Narrative:

During descent into phx on the maier one RNAV arrival out of about 20000 ft; center cleared us to descend via the maier one arrival and speed; our discretion. We crossed brusr at 12000 ft then continued down and crossed hokey at 9000 ft. We then started down to cross eddna at 8000 ft. We checked in with approach and I stated; 'air carrier X checking in at 8000 ft descending via the maier one arrival.' approach then asked us to slow to 210 KTS. As we approached eddna; approach stated; 'expect runway 25L now.' I reprogrammed the FMC to switch the runway from runway 26 (earlier clearance) to runway 25L. Then; as the captain was flying; I changed our frequencies and set up for the approach. As we briefed the approach of the new runway; center called and asked what we were descending to. I stated we were descending to cross kucoo 6000 ft. Approach then said that we had descended too early and we needed to call the supervisor on duty when we landed and that tower would have the number. When approach questioned us about our descent; we were at about 6900 ft and well past eddna; only 3 miles from kucoo which is the 6000 ft fix; putting us on the descent profile. Based on PNF duties associated with the runway swap; I do not recall when the captain started out of 8000 ft for 6000 ft. On a side note -- later in the approach descending through about 5000 ft; we were given yet another runway change back to runway 26. I would like to see fewer runway changes in the mix. It's not uncommon to see two or three runway changes. (Where is the big picture?) I feel that in some places; ie; lax; phx; that the descent via an arrival takes a crew and keeps them focused inside studying crossing restrictions and setting altitudes instead of outside. You can fly into lax and between 14000 ft and 3000 ft; you have not looked outside because of the altitudes and speed restriction that the arrivals have. Have they just taken a load off of the controllers and placed more on the crews?callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter confirmed that this aircraft has only a single FMC with no navigation display. Although; through experience; comfortable using this fundamentally inferior FMS system he was certain that the lack of visual reference of the aircraftsouth position on the STAR and the display of required altitudes seriously compromised the PF's situational awareness. The reporter's extensive 'headsouth down' time reprogramming the runway changes effectively removed him from the PNF monitoring duties at a critical time.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737-300 FLT CREW MISSES CROSSING RESTRICTION AT EDDNA ON MAIER RNAV STAR TO PHX. MULTIPLE CHANGES IN RWY ASSIGNMENT REQUIRED REPEATED REPROGRAMMING OF THE FMS AND REMOVED THE PNF FROM ACTIVE MONITORING OF THE ACFTS FLT PATH.

Narrative: DURING DESCENT INTO PHX ON THE MAIER ONE RNAV ARRIVAL OUT OF ABOUT 20000 FT; CENTER CLEARED US TO DESCEND VIA THE MAIER ONE ARRIVAL AND SPEED; OUR DISCRETION. WE CROSSED BRUSR AT 12000 FT THEN CONTINUED DOWN AND CROSSED HOKEY AT 9000 FT. WE THEN STARTED DOWN TO CROSS EDDNA AT 8000 FT. WE CHECKED IN WITH APPROACH AND I STATED; 'ACR X CHECKING IN AT 8000 FT DESCENDING VIA THE MAIER ONE ARRIVAL.' APPROACH THEN ASKED US TO SLOW TO 210 KTS. AS WE APPROACHED EDDNA; APPROACH STATED; 'EXPECT RWY 25L NOW.' I REPROGRAMMED THE FMC TO SWITCH THE RWY FROM RWY 26 (EARLIER CLEARANCE) TO RWY 25L. THEN; AS THE CAPTAIN WAS FLYING; I CHANGED OUR FREQUENCIES AND SET UP FOR THE APPROACH. AS WE BRIEFED THE APPROACH OF THE NEW RWY; CENTER CALLED AND ASKED WHAT WE WERE DESCENDING TO. I STATED WE WERE DESCENDING TO CROSS KUCOO 6000 FT. APPROACH THEN SAID THAT WE HAD DESCENDED TOO EARLY AND WE NEEDED TO CALL THE SUPERVISOR ON DUTY WHEN WE LANDED AND THAT TOWER WOULD HAVE THE NUMBER. WHEN APPROACH QUESTIONED US ABOUT OUR DESCENT; WE WERE AT ABOUT 6900 FT AND WELL PAST EDDNA; ONLY 3 MILES FROM KUCOO WHICH IS THE 6000 FT FIX; PUTTING US ON THE DESCENT PROFILE. BASED ON PNF DUTIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE RWY SWAP; I DO NOT RECALL WHEN THE CAPTAIN STARTED OUT OF 8000 FT FOR 6000 FT. ON A SIDE NOTE -- LATER IN THE APPROACH DESCENDING THROUGH ABOUT 5000 FT; WE WERE GIVEN YET ANOTHER RWY CHANGE BACK TO RWY 26. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE FEWER RWY CHANGES IN THE MIX. IT'S NOT UNCOMMON TO SEE TWO OR THREE RWY CHANGES. (WHERE IS THE BIG PICTURE?) I FEEL THAT IN SOME PLACES; IE; LAX; PHX; THAT THE DESCENT VIA AN ARRIVAL TAKES A CREW AND KEEPS THEM FOCUSED INSIDE STUDYING CROSSING RESTRICTIONS AND SETTING ALTITUDES INSTEAD OF OUTSIDE. YOU CAN FLY INTO LAX AND BETWEEN 14000 FT AND 3000 FT; YOU HAVE NOT LOOKED OUTSIDE BECAUSE OF THE ALTITUDES AND SPEED RESTRICTION THAT THE ARRIVALS HAVE. HAVE THEY JUST TAKEN A LOAD OFF OF THE CONTROLLERS AND PLACED MORE ON THE CREWS?CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE REPORTER CONFIRMED THAT THIS ACFT HAS ONLY A SINGLE FMC WITH NO NAV DISPLAY. ALTHOUGH; THROUGH EXPERIENCE; COMFORTABLE USING THIS FUNDAMENTALLY INFERIOR FMS SYSTEM HE WAS CERTAIN THAT THE LACK OF VISUAL REFERENCE OF THE ACFTS POSITION ON THE STAR AND THE DISPLAY OF REQUIRED ALTS SERIOUSLY COMPROMISED THE PF'S SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. THE REPORTER'S EXTENSIVE 'HEADS DOWN' TIME REPROGRAMMING THE RWY CHANGES EFFECTIVELY REMOVED HIM FROM THE PNF MONITORING DUTIES AT A CRITICAL TIME.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.