NASA · Aviation Safety Reporting System
EMB175 Flight Crew reported autoflight improperly set resulted in higher rate of descent and a low altitude alert on approach.
What is ASRS?
The Aviation Safety Reporting System is NASA's voluntary, confidential, non- punitive incident-reporting system, established 1976. Pilots, controllers, dispatchers, and maintenance technicians file reports describing safety- relevant events. NASA de-identifies every report before adding it to the public database. Reports are not investigated by NASA, the FAA, or the NTSB — they represent the reporter's perspective.
Pilot narratives
Verbatim from the de-identified NASA record. First-person account by the
reporter. NASA strips identifying details (names, company, specific time);
anonymization placeholders are ZZZ,
X, Y.
Reporter 1
On LDA Z Runway XX into ZZZ, we followed procedure down to minimums. Pilot Flying (PF) was set to appropriate Ground Based NAV source, Pilot Monitoring (PM) was set to appropriate Magenta NAV source. At 0.3 NM from FAF, FPA mode was selected per procedure. As we descended, PF noticed we were off course slightly (on Autopilot). PF decided to disengage autopilot to track course accurately as ZZZ is a busy airport with tight restrictions. PM task saturation increased and did not notice altitude selector was not set to missed approach altitude when visual was attained. Airplane Flight Director disengaged for cause unknown at the time which increased workload and scan on both pilots. The momentary distraction allowed us to descend more rapidly than desired toward the airport environment and we received a GPWS alert approaching obstacles in the city. Crew noted the alert, saw the obstacles and corrected with power and pitch changes back to stable flight. Tower noted altitude alert to which we replied correcting. Landed without further incident. Cause - PF was newer on the airplane and we had to fly a procedure that was not done commonly. PM had only done a few of them before as well so monitoring of the approach may have been slightly less proficient. Distraction caused by Flight Director allowed us to lose awareness on descent rate and obstacle closure rate. Crew was on final leg of a long 11 hour day which started at XA:30 AM so fatigue may have been apart Suggestions - More awareness can be given during LDA approaches especially to ZZZ. More proficiency can be attained by doing more LOC approaches out on the line. Long fatiguing day caused by delays earlier including go arounds and catering from previous flight. These are out of the power of the parties involved.
Reporter 2
On LDA Z XX approach into ZZZ, aircraft was not capturing LOC and maintained Roll mode. After selecting NAV aircraft stayed in Roll mode. I disconnected the autopilot to hand fly the approach. After descending into VMC conditions at 1,100 ft. I continued the approach visually. At 800 ft. ATC advised am altitude alert, I leveled off and continued the approach to a landing. Cause - Descended too fast while on a visual segment of the approach. Suggestions - Be more vigilant on altitude constraints after going visual on an instrument approach.
NASA classification — Anomalies
- Aircraft Equipment Problem
- Deviation - Altitude
- Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural
- Inflight Event / Encounter
NASA classification — Assessments
- Contributing Factors / Situations
- Aircraft · Human Factors
- Primary Problem
- Human Factors
ASRS reports are voluntarily submitted, de-identified by NASA, and represent the reporter's perspective. The presence of reports on a topic cannot be used to infer prevalence in the National Airspace System. The authoritative source is the NASA ASRS Database Online at asrs.arc.nasa.gov ↗.