Narrative:

On approach to ind; I was pilot monitoring; first officer was flying using autoplt. I briefed the approach using a standard briefing format. I verified with the first officer that they were using the ILS even though the WX was better than 5 and 5. I mentioned that the final intercept was at 2700 ft at zerox. Other altitudes briefed were the decision altitude; touchdown zone; MSA; and acceleration altitude. I went off communications to talk to the passenger and operations. When I got back; I noticed we were in heading mode and the altitude select was at 4000 ft. I asked the first officer if we were cleared for the ILS and he said yes. Being in heading mode; I assumed we had been given a standard clearance of 'fly heading xyz to intercept; maintain 4000 ft; cleared for the approach.' I mentioned to the first officer that the heading we were given was not going to intercept the localizer. I called ATC about this as well and he approved runway 10R. At this time the first officer said something like 'I read that wrong' and just after that ATC came back with 'you were supposed to be at 5000 ft there. Maintain 4000 ft now.' we continued the approach and landing with no other comments. No traffic was anywhere around us. When talking with the first officer; he mentioned that the approach clearance was 'cross clang at or above 7000 ft; cleared for the ILS runway 23L.' clang is the IAF off of the clang 5. On that approach; the altitudes are 5000 ft from clang to isola then 4000 ft from isola to latte. We had crossed clang at or above 7000 ft but then the first officer descended too soon to 4000 ft. He said that he was unused to a full approach and had not studied the altitude restrs close enough. Contributing to this was the VMC day and the standard approach briefing which started with the final intercept of 2700 ft; not mentioning the other altitudes of the approach. When I got back to the communications prior to the event; I did not notice the new altitude (just the heading) and the PF did not mention it to me. But also; when I asked if we were cleared for the approach; I just assumed the 'yes' answer contained all the information I needed and I did not query further. My assumptions about the kind of approach we were doing made me unable to verify that we were at the proper altitudes for our position. In addition to the standard 'has anything changed' items when 1 pilot returns to communications; a fuller description of the approach should be added; eg; instead of 'we are at 7000 ft; cleared for the approach' it should be 'we are at 7000 ft; cross clang at or above 7000 ft; cleared for the approach from clang.' supplemental information from acn 789717: I was flying the ILS runway 23L at ind with the autoplt engaged. The captain was off frequency when ATC instructed us to 'cross clang at or above 7000 ft and cleared for the approach.' the captain came back on frequency. As we passed clang I looked at the vertical profile on the plate and saw 4000 ft to latte; so I dialed 4000 ft in the asel without confirming our position or the altitude with the captain. I looked at the mfd to see where latte was; but there was only the FAF (zerox) with the final course extending from it; so I looked at the plate to find the DME for latte. I saw we were at about 15 DME which meant we were outside isola and the minimum altitude was 5000 ft. I looked at the altimeter and saw that we were descending through 4500 ft; and about the same time; ATC told us we went too low on the approach; and he then cleared us to 4000 ft. We continued with the approach and landing without further incident. My first mistake was to set the altitude without confirming that it was the correct one. My second mistake was to not communicate with the captain what I was doing. A contributing factor was having the FMS set to intercept the FAF without the preceding fixes which affected my situational awareness. Things were happening quickly; and I should have talked with the captain about our position before continuing to descend.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: EMB145 EXPERIENCES ALT DEVIATION ON APCH TO IND.

