Narrative:

Air carrier flight between las and sna. New arrival into sna, east side 1 to be used by slant F aircraft. Problems with this new approach begin with the fact that socal approach doesn't verbally clear you for this approach. We used to use the kayoh arrival and this leaves some confusion as to how to set up the approach. That was the case on this arrival. We had to ask about 10 mi from kayoh if we were cleared the east side 1. Socal said, 'oh, sure if you want the east side 1, you're cleared.' secondly, sometimes socal will clear you to 7000 ft prior to kayoh instead of the listed expect at 8000 ft. This is happening because crossing kayoh at 8000 ft doesn't leave adequate time to step down to the close following at or above altitudes. Our FMC did not start a descent over kayoh for the next altitude of 7000 ft in 1.3 mi. We were behind the rest of the way in despite attempts at configuring and slowing. The hard restr at snake 3300 ft comes after a hard turn of 83 degrees. The descent of 4700 ft comes after 5 letdowns and 10.7 mi. I don't know if it's the descent capabilities of the B737-300, the software, or the construction of this new procedure. I was asked to call socal as we came over snake high. She informed me there were a lot of complaints about east side 1 arrival and not just from our air carrier. Pilots need to be made aware of the tight arrival parameters. Socal needs to make it clear farther out what arrival they are cleared for as they do for the civet arrival into lax. If you get behind on the arrival, as happens so quickly, if it's VFR call the field in sight and get cleared for a visual before you have a problem with the snake restr. (I didn't have the WX.) socal should cut a little slack on this approach until the bugs are worked out, ie, violations. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter was concerned that a new FMS STAR the 'east side 1' required the flight crew to accomplish a rapid descent between kayoh and snake and unless the aircraft was 'prematurely' slowed and had some flaps extended and the speed brakes deployed the descent may be beyond the aircraft's capabilities. This STAR is another of the new custom designed FMS procedures that are now appearing throughout the airspace system. In this case, the reporter was flying a non-EFIS aircraft and he complained that he had a very difficult time maintaining awareness of how the aircraft was performing relative to the required route and profile. This analyst notes that the copy of the 'east side 1' arrival faxed to the ASRS clearly states that the procedure was for '/G' aircraft only. When questioned about this, the reporter said that he thought that the copy that he used allowed non-EFIS FMS equipped aircraft to perform this STAR. The reporter did not have a copy of the STAR in his possession at the time of the callback for reference, however.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR FLC RPTS THAT THE FMS ARR TO SNA, THE 'E SIDE 1' IS VERY DIFFICULT TO COMPLY WITH, PARTICULARLY IN A NON- EFIS ACFT, BECAUSE OF THE SHARP TURNING AND DSNDING MANEUVERS REQUIRED. THE RPTR ALSO SAID THAT THE CTLRS COULD ASSIST BY INFORMING THE FLCS EARLIER AS TO THE TYPE OF ARR THEY WOULD BE FLYING AND THE TRANSITION RTE.

Narrative: ACR FLT BTWN LAS AND SNA. NEW ARR INTO SNA, E SIDE 1 TO BE USED BY SLANT F ACFT. PROBS WITH THIS NEW APCH BEGIN WITH THE FACT THAT SOCAL APCH DOESN'T VERBALLY CLR YOU FOR THIS APCH. WE USED TO USE THE KAYOH ARR AND THIS LEAVES SOME CONFUSION AS TO HOW TO SET UP THE APCH. THAT WAS THE CASE ON THIS ARR. WE HAD TO ASK ABOUT 10 MI FROM KAYOH IF WE WERE CLRED THE E SIDE 1. SOCAL SAID, 'OH, SURE IF YOU WANT THE E SIDE 1, YOU'RE CLRED.' SECONDLY, SOMETIMES SOCAL WILL CLR YOU TO 7000 FT PRIOR TO KAYOH INSTEAD OF THE LISTED EXPECT AT 8000 FT. THIS IS HAPPENING BECAUSE XING KAYOH AT 8000 FT DOESN'T LEAVE ADEQUATE TIME TO STEP DOWN TO THE CLOSE FOLLOWING AT OR ABOVE ALTS. OUR FMC DID NOT START A DSCNT OVER KAYOH FOR THE NEXT ALT OF 7000 FT IN 1.3 MI. WE WERE BEHIND THE REST OF THE WAY IN DESPITE ATTEMPTS AT CONFIGURING AND SLOWING. THE HARD RESTR AT SNAKE 3300 FT COMES AFTER A HARD TURN OF 83 DEGS. THE DSCNT OF 4700 FT COMES AFTER 5 LETDOWNS AND 10.7 MI. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THE DSCNT CAPABILITIES OF THE B737-300, THE SOFTWARE, OR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS NEW PROC. I WAS ASKED TO CALL SOCAL AS WE CAME OVER SNAKE HIGH. SHE INFORMED ME THERE WERE A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT E SIDE 1 ARR AND NOT JUST FROM OUR ACR. PLTS NEED TO BE MADE AWARE OF THE TIGHT ARR PARAMETERS. SOCAL NEEDS TO MAKE IT CLR FARTHER OUT WHAT ARR THEY ARE CLRED FOR AS THEY DO FOR THE CIVET ARR INTO LAX. IF YOU GET BEHIND ON THE ARR, AS HAPPENS SO QUICKLY, IF IT'S VFR CALL THE FIELD IN SIGHT AND GET CLRED FOR A VISUAL BEFORE YOU HAVE A PROB WITH THE SNAKE RESTR. (I DIDN'T HAVE THE WX.) SOCAL SHOULD CUT A LITTLE SLACK ON THIS APCH UNTIL THE BUGS ARE WORKED OUT, IE, VIOLATIONS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR WAS CONCERNED THAT A NEW FMS STAR THE 'E SIDE 1' REQUIRED THE FLC TO ACCOMPLISH A RAPID DSCNT BTWN KAYOH AND SNAKE AND UNLESS THE ACFT WAS 'PREMATURELY' SLOWED AND HAD SOME FLAPS EXTENDED AND THE SPD BRAKES DEPLOYED THE DSCNT MAY BE BEYOND THE ACFT'S CAPABILITIES. THIS STAR IS ANOTHER OF THE NEW CUSTOM DESIGNED FMS PROCS THAT ARE NOW APPEARING THROUGHOUT THE AIRSPACE SYS. IN THIS CASE, THE RPTR WAS FLYING A NON-EFIS ACFT AND HE COMPLAINED THAT HE HAD A VERY DIFFICULT TIME MAINTAINING AWARENESS OF HOW THE ACFT WAS PERFORMING RELATIVE TO THE REQUIRED RTE AND PROFILE. THIS ANALYST NOTES THAT THE COPY OF THE 'E SIDE 1' ARR FAXED TO THE ASRS CLRLY STATES THAT THE PROC WAS FOR '/G' ACFT ONLY. WHEN QUESTIONED ABOUT THIS, THE RPTR SAID THAT HE THOUGHT THAT THE COPY THAT HE USED ALLOWED NON-EFIS FMS EQUIPPED ACFT TO PERFORM THIS STAR. THE RPTR DID NOT HAVE A COPY OF THE STAR IN HIS POSSESSION AT THE TIME OF THE CALLBACK FOR REF, HOWEVER.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.