; captain; PNF. Assigned runway 23 on initial contact; approach was briefed and data entered. Clt approach control then reassigned ILS runway 18R about 20 mi out from airport and about 12 mi to intercept the course. I (captain) left the first officer in charge of the flying duties and the radio while I reset the approach confign in the FMS for runway 18R. I programmed the first officer's side first and stated the inbound course for her to set on the CDI while briefing the approach. During this time a clearance to intercept the final was given on approximately a 30 degree intercept heading. And our flight was cleared for the approach. As I completed the tasks on the left side (head down) I noticed the aircraft was on the runway 18R localizer centerline (about 9 DME) and not intercepting. I immediately alerted the first officer and spun the heading bug to an intercept course from the east side of the runway 18R localizer and told her to fly this heading to reintercept. I also checked TCAS for traffic and saw that there was no traffic in our proximity on runway 18L; only approach traffic for runway 23. I also saw that the wind vector angle was right to left at 51 KTS and pushing the aircraft further left of course. I then reset the heading further right. We were also descending at this point but were indicating 1.5 dots high on the GS. The EFIS display (mfd) through the FMS illustrated the final approach course line for runway 18R and was helpful in regaining the centerline; but not before we experienced full scale deflection. During this time the airplane was descending and configuring for landing. Prior to the FAF the airplane reacquired the centerline; but was still 1.5 dots high on the GS. Just inside the FAF the runway was in sight visually and the GS recaptured. No GPWS warnings were ever received; and at no point was the approach unstabilized. A normal landing followed. The first officer was relatively inexperienced and after discussion on the ground we discovered she simply failed to arm the navigation select on the flight guidance panel and failed to recognize the proximity of the aircraft to the centerline. I was heads down completing tasks and my attention was not on localizer needle when it began to move. The 50+ KTS of side wind further aggravated the attempt to reintercept the localizer from the opposite side; resulting in the full scale deflection. Ultimately I; as captain; was aware of my limitations and felt that there was adequate time to reset the approach and brief prior to clearance; rather than vector to buy time. I was not aware of the limitations of the first officer who; in her limited 121 experience; was not able to keep up with a suddenly very busy cockpit. I am sure ATC reassigned the runway 18R approach to us to make our arrival from the west more convenient. In actuality; the assignment was very inconvenient having already briefed and set up for the approach to runway 23. The situation was further aggravated by strong winds pushing east and the inexperience of the first officer. We should have said thanks; but no thanks; we will keep flying for runway 23. Supplemental information from acn 769344: we were told to expect ILS runway 23 approach inbound to clt. Setup in the FMS and pfd was complete as was the approach briefing for ILS runway 23. Approximately 20 mi from clt; approach then told us to then expect runway 18R direct tomme intersection from our present position. The PNF reprogrammed the FMS and pfd as I was configuring the airplane. At 3000 ft; the winds were 50 KTS direct crosswind from the right. Our course to capture the localizer was from west to east. Due to being cleared earlier than expected from the original approach; the autoplt did not capture the localizer. We overshot the localizer due to the strong winds; approaching the area of runway 18L. At the time I believe runway 18L was not being used for arrs. There was no RA or GPWS indications at any time. Being new to the airline industry; I feel this occurrence could have been prevented if ATC gave us additional vectoring to set up properly or advised ATC that we could not accept the ILS runway 18R.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN EMB175 CREW REPORTS THE INEXPERIENCED FO OVERFLYING CLT 18R LOC AFTER A CLOSE-IN RWY CHANGE IN WINDY CONDITIONS.

