Narrative:

Inbound for landing at orlando international airport, the approach controller issued radar vectors for the ILS runway 18R approach, with WX reported at 500 ft overcast with 10 mi visibility. We had briefed and planned a fully coupled approach and landing. As a first officer relatively new to the L1011 aircraft, I was focused on flying the aircraft using the autoplt/flight director system when the captain received clearance for the ILS runway 18R approach with an altitude restr of 3000 ft MSL at the tuffe OM. Just outside tuffe on the GS at 2200 ft in IMC conditions, approach asked if we were receiving the tuffe marker, presumably in regard to our deviation from the approach clearance altitude restr. No traffic conflict was observed as we completed the ILS and landed safely. The reason for the altitude restr on the ILS is apparently to release airspace to the control tower at orlando executive airport which underlies the ILS. Unfortunately, this requires aircraft on the approach to stay over 800 ft above the GS when just 5 mi from the runway. This necessitates capturing the GS from above at high rates of sink on the final approach segment. Such unstabilized approachs increase risk of CFIT (controled flight into terrain) accidents, and increase the potential for a collision in the event of human error such as our own. Full readback of approach clrncs and altitude restrs, and improved cockpit coordination could have prevented our error. However, mco approach should seriously reassess the safety impact of these practices when IMC conditions prevail.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: L1011 CLRED FOR AN APCH TO CROSS TUFFE OM AT 3000 FT. FO FLYING MADE COUPLED APCH WHICH CAUSED THEM TO CROSS TUFFE AT 2200 FT. ATC NOTICED BUT ACCEPTED THE DEV.

Narrative: INBOUND FOR LNDG AT ORLANDO INTL ARPT, THE APCH CTLR ISSUED RADAR VECTORS FOR THE ILS RWY 18R APCH, WITH WX RPTED AT 500 FT OVCST WITH 10 MI VISIBILITY. WE HAD BRIEFED AND PLANNED A FULLY COUPLED APCH AND LNDG. AS A FO RELATIVELY NEW TO THE L1011 ACFT, I WAS FOCUSED ON FLYING THE ACFT USING THE AUTOPLT/FLT DIRECTOR SYS WHEN THE CAPT RECEIVED CLRNC FOR THE ILS RWY 18R APCH WITH AN ALT RESTR OF 3000 FT MSL AT THE TUFFE OM. JUST OUTSIDE TUFFE ON THE GS AT 2200 FT IN IMC CONDITIONS, APCH ASKED IF WE WERE RECEIVING THE TUFFE MARKER, PRESUMABLY IN REGARD TO OUR DEV FROM THE APCH CLRNC ALT RESTR. NO TFC CONFLICT WAS OBSERVED AS WE COMPLETED THE ILS AND LANDED SAFELY. THE REASON FOR THE ALT RESTR ON THE ILS IS APPARENTLY TO RELEASE AIRSPACE TO THE CTL TWR AT ORLANDO EXECUTIVE ARPT WHICH UNDERLIES THE ILS. UNFORTUNATELY, THIS REQUIRES ACFT ON THE APCH TO STAY OVER 800 FT ABOVE THE GS WHEN JUST 5 MI FROM THE RWY. THIS NECESSITATES CAPTURING THE GS FROM ABOVE AT HIGH RATES OF SINK ON THE FINAL APCH SEGMENT. SUCH UNSTABILIZED APCHS INCREASE RISK OF CFIT (CTLED FLT INTO TERRAIN) ACCIDENTS, AND INCREASE THE POTENTIAL FOR A COLLISION IN THE EVENT OF HUMAN ERROR SUCH AS OUR OWN. FULL READBACK OF APCH CLRNCS AND ALT RESTRS, AND IMPROVED COCKPIT COORD COULD HAVE PREVENTED OUR ERROR. HOWEVER, MCO APCH SHOULD SERIOUSLY REASSESS THE SAFETY IMPACT OF THESE PRACTICES WHEN IMC CONDITIONS PREVAIL.

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.