Narrative:

On downwind with flaps 1 degree and slowing; we were turned to base and given a lower airspeed and altitude. We were quickly given a dogleg and clearance to intercept and for the approach. I had been at idle as soon as they gave me the reduced airspeed and started to configure as soon as the airspds allowed. I was intercepting the localizer and going above the GS and called for flaps 5 degrees with the speed brakes out. I started down towards the GS and called for flaps 15 degrees when my copilot pointed out that I was a couple of KTS above the flap limit speed for 15 degrees flaps. I raised the nose and quickly got the speed below 195 KTS and called for flaps 15 degrees and flaps 20 degrees. I started a more rapid descent thinking that 20 degrees flaps would create enough drag but I had to pull the nose up to slow what had been a slight gain in speed; about 2 KTS over the flap limit speed of 195 KTS (we write this up). Going down towards the GS with speed brakes; gear and flaps 25 degrees; I did an s-turn to lose some energy and put the plane on the GS and back on the localizer. The first officer made the standard callouts and pointing out that I was well over the bug speed; I stated I would land with 25 degrees flaps (thus reducing my overage by about 5 KTS) and stability with no further confign changes. The speed brake was stowed and armed for landing. Since I was on GS and localizer at normal descent rate and the speed was coming back on this clear day with a dry runway; I felt the speed would come back more rapidly. I made a nice touchdown well within the landing zone and using light reverser and braking; taxied clear of the runway. However; I had not met the stabilized approach criteria for speed and power. There had been 1 sink rate call at a higher segment of the GS. There were no pull-up warnings; which would have required an immediate go around. In looking back on the events after landing; I realized that I had made a significant mistake in continuing the approach. I fly the B767-300 about 98% of the time and I believe this was my first sequence with the winglet 757. My approach the previous day had been fine; so I wasn't expecting any difficulty getting configured and down. I had heard the 757 with winglets was clean and had a tendency to float; but my experience had told me that configuring the aircraft and using speed brakes would slow it down more quickly. I now know that I must be much more aggressive in getting the 757 slowed in order to deal with such direction from the controller rather than trying to conserve energy and minimize fuel burn. If ever placed in this situation again; I will do a go around before or at 500 ft AGL on a VFR day.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B757 FLT CREW REPORTS UNSTABILIZED APPROACH WITH WINGLETED ACFT AFTER SHORT APPROACH CLRNC. FLT CREW CONTINUES FOR NORMAL LANDING.

Narrative: ON DOWNWIND WITH FLAPS 1 DEG AND SLOWING; WE WERE TURNED TO BASE AND GIVEN A LOWER AIRSPD AND ALT. WE WERE QUICKLY GIVEN A DOGLEG AND CLRNC TO INTERCEPT AND FOR THE APCH. I HAD BEEN AT IDLE AS SOON AS THEY GAVE ME THE REDUCED AIRSPD AND STARTED TO CONFIGURE AS SOON AS THE AIRSPDS ALLOWED. I WAS INTERCEPTING THE LOC AND GOING ABOVE THE GS AND CALLED FOR FLAPS 5 DEGS WITH THE SPD BRAKES OUT. I STARTED DOWN TOWARDS THE GS AND CALLED FOR FLAPS 15 DEGS WHEN MY COPLT POINTED OUT THAT I WAS A COUPLE OF KTS ABOVE THE FLAP LIMIT SPD FOR 15 DEGS FLAPS. I RAISED THE NOSE AND QUICKLY GOT THE SPD BELOW 195 KTS AND CALLED FOR FLAPS 15 DEGS AND FLAPS 20 DEGS. I STARTED A MORE RAPID DSCNT THINKING THAT 20 DEGS FLAPS WOULD CREATE ENOUGH DRAG BUT I HAD TO PULL THE NOSE UP TO SLOW WHAT HAD BEEN A SLIGHT GAIN IN SPD; ABOUT 2 KTS OVER THE FLAP LIMIT SPD OF 195 KTS (WE WRITE THIS UP). GOING DOWN TOWARDS THE GS WITH SPD BRAKES; GEAR AND FLAPS 25 DEGS; I DID AN S-TURN TO LOSE SOME ENERGY AND PUT THE PLANE ON THE GS AND BACK ON THE LOC. THE FO MADE THE STANDARD CALLOUTS AND POINTING OUT THAT I WAS WELL OVER THE BUG SPD; I STATED I WOULD LAND WITH 25 DEGS FLAPS (THUS REDUCING MY OVERAGE BY ABOUT 5 KTS) AND STABILITY WITH NO FURTHER CONFIGN CHANGES. THE SPD BRAKE WAS STOWED AND ARMED FOR LNDG. SINCE I WAS ON GS AND LOC AT NORMAL DSCNT RATE AND THE SPD WAS COMING BACK ON THIS CLR DAY WITH A DRY RWY; I FELT THE SPD WOULD COME BACK MORE RAPIDLY. I MADE A NICE TOUCHDOWN WELL WITHIN THE LNDG ZONE AND USING LIGHT REVERSER AND BRAKING; TAXIED CLR OF THE RWY. HOWEVER; I HAD NOT MET THE STABILIZED APCH CRITERIA FOR SPD AND PWR. THERE HAD BEEN 1 SINK RATE CALL AT A HIGHER SEGMENT OF THE GS. THERE WERE NO PULL-UP WARNINGS; WHICH WOULD HAVE REQUIRED AN IMMEDIATE GAR. IN LOOKING BACK ON THE EVENTS AFTER LNDG; I REALIZED THAT I HAD MADE A SIGNIFICANT MISTAKE IN CONTINUING THE APCH. I FLY THE B767-300 ABOUT 98% OF THE TIME AND I BELIEVE THIS WAS MY FIRST SEQUENCE WITH THE WINGLET 757. MY APCH THE PREVIOUS DAY HAD BEEN FINE; SO I WASN'T EXPECTING ANY DIFFICULTY GETTING CONFIGURED AND DOWN. I HAD HEARD THE 757 WITH WINGLETS WAS CLEAN AND HAD A TENDENCY TO FLOAT; BUT MY EXPERIENCE HAD TOLD ME THAT CONFIGURING THE ACFT AND USING SPD BRAKES WOULD SLOW IT DOWN MORE QUICKLY. I NOW KNOW THAT I MUST BE MUCH MORE AGGRESSIVE IN GETTING THE 757 SLOWED IN ORDER TO DEAL WITH SUCH DIRECTION FROM THE CTLR RATHER THAN TRYING TO CONSERVE ENERGY AND MINIMIZE FUEL BURN. IF EVER PLACED IN THIS SITUATION AGAIN; I WILL DO A GAR BEFORE OR AT 500 FT AGL ON A VFR DAY.

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.