Narrative:

Flew bradford 3 arrival to ord. After bradford, at 11000 ft, vectored to east. Had briefed runway 9L ILS. After considerable vectoring, we were told to expect runway 4R ILS. While 61 DME south of ord, we were turned to north and told to intercept runway 4R localizer. We were not told how far we were from the localizer. I selected the 'localizer' button and the aircraft immediately turned right. Suspecting a false lock-on due to the distance to ord, I returned to 'heading.' I had to change from 40 NM to 80 NM scale on the navigation display (eliminates TCASII information display) to 'see' ord, but into was so bunched that we could not visualize the extended runway 4R localizer. I had the first officer type in 'rahnn' -- a better visual and we could see we were through the localizer. Ord approach saw this too at the same time and gave us a 070 degree to intercept runway 4R localizer. On boeing glass, it is easy to 'extend the centerline.' this is a labor intensive task on airbus glass. The controller should have told us how far we were from the localizer course. Why clear us 61 DME from ord when the aeronautical information manual says a localizer is usually good for only 18 NM? Just 5 days earlier, I was cleared to intercept the runway 27 localizer at san from 40 mi out. We did get an obvious false lock-on when 'localizer' was selected. This false lock-on biased me against the ord runway 4R localizer right turn when 'localizer' was selected. Once vectored so far off the bradford 3 arrival, we should have 'cleaned up the box.' with a properly sequenced box, 'navigation' would be a better choice than 'localizer' for intercepting a localizer far from an airport. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter thinks the airbus FMC is overly complex and hard to use, compared to the boeing system. His example is a waypoint extension. It is a 10-12 keystroke procedure to extend in the airbus, whereas only a 2 keystroke procedure in the boeing. He thinks airbus should be required to make their system more user friendly. The reporter also thinks that the ATC system should not clear aircraft to track the localizer, when out of range.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AIRBUS A319 CREW FLEW THROUGH THE LOC COURSE WHEN CLRED TO INTERCEPT AND TRACK INBOUND.

Narrative: FLEW BRADFORD 3 ARR TO ORD. AFTER BRADFORD, AT 11000 FT, VECTORED TO E. HAD BRIEFED RWY 9L ILS. AFTER CONSIDERABLE VECTORING, WE WERE TOLD TO EXPECT RWY 4R ILS. WHILE 61 DME S OF ORD, WE WERE TURNED TO N AND TOLD TO INTERCEPT RWY 4R LOC. WE WERE NOT TOLD HOW FAR WE WERE FROM THE LOC. I SELECTED THE 'LOC' BUTTON AND THE ACFT IMMEDIATELY TURNED R. SUSPECTING A FALSE LOCK-ON DUE TO THE DISTANCE TO ORD, I RETURNED TO 'HDG.' I HAD TO CHANGE FROM 40 NM TO 80 NM SCALE ON THE NAV DISPLAY (ELIMINATES TCASII INFO DISPLAY) TO 'SEE' ORD, BUT INTO WAS SO BUNCHED THAT WE COULD NOT VISUALIZE THE EXTENDED RWY 4R LOC. I HAD THE FO TYPE IN 'RAHNN' -- A BETTER VISUAL AND WE COULD SEE WE WERE THROUGH THE LOC. ORD APCH SAW THIS TOO AT THE SAME TIME AND GAVE US A 070 DEG TO INTERCEPT RWY 4R LOC. ON BOEING GLASS, IT IS EASY TO 'EXTEND THE CTRLINE.' THIS IS A LABOR INTENSIVE TASK ON AIRBUS GLASS. THE CTLR SHOULD HAVE TOLD US HOW FAR WE WERE FROM THE LOC COURSE. WHY CLR US 61 DME FROM ORD WHEN THE AERONAUTICAL INFO MANUAL SAYS A LOC IS USUALLY GOOD FOR ONLY 18 NM? JUST 5 DAYS EARLIER, I WAS CLRED TO INTERCEPT THE RWY 27 LOC AT SAN FROM 40 MI OUT. WE DID GET AN OBVIOUS FALSE LOCK-ON WHEN 'LOC' WAS SELECTED. THIS FALSE LOCK-ON BIASED ME AGAINST THE ORD RWY 4R LOC R TURN WHEN 'LOC' WAS SELECTED. ONCE VECTORED SO FAR OFF THE BRADFORD 3 ARR, WE SHOULD HAVE 'CLEANED UP THE BOX.' WITH A PROPERLY SEQUENCED BOX, 'NAV' WOULD BE A BETTER CHOICE THAN 'LOC' FOR INTERCEPTING A LOC FAR FROM AN ARPT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR THINKS THE AIRBUS FMC IS OVERLY COMPLEX AND HARD TO USE, COMPARED TO THE BOEING SYS. HIS EXAMPLE IS A WAYPOINT EXTENSION. IT IS A 10-12 KEYSTROKE PROC TO EXTEND IN THE AIRBUS, WHEREAS ONLY A 2 KEYSTROKE PROC IN THE BOEING. HE THINKS AIRBUS SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO MAKE THEIR SYS MORE USER FRIENDLY. THE RPTR ALSO THINKS THAT THE ATC SYS SHOULD NOT CLR ACFT TO TRACK THE LOC, WHEN OUT OF RANGE.

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.