Narrative:

The ATIS in seattle is reporting ILS runway 16R and 16L. Glide path inoperative for runway 16L. We plan and brief the ILS for runway 16R due to no GS runway 16L. We switch approach controllers. We are told to descend to 5;000 ft and expect the ILS 16L. We discuss the legalities of accepting the ILS without an operative GS. To make things easier; we requested the RNAV 16L. We are denied. We figured the controller must have meant the localizer 16L. The pilot monitoring enters the approach into the FMS; we fiddle through our charts to get the ILS 16L; and try to brief the localizer 16L. Soon we get; 'turn left heading 190 degrees; intercept the localizer; maintain 3;200 ft till karfo; cleared ILS 16L glide path out of service.' pilot monitoring reads back 'cleared for the localizer 16L approach.' we are IMC; flight idle; and diving to get to the stepdown altitude on the approach. We are then slowed to 170 KTS while still high with no glide path. We pop out of the clouds around 2;800 ft and land without any incident. In addition; I just noticed that the map on the localizer 16L is D1.8. This is while sitting in a hotel room reflecting on that approach. I never had time to brief that in the air. We were task saturated. Once again; seattle is changing approaches last minute on us. We are heads down in a critical phase of flight. We are given confusing instructions (how can one be cleared an ILS approach when there is no glide path?). According to the fdc NOTAM; the glide path for seattle will be out of service until september. Crews need to be informed when entering seattle airspace what runway they should expect so we have ample time to brief the proper approach. Planning an ILS to change last minute to a non-precision approach is going to get someone in trouble. Maybe we should just start asking approach for delay vectors to properly plan for these approaches. Seattle is getting dangerous!

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Q400 First Officer questions the terminology of the approach controller who clears him for an 'ILS Approach; Glide Slope out of service' instead of a 'Localizer Approach.'

Narrative: The ATIS in Seattle is reporting ILS Runway 16R and 16L. Glide path inoperative for Runway 16L. We plan and brief the ILS for Runway 16R due to no GS Runway 16L. We switch approach Controllers. We are told to descend to 5;000 FT and expect the ILS 16L. We discuss the legalities of accepting the ILS without an operative GS. To make things easier; we requested the RNAV 16L. We are denied. We figured the Controller must have meant the LOC 16L. The pilot monitoring enters the approach into the FMS; we fiddle through our charts to get the ILS 16L; and try to brief the LOC 16L. Soon we get; 'Turn left heading 190 degrees; intercept the LOC; maintain 3;200 FT till KARFO; cleared ILS 16L glide path out of service.' Pilot Monitoring reads back 'cleared for the LOC 16L approach.' We are IMC; flight idle; and diving to get to the stepdown altitude on the approach. We are then slowed to 170 KTS while still high with no glide path. We pop out of the clouds around 2;800 FT and land without any incident. In addition; I just noticed that the MAP on the LOC 16L is D1.8. This is while sitting in a hotel room reflecting on that approach. I never had time to brief that in the air. We were task saturated. Once again; Seattle is changing approaches last minute on us. We are heads down in a critical phase of flight. We are given confusing instructions (how can one be cleared an ILS approach when there is no glide path?). According to the FDC NOTAM; the glide path for Seattle will be out of service until September. Crews need to be informed when entering Seattle airspace what runway they should expect so we have ample time to brief the proper approach. Planning an ILS to change last minute to a non-precision approach is going to get someone in trouble. Maybe we should just start asking approach for delay vectors to properly plan for these approaches. Seattle is getting dangerous!

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.