Narrative:

After landing in lax (on runway 25L) the flight crew of aircraft #1, flight xyz, jun/tue/98, was asked to call the approach control facility. Upon talking to the controller, he asked if we had any erratic GS information while on this approach. It seemed to us (the crew) that we were getting erratic movement of the GS during the outer portion of this approach between the arnes intersection (DME 33) and the hunda intersection (DME 12.2). This was the end of our conversation with the controller. I would like to add: there was also concern about this GS from a king air that was following us on this approach. He asked the controller if 'the GS was up.' he also seemed to be getting erratic information. The controller stated that it was up and asked him if he was having any problems with it. At about this time we switched to tower and cleared to land. On approach runway 25L: when cleared for this approach we did follow the step-down procedures as indicated on the profile of the approach chart. Between fuelr intersection and gaate intersection, I (the PF) may have deviated down to 4800 ft. At gaate intersection, I had my correct altitude back. Every other crossing restr was made. Upon reaching the GS, it was followed on or above for landing. I feel this approach should be revised somewhat to eliminate some of these close in step-downs. While on this approach we were given 4 speed changes. Supplemental information from acn 406370: this approach is very demanding and produces unsafe procedures. Step-down and speed changes at same time are distracting at a time of checklist and confign changes. This approach needs to be simplified.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MD80 FLC ASKED TO CALL APCH CTL AFTER LNDG. SUPVR ASKED IF FLC OBSERVED EXPERIENCED GS ANOMALIES ON FINAL, WHICH THEY HAD. FLC CONCERNED THAT THEY MAY HAVE DEVIATED FROM ASSIGNED ALT WHEN ON FINAL IN THE QUESTIONED AREA. FLC CONCERNED WITH APCH PROC AND THE COMPLEX ACTIVITY ENCOUNTERED WHILE MAKING THE APCH WHILE CONFIGURING THE ACFT FOR LNDG.

Narrative: AFTER LNDG IN LAX (ON RWY 25L) THE FLC OF ACFT #1, FLT XYZ, JUN/TUE/98, WAS ASKED TO CALL THE APCH CTL FACILITY. UPON TALKING TO THE CTLR, HE ASKED IF WE HAD ANY ERRATIC GS INFO WHILE ON THIS APCH. IT SEEMED TO US (THE CREW) THAT WE WERE GETTING ERRATIC MOVEMENT OF THE GS DURING THE OUTER PORTION OF THIS APCH BTWN THE ARNES INTXN (DME 33) AND THE HUNDA INTXN (DME 12.2). THIS WAS THE END OF OUR CONVERSATION WITH THE CTLR. I WOULD LIKE TO ADD: THERE WAS ALSO CONCERN ABOUT THIS GS FROM A KING AIR THAT WAS FOLLOWING US ON THIS APCH. HE ASKED THE CTLR IF 'THE GS WAS UP.' HE ALSO SEEMED TO BE GETTING ERRATIC INFO. THE CTLR STATED THAT IT WAS UP AND ASKED HIM IF HE WAS HAVING ANY PROBS WITH IT. AT ABOUT THIS TIME WE SWITCHED TO TWR AND CLRED TO LAND. ON APCH RWY 25L: WHEN CLRED FOR THIS APCH WE DID FOLLOW THE STEP-DOWN PROCS AS INDICATED ON THE PROFILE OF THE APCH CHART. BTWN FUELR INTXN AND GAATE INTXN, I (THE PF) MAY HAVE DEVIATED DOWN TO 4800 FT. AT GAATE INTXN, I HAD MY CORRECT ALT BACK. EVERY OTHER XING RESTR WAS MADE. UPON REACHING THE GS, IT WAS FOLLOWED ON OR ABOVE FOR LNDG. I FEEL THIS APCH SHOULD BE REVISED SOMEWHAT TO ELIMINATE SOME OF THESE CLOSE IN STEP-DOWNS. WHILE ON THIS APCH WE WERE GIVEN 4 SPD CHANGES. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 406370: THIS APCH IS VERY DEMANDING AND PRODUCES UNSAFE PROCS. STEP-DOWN AND SPD CHANGES AT SAME TIME ARE DISTRACTING AT A TIME OF CHKLIST AND CONFIGN CHANGES. THIS APCH NEEDS TO BE SIMPLIFIED.

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.