Narrative:

On descent into cyeg I was letting the automation (VNAV) descend us for the approach. In an effort to cross fixes 'at' specific altitudes and not 'at or above;' or 'at or below' with the VNAV; I have recently started editing the crossing fixes to remove the 'a' or 'B' when desiring to cross fixes at a hard altitude. When preparing for the approach to runway 30 I input into the FMS to cross the outer marker ZAB 'at' 3;620 instead of 'at or above' 3;620; as canada often times brings us in high I wanted to cross the marker 'at' the required altitude and not be high and then dive for the runway. Everything was going fine; although after being cleared for the straight in for runway 30; we encountered an IMC and icing layer south of the field without the field in sight yet. This required some distraction with updating the speeds. Also after being cleared for the straight in I removed the vectors portion in the FMS which separates the arrival and approach segments so the FMS would descend us right onto the approach; at which time I would arm the approach. Everything [was] still good. However; outside the marker when I set the step down altitude for the outer marker my brain figured out something wasn't quite right but I could not see what it was. What I could not see just yet was that when I had earlier changed the marker crossing altitude to 'at' instead of 'at or above;' apparently I 'fat fingered' it and input 2;620; instead of 3;620. Needless to say this made for crossing the marker and starting the approach at a low altitude. As this was all coming together mentally we broke out VMC and as I arrested the descent and headed to intercept the VASI; we received a single one word announce of 'terrain.' I then leveled and climbed to intercept the VASI for a normal landing. ATC did not acknowledge or comment on our low altitude but I estimate we were as low as 300-400 ft. In probably 6;000 plus hours in this aircraft this is the worst mistake I have ever made. I will no longer be adjusting altitudes (a/B indicators) for any final approach fixes. The potential seriousness of making an input error like this at low altitudes far exceeds any down side of being high on the approach. This was my error plain and simple. Things I would recommend to mitigate this from happening again are never adjusting FAF altitudes to be hard crossing fixes; even if you are using cami this late at night and after an 18 hour day with commuting; you can still make a '2' into a '3' and miss it. I think all FAF should just be hard altitudes by default in the FMS and not 'at or above' crossings; but I'm sure there is probably a good reason for having them as 'at or above' that I don't know about. Also; I had a top notch first officer so no dings there.however; I would say it has become common place now that the landing speeds and any adjustments are being input by the flying pilot. I think this should strictly be a pilot not flying duty but I understand that now with the ACARS it's easier to hold the page up and let the pilot flying input them as opposed to writing them down or memorizing them. Also; an ergonomically challenging factor we have all been dealing with is having an electronic flight bag (efb) mounting bracket for a chart holder. There is no convenient place to have your charts visible at a glance for easy reference; especially at night. Many times while flying and taxiing my charts are not visible because they are on the floor; my flight bag; the little trash can; or clipped down between my legs where I don't have a prayer of reading them without a total distraction. There has to be some chart holder modification that can be mounted over this bracket until the efbs finally start working. Alternatively; drill out the rivets and put the chart holders back. The amount of time these mounting brackets have been there (months; years?) versus the time to put the chart holder back is insignificant in my opinion in light of how distractingthis is.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An EMB170 Captain whose unilateral SOP is to remove all 'at or above and at or below' FMS crossing altitudes so as to make them 'hard crossing altitudes' inadvertently altered the glide slope crossing altitude at the ZAB marker at CYEG typing in 2;620 MSL vice the published 3;620 MSL. The terrain at that point is about 2;400 MSL.

Narrative: On descent into CYEG I was letting the automation (VNAV) descend us for the approach. In an effort to cross fixes 'AT' specific altitudes and not 'AT OR ABOVE;' or 'AT OR BELOW' with the VNAV; I have recently started editing the crossing fixes to remove the 'A' or 'B' when desiring to cross fixes at a hard altitude. When preparing for the approach to Runway 30 I input into the FMS to cross the outer marker ZAB 'AT' 3;620 instead of 'AT OR ABOVE' 3;620; as Canada often times brings us in high I wanted to cross the marker 'AT' the required altitude and not be high and then dive for the runway. Everything was going fine; although after being cleared for the straight in for Runway 30; we encountered an IMC and icing layer south of the field without the field in sight yet. This required some distraction with updating the speeds. Also after being cleared for the straight in I removed the vectors portion in the FMS which separates the arrival and approach segments so the FMS would descend us right onto the approach; at which time I would arm the approach. Everything [was] still good. However; outside the marker when I set the step down altitude for the outer marker my brain figured out something wasn't quite right but I could not see what it was. What I could not see just yet was that when I had earlier changed the marker crossing altitude to 'AT' instead of 'AT OR ABOVE;' apparently I 'fat fingered' it and input 2;620; instead of 3;620. Needless to say this made for crossing the marker and starting the approach at a low altitude. As this was all coming together mentally we broke out VMC and as I arrested the descent and headed to intercept the VASI; we received a single one word announce of 'TERRAIN.' I then leveled and climbed to intercept the VASI for a normal landing. ATC did not acknowledge or comment on our low altitude but I estimate we were as low as 300-400 FT. In probably 6;000 plus hours in this aircraft this is the worst mistake I have ever made. I will no longer be adjusting altitudes (A/B indicators) for ANY final approach fixes. The potential seriousness of making an input error like this at low altitudes far exceeds any down side of being high on the approach. This was my error plain and simple. Things I would recommend to mitigate this from happening again are never adjusting FAF altitudes to be hard crossing fixes; even if you are using CAMI this late at night and after an 18 hour day with commuting; you can still make a '2' into a '3' and miss it. I think all FAF should just be hard altitudes by default in the FMS and not 'AT OR ABOVE' crossings; but I'm sure there is probably a good reason for having them as 'At or Above' that I don't know about. Also; I had a top notch First Officer so no dings there.However; I would say it has become common place now that the landing speeds and any adjustments are being input by the flying pilot. I think this should strictly be a pilot not flying duty but I understand that now with the ACARS it's easier to hold the page up and let the pilot flying input them as opposed to writing them down or memorizing them. Also; an ergonomically challenging factor we have all been dealing with is having an Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) mounting bracket for a chart holder. There is no convenient place to have your charts visible at a glance for easy reference; especially at night. Many times while flying and taxiing my charts are not visible because they are on the floor; my flight bag; the little trash can; or clipped down between my legs where I don't have a prayer of reading them without a total distraction. There has to be some chart holder modification that can be mounted over this bracket until the EFBs finally start working. Alternatively; drill out the rivets and put the chart holders back. The amount of time these mounting brackets have been there (months; years?) versus the time to put the chart holder back is insignificant in my opinion in light of how distractingthis is.

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.