Narrative:

I passed through las and had several events which posed some questions. Let me note that the new FMC update was issued starting [date]. In addition; many of our las charts went effective on [date]. Our issues included arrival and departure events and I will include them both in this single report. To my knowledge; there were no navigation errors committed during this flight by the flight crew. 1. Upon arriving in las we were given the granpa arrival for runway 19L. We were cleared direct to tropp and then to lemnz. Our visual approach clearance (assigned to us and the two aircraft behind us) was to cross lemnz at 3;500 ft. This is 2.6 miles from the end of the runway. The FMC says we should be at 2;963 ft so we are 550 ft high at a position where we should be making our 1;000 ft call. We had it deleted by the tower. ATC informed us that it is assigned for helicopter traffic. The old clearance used to be: turn final at the stratosphere and maintain 4;000 ft until final. This new clearance is well inside of that and is clearly too high.2. Departing las; we were assigned the boach 3 SID off runway 7L. As an aside; the restriction at bakrr (above 6;000 ft and below 7;000 ft) may be unattainable in a heavy classic aircraft if diligent care is not exercised. Our issue; however; was how to make the FMC match the charted SID and the associated fdc notams. For clarification; the notams are all correctly reflected in the SID chart; however; the FMC does not match the charts or these notams. The problem is that the new boach and shead departures have multiple restrictions that include both an 'at or above' and a 'at or below' clearance window. The FMC does not reflect this. I lack the know-how to insert these restrictions; therefore the FMC cannot be correctly set up for the departure. I can only assume that procedurally we need to have them in the FMC correctly regardless of our ability to have the aircraft meet these restrictions. If using the VNAV mode; the potential consequences are obvious. Our decision was to ask clearance for an alternate departure procedure off of runway 7L. They assigned us the mccarran departure.3. Lastly; the boach 3 off of runway 1L/right has an fdc NOTAM which has bessy changed from an overfly waypoint to a flyby point. Once again; our chart is correct; but I found myself asking if there is any way for the crew to change that waypoint if we were required. Also; how does the crew determine an overfly versus a flyby waypoint in the FMC during our departure procedure verification?one final thought; we should include a mandatory briefing of the SID name and effective date in our departure or arrival briefing. Numerous times my first officer and I have had mixed charts. This is a pitfall of the new ship set format we are using. Old charts are retained past their due dates and new charts are included long before their effective dates. We have not yet developed the care to verify the specific chart. In my las departure event; if the first officer is briefing the old/wrong chart and the captain is verifying the data on an incorrect FMC update; we have a potential threat.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737-700 Captain reported a variety of confusing factors regarding RNAV SIDs and STARs at LAS. These included apparent differences between the aero charts and the FMS database; crossing altitude windows that are not programmed in the FMS; questions about flyover and flyby waypoints; compatibility with FDC NOTAMS; and; finally; concerns about the onboard chart package which includes both revisions that are not yet applicable and others that become out of date during their time on board prior to the next revision.

Narrative: I passed through LAS and had several events which posed some questions. Let me note that the new FMC update was issued starting [date]. In addition; many of our LAS charts went effective on [date]. Our issues included arrival and departure events and I will include them both in this single report. To my knowledge; there were no navigation errors committed during this flight by the flight crew. 1. Upon arriving in LAS we were given the GRANPA Arrival for Runway 19L. We were cleared direct to TROPP and then to LEMNZ. Our visual approach clearance (assigned to us and the two aircraft behind us) was to cross LEMNZ at 3;500 FT. This is 2.6 miles from the end of the runway. The FMC says we should be at 2;963 FT so we are 550 FT high at a position where we should be making our 1;000 FT call. We had it deleted by the Tower. ATC informed us that it is assigned for helicopter traffic. The old clearance used to be: turn final at the Stratosphere and maintain 4;000 FT until final. This new clearance is well inside of that and is clearly too high.2. Departing LAS; we were assigned the BOACH 3 SID off Runway 7L. As an aside; the restriction at BAKRR (above 6;000 FT and below 7;000 FT) may be unattainable in a heavy classic aircraft if diligent care is not exercised. Our issue; however; was how to make the FMC match the charted SID and the associated FDC NOTAMs. For clarification; the NOTAMs are all correctly reflected in the SID chart; however; the FMC does not match the charts or these NOTAMs. The problem is that the new BOACH and SHEAD Departures have multiple restrictions that include both an 'at or above' and a 'at or below' clearance window. The FMC does not reflect this. I lack the know-how to insert these restrictions; therefore the FMC cannot be correctly set up for the departure. I can only assume that procedurally we need to have them in the FMC correctly regardless of our ability to have the aircraft meet these restrictions. If using the VNAV mode; the potential consequences are obvious. Our decision was to ask clearance for an alternate departure procedure off of Runway 7L. They assigned us the MCCARRAN Departure.3. Lastly; the BOACH 3 off of Runway 1L/R has an FDC NOTAM which has BESSY changed from an overfly waypoint to a flyby point. Once again; our chart is correct; but I found myself asking if there is any way for the crew to change that waypoint if we were required. Also; how does the crew determine an overfly versus a flyby waypoint in the FMC during our departure procedure verification?One final thought; we should include a mandatory briefing of the SID name and effective date in our departure or arrival briefing. Numerous times my First Officer and I have had mixed charts. This is a pitfall of the new ship set format we are using. Old charts are retained past their due dates and new charts are included long before their effective dates. We have not yet developed the care to verify the specific chart. In my LAS Departure event; if the First Officer is briefing the old/wrong chart and the Captain is verifying the data on an incorrect FMC update; we have a potential threat.

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.