Narrative: ON APCH TO IND; I WAS PLT MONITORING; FO WAS FLYING USING AUTOPLT. I BRIEFED THE APCH USING A STANDARD BRIEFING FORMAT. I VERIFIED WITH THE FO THAT THEY WERE USING THE ILS EVEN THOUGH THE WX WAS BETTER THAN 5 AND 5. I MENTIONED THAT THE FINAL INTERCEPT WAS AT 2700 FT AT ZEROX. OTHER ALTS BRIEFED WERE THE DECISION ALT; TOUCHDOWN ZONE; MSA; AND ACCELERATION ALT. I WENT OFF COMS TO TALK TO THE PAX AND OPS. WHEN I GOT BACK; I NOTICED WE WERE IN HDG MODE AND THE ALT SELECT WAS AT 4000 FT. I ASKED THE FO IF WE WERE CLRED FOR THE ILS AND HE SAID YES. BEING IN HDG MODE; I ASSUMED WE HAD BEEN GIVEN A STANDARD CLRNC OF 'FLY HDG XYZ TO INTERCEPT; MAINTAIN 4000 FT; CLRED FOR THE APCH.' I MENTIONED TO THE FO THAT THE HDG WE WERE GIVEN WAS NOT GOING TO INTERCEPT THE LOC. I CALLED ATC ABOUT THIS AS WELL AND HE APPROVED RWY 10R. AT THIS TIME THE FO SAID SOMETHING LIKE 'I READ THAT WRONG' AND JUST AFTER THAT ATC CAME BACK WITH 'YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO BE AT 5000 FT THERE. MAINTAIN 4000 FT NOW.' WE CONTINUED THE APCH AND LNDG WITH NO OTHER COMMENTS. NO TFC WAS ANYWHERE AROUND US. WHEN TALKING WITH THE FO; HE MENTIONED THAT THE APCH CLRNC WAS 'CROSS CLANG AT OR ABOVE 7000 FT; CLRED FOR THE ILS RWY 23L.' CLANG IS THE IAF OFF OF THE CLANG 5. ON THAT APCH; THE ALTS ARE 5000 FT FROM CLANG TO ISOLA THEN 4000 FT FROM ISOLA TO LATTE. WE HAD CROSSED CLANG AT OR ABOVE 7000 FT BUT THEN THE FO DSNDED TOO SOON TO 4000 FT. HE SAID THAT HE WAS UNUSED TO A FULL APCH AND HAD NOT STUDIED THE ALT RESTRS CLOSE ENOUGH. CONTRIBUTING TO THIS WAS THE VMC DAY AND THE STANDARD APCH BRIEFING WHICH STARTED WITH THE FINAL INTERCEPT OF 2700 FT; NOT MENTIONING THE OTHER ALTS OF THE APCH. WHEN I GOT BACK TO THE COMS PRIOR TO THE EVENT; I DID NOT NOTICE THE NEW ALT (JUST THE HDG) AND THE PF DID NOT MENTION IT TO ME. BUT ALSO; WHEN I ASKED IF WE WERE CLRED FOR THE APCH; I JUST ASSUMED THE 'YES' ANSWER CONTAINED ALL THE INFO I NEEDED AND I DID NOT QUERY FURTHER. MY ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT THE KIND OF APCH WE WERE DOING MADE ME UNABLE TO VERIFY THAT WE WERE AT THE PROPER ALTS FOR OUR POS. IN ADDITION TO THE STANDARD 'HAS ANYTHING CHANGED' ITEMS WHEN 1 PLT RETURNS TO COMS; A FULLER DESCRIPTION OF THE APCH SHOULD BE ADDED; EG; INSTEAD OF 'WE ARE AT 7000 FT; CLRED FOR THE APCH' IT SHOULD BE 'WE ARE AT 7000 FT; CROSS CLANG AT OR ABOVE 7000 FT; CLRED FOR THE APCH FROM CLANG.' SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 789717: I WAS FLYING THE ILS RWY 23L AT IND WITH THE AUTOPLT ENGAGED. THE CAPT WAS OFF FREQ WHEN ATC INSTRUCTED US TO 'CROSS CLANG AT OR ABOVE 7000 FT AND CLRED FOR THE APCH.' THE CAPT CAME BACK ON FREQ. AS WE PASSED CLANG I LOOKED AT THE VERT PROFILE ON THE PLATE AND SAW 4000 FT TO LATTE; SO I DIALED 4000 FT IN THE ASEL WITHOUT CONFIRMING OUR POS OR THE ALT WITH THE CAPT. I LOOKED AT THE MFD TO SEE WHERE LATTE WAS; BUT THERE WAS ONLY THE FAF (ZEROX) WITH THE FINAL COURSE EXTENDING FROM IT; SO I LOOKED AT THE PLATE TO FIND THE DME FOR LATTE. I SAW WE WERE AT ABOUT 15 DME WHICH MEANT WE WERE OUTSIDE ISOLA AND THE MINIMUM ALT WAS 5000 FT. I LOOKED AT THE ALTIMETER AND SAW THAT WE WERE DSNDING THROUGH 4500 FT; AND ABOUT THE SAME TIME; ATC TOLD US WE WENT TOO LOW ON THE APCH; AND HE THEN CLRED US TO 4000 FT. WE CONTINUED WITH THE APCH AND LNDG WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. MY FIRST MISTAKE WAS TO SET THE ALT WITHOUT CONFIRMING THAT IT WAS THE CORRECT ONE. MY SECOND MISTAKE WAS TO NOT COMMUNICATE WITH THE CAPT WHAT I WAS DOING. A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR WAS HAVING THE FMS SET TO INTERCEPT THE FAF WITHOUT THE PRECEDING FIXES WHICH AFFECTED MY SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. THINGS WERE HAPPENING QUICKLY; AND I SHOULD HAVE TALKED WITH THE CAPT ABOUT OUR POS BEFORE CONTINUING TO DSND.

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.