Narrative: APCHING CLT ON THE JOHNS 1 ARR; ATIS RPTING ILS APCHS TO RWYS 18L; 18R; AND 23. ACTUAL CONDITIONS N AND W OF THE ARPT WERE VMC EXCEPT FOR A SCATTERED TO BROKEN CLOUD DECK ABOUT 2000 FT MSL. FO; PF; CAPT; PNF. ASSIGNED RWY 23 ON INITIAL CONTACT; APCH WAS BRIEFED AND DATA ENTERED. CLT APCH CTL THEN REASSIGNED ILS RWY 18R ABOUT 20 MI OUT FROM ARPT AND ABOUT 12 MI TO INTERCEPT THE COURSE. I (CAPT) LEFT THE FO IN CHARGE OF THE FLYING DUTIES AND THE RADIO WHILE I RESET THE APCH CONFIGN IN THE FMS FOR RWY 18R. I PROGRAMMED THE FO'S SIDE FIRST AND STATED THE INBOUND COURSE FOR HER TO SET ON THE CDI WHILE BRIEFING THE APCH. DURING THIS TIME A CLRNC TO INTERCEPT THE FINAL WAS GIVEN ON APPROX A 30 DEG INTERCEPT HDG. AND OUR FLT WAS CLRED FOR THE APCH. AS I COMPLETED THE TASKS ON THE L SIDE (HEAD DOWN) I NOTICED THE ACFT WAS ON THE RWY 18R LOC CTRLINE (ABOUT 9 DME) AND NOT INTERCEPTING. I IMMEDIATELY ALERTED THE FO AND SPUN THE HDG BUG TO AN INTERCEPT COURSE FROM THE E SIDE OF THE RWY 18R LOC AND TOLD HER TO FLY THIS HDG TO REINTERCEPT. I ALSO CHKED TCAS FOR TFC AND SAW THAT THERE WAS NO TFC IN OUR PROX ON RWY 18L; ONLY APCH TFC FOR RWY 23. I ALSO SAW THAT THE WIND VECTOR ANGLE WAS R TO L AT 51 KTS AND PUSHING THE ACFT FURTHER L OF COURSE. I THEN RESET THE HDG FURTHER R. WE WERE ALSO DSNDING AT THIS POINT BUT WERE INDICATING 1.5 DOTS HIGH ON THE GS. THE EFIS DISPLAY (MFD) THROUGH THE FMS ILLUSTRATED THE FINAL APCH COURSE LINE FOR RWY 18R AND WAS HELPFUL IN REGAINING THE CTRLINE; BUT NOT BEFORE WE EXPERIENCED FULL SCALE DEFLECTION. DURING THIS TIME THE AIRPLANE WAS DSNDING AND CONFIGURING FOR LNDG. PRIOR TO THE FAF THE AIRPLANE REACQUIRED THE CTRLINE; BUT WAS STILL 1.5 DOTS HIGH ON THE GS. JUST INSIDE THE FAF THE RWY WAS IN SIGHT VISUALLY AND THE GS RECAPTURED. NO GPWS WARNINGS WERE EVER RECEIVED; AND AT NO POINT WAS THE APCH UNSTABILIZED. A NORMAL LNDG FOLLOWED. THE FO WAS RELATIVELY INEXPERIENCED AND AFTER DISCUSSION ON THE GND WE DISCOVERED SHE SIMPLY FAILED TO ARM THE NAV SELECT ON THE FLT GUIDANCE PANEL AND FAILED TO RECOGNIZE THE PROX OF THE ACFT TO THE CTRLINE. I WAS HEADS DOWN COMPLETING TASKS AND MY ATTN WAS NOT ON LOC NEEDLE WHEN IT BEGAN TO MOVE. THE 50+ KTS OF SIDE WIND FURTHER AGGRAVATED THE ATTEMPT TO REINTERCEPT THE LOC FROM THE OPPOSITE SIDE; RESULTING IN THE FULL SCALE DEFLECTION. ULTIMATELY I; AS CAPT; WAS AWARE OF MY LIMITATIONS AND FELT THAT THERE WAS ADEQUATE TIME TO RESET THE APCH AND BRIEF PRIOR TO CLRNC; RATHER THAN VECTOR TO BUY TIME. I WAS NOT AWARE OF THE LIMITATIONS OF THE FO WHO; IN HER LIMITED 121 EXPERIENCE; WAS NOT ABLE TO KEEP UP WITH A SUDDENLY VERY BUSY COCKPIT. I AM SURE ATC REASSIGNED THE RWY 18R APCH TO US TO MAKE OUR ARR FROM THE W MORE CONVENIENT. IN ACTUALITY; THE ASSIGNMENT WAS VERY INCONVENIENT HAVING ALREADY BRIEFED AND SET UP FOR THE APCH TO RWY 23. THE SITUATION WAS FURTHER AGGRAVATED BY STRONG WINDS PUSHING E AND THE INEXPERIENCE OF THE FO. WE SHOULD HAVE SAID THANKS; BUT NO THANKS; WE WILL KEEP FLYING FOR RWY 23. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 769344: WE WERE TOLD TO EXPECT ILS RWY 23 APCH INBOUND TO CLT. SETUP IN THE FMS AND PFD WAS COMPLETE AS WAS THE APCH BRIEFING FOR ILS RWY 23. APPROX 20 MI FROM CLT; APCH THEN TOLD US TO THEN EXPECT RWY 18R DIRECT TOMME INTXN FROM OUR PRESENT POS. THE PNF REPROGRAMMED THE FMS AND PFD AS I WAS CONFIGURING THE AIRPLANE. AT 3000 FT; THE WINDS WERE 50 KTS DIRECT XWIND FROM THE R. OUR COURSE TO CAPTURE THE LOC WAS FROM W TO E. DUE TO BEING CLRED EARLIER THAN EXPECTED FROM THE ORIGINAL APCH; THE AUTOPLT DID NOT CAPTURE THE LOC. WE OVERSHOT THE LOC DUE TO THE STRONG WINDS; APCHING THE AREA OF RWY 18L. AT THE TIME I BELIEVE RWY 18L WAS NOT BEING USED FOR ARRS. THERE WAS NO RA OR GPWS INDICATIONS AT ANY TIME. BEING NEW TO THE AIRLINE INDUSTRY; I FEEL THIS OCCURRENCE COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED IF ATC GAVE US ADDITIONAL VECTORING TO SET UP PROPERLY OR ADVISED ATC THAT WE COULD NOT ACCEPT THE ILS RWY 18R.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 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.