An EMB145 first officer is surprised to find that the day after an aci viewed the visual approach to...

Attributes
ACN	563482
Time
Date	200210
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : lit.airport
State Reference	AR
Altitude	agl single value : 1000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : lit.tower tower : cys.tower
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	EMB ERJ 145 ER&LR
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	approach : visual
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : multi engine
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 210 flight time total : 4300 flight time type : 500
ASRS Report	563482
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Events
Anomaly	altitude deviation : overshoot non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other anomaly other
Independent Detector	atc equipment other atc equipment : papi aircraft equipment : gpws aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : ils gs ind other flight crewa other flight crewb other other : aci 3
Resolutory Action	flight crew : returned to assigned altitude
Consequence	faa : investigated other
Supplementary
Problem Areas	FAA Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

I was flying as first officer on flight from dfw to lit. On this particular flight, we had an FAA inspector in our jump seat. We were cleared for a visual approach to runway 22L. It was daylight and there was an overcast that started at about 2500 ft MSL. The visibility was reported at 7 mi. We were cleared for the visual on downwind. As I turned downwind to base, I was slightly high and was correcting. The flight parameters were well within the company's established approach criteria. As we turned onto final, we were fully configured and the PAPI indicated 3 red lights and 1 white light. The captain and I were both comfortable with the approach. I looked inside the aircraft for a moment to confirm the visual approach with the ILS that we had set for a backup to the visual. We were slightly below the GS indicator, but this is normal on a visual. When I looked back up, the PAPI indicated 4 red lights. I added some power and then the GPWS announced 'GS.' I immediately added more power and announced that I was correcting. (This is the way the company had trained us to acknowledge any GPWS announcements.) at no time was the aircraft dangerously low. As soon as power was added, we once again saw 2 red and 2 white lights on the PAPI. The safety of the flight was at no time in jeopardy. The landing was acceptable and in the touchdown zone. When we arrived at the gate, the inspector said nothing of the momentary deviation below the GS and left the cockpit. I was slightly concerned about the GPWS going off, especially with the FAA on board. The captain assured me that the approach was safe, I did everything I should have done, and he was not concerned about it. I didn't think much more about this flight until the next day when I was notified by our pilot union that the FAA had written a report to the chief pilot about this deviation.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN EMB145 FO IS SURPRISED TO FIND THAT THE DAY AFTER AN ACI VIEWED THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 22 THAT SHE WAS TURNED IN TO THE CHIEF PLT FOR A GS DEV DURING THE LAST 1000 FT OF THE APCH INTO LIT, AR.

Narrative: I WAS FLYING AS FO ON FLT FROM DFW TO LIT. ON THIS PARTICULAR FLT, WE HAD AN FAA INSPECTOR IN OUR JUMP SEAT. WE WERE CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 22L. IT WAS DAYLIGHT AND THERE WAS AN OVCST THAT STARTED AT ABOUT 2500 FT MSL. THE VISIBILITY WAS RPTED AT 7 MI. WE WERE CLRED FOR THE VISUAL ON DOWNWIND. AS I TURNED DOWNWIND TO BASE, I WAS SLIGHTLY HIGH AND WAS CORRECTING. THE FLT PARAMETERS WERE WELL WITHIN THE COMPANY'S ESTABLISHED APCH CRITERIA. AS WE TURNED ONTO FINAL, WE WERE FULLY CONFIGURED AND THE PAPI INDICATED 3 RED LIGHTS AND 1 WHITE LIGHT. THE CAPT AND I WERE BOTH COMFORTABLE WITH THE APCH. I LOOKED INSIDE THE ACFT FOR A MOMENT TO CONFIRM THE VISUAL APCH WITH THE ILS THAT WE HAD SET FOR A BACKUP TO THE VISUAL. WE WERE SLIGHTLY BELOW THE GS INDICATOR, BUT THIS IS NORMAL ON A VISUAL. WHEN I LOOKED BACK UP, THE PAPI INDICATED 4 RED LIGHTS. I ADDED SOME PWR AND THEN THE GPWS ANNOUNCED 'GS.' I IMMEDIATELY ADDED MORE PWR AND ANNOUNCED THAT I WAS CORRECTING. (THIS IS THE WAY THE COMPANY HAD TRAINED US TO ACKNOWLEDGE ANY GPWS ANNOUNCEMENTS.) AT NO TIME WAS THE ACFT DANGEROUSLY LOW. AS SOON AS PWR WAS ADDED, WE ONCE AGAIN SAW 2 RED AND 2 WHITE LIGHTS ON THE PAPI. THE SAFETY OF THE FLT WAS AT NO TIME IN JEOPARDY. THE LNDG WAS ACCEPTABLE AND IN THE TOUCHDOWN ZONE. WHEN WE ARRIVED AT THE GATE, THE INSPECTOR SAID NOTHING OF THE MOMENTARY DEV BELOW THE GS AND LEFT THE COCKPIT. I WAS SLIGHTLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE GPWS GOING OFF, ESPECIALLY WITH THE FAA ON BOARD. THE CAPT ASSURED ME THAT THE APCH WAS SAFE, I DID EVERYTHING I SHOULD HAVE DONE, AND HE WAS NOT CONCERNED ABOUT IT. I DIDN'T THINK MUCH MORE ABOUT THIS FLT UNTIL THE NEXT DAY WHEN I WAS NOTIFIED BY OUR PLT UNION THAT THE FAA HAD WRITTEN A RPT TO THE CHIEF PLT ABOUT THIS DEV.

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.

An EMB145 first officer is surprised to find that the day after an aci viewed the visual approach to runway 22 that she was turned in to the chief pilot for a GS deviation during the last 1000 ft of the approach into lit, ar.