Narrative:

The ILS to runway xc at ZZZ was proceeding normally. I was flying the approach using the HUD in aii mode. At approximately 900 ft AGL; the FD on the primary flight display lost localizer guidance. Tower called saying they had an 'alarm' on the localizer. I did not understand what was said; and asked the first officer what tower said. I did not 'interpret' the information from tower; the first officer; or the airplane correctly. At this point; I should have executed a go-around. Because of my inexperience; I relied too heavily on the HUD information. The HUD I thought was giving me good course and GS information. We continued to descend on the GS; with ground contact. I was still trying to sort out what was going on. The ceiling was ragged and we visually saw the runway at about 600 ft AGL. We were slightly right of centerline. Tower cleared us to land visually from that point and I maneuvered the aircraft left to centerline and landed uneventfully in the TDZ. Even at that point; I still should have done as trained and executed a go-around. Contributing factors to this event are my inexperience in the left seat of the aircraft; confusion about inputs from tower; the first officer and the conflicting information from the aircraft systems I was receiving. I was too slow processing the information. I was unsure about the tower alert call; what it meant. If they had said the localizer went down or inoperative; it would have helped. However; I should have failed to a go-around regardless; even after acquiring the runway visually. This was my first leg after IOE checkout; first leg of a 3-day trip; and with the first officer (we had not flown together previously). I did not make the safest decision. The decision to land was more by default. Lessons learned: no matter what; if something doesn't look normal; even with conflict information; go-around and discuss it later. My confusion and inaction lead to a less than optimum decision. Supplemental information from acn 829207: approximately 900 ft AGL; the FD course guidance and localizer raw data information disappeared from my primary flight display. The control tower informed us that they had an alarm on the localizer. I responded that we concur; as I had no localizer information on my flight display. I expected the captain (pilot flying) to execute a go-around due to the loss of the localizer. He did not execute a go-around. He indicated that he had localizer course data in his HUD. He did have course guidance in his HUD that he mistakenly thought was valid localizer course guidance. My failure to communicate better with the captain or suggest that we execute a go-around were my major errors. After acquiring the runway visually; a more prudent decision would have been to execute a go-around since we were not lined up with the runway centerline without maneuvering. I think the control tower's use of the term an 'alarm' confused the captain; had they simply directed us to go-around due to their equipment problem; there would have been no problems. Callback conversation with reporter acn 829531 revealed the following information: reporter stated that was his first flight after an IOE. He was so focused on the approach; and wanted everything to be right; he just didn't have a clear understanding of the control tower's alert about the failed localizer signal and what data he should have been aware of that was displayed on the HUD screen. Callback conversation with reporter acn 829207 revealed the following info: reporter stated although he flew F-16's in the air force using the 'head-up display' (HUD) system; only the captain's position has a HUD screen on their B737-800's. Reporter stated they were not flying an unstabilized approach. The issue was the captain's unfamiliarity with; and recognizing the course data in his HUD; was not have a valid localizer course guidance. Reporter stated he believes the reason they were a little right of the runway; after they broke out at 600 ft AGL; was due to the HUD using the last localizer fix; prior t

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737-800 Captain and First Officer report on contributing factors associated with the Captain continuing to use his Head-up Display (HUD); on approach; even after the Control Tower informed them the airport localizer signal had failed.

Narrative: The ILS to Runway XC at ZZZ was proceeding normally. I was flying the approach using the HUD in AII mode. At approximately 900 FT AGL; the FD on the Primary Flight Display lost LOC guidance. Tower called saying they had an 'alarm' on the LOC. I did not understand what was said; and asked the First Officer what Tower said. I did not 'interpret' the information from Tower; the First Officer; or the airplane correctly. At this point; I should have executed a go-around. Because of my inexperience; I relied too heavily on the HUD information. The HUD I thought was giving me good course and GS information. We continued to descend on the GS; with ground contact. I was still trying to sort out what was going on. The ceiling was ragged and we visually saw the runway at about 600 FT AGL. We were slightly right of centerline. Tower cleared us to land visually from that point and I maneuvered the aircraft left to centerline and landed uneventfully in the TDZ. Even at that point; I still should have done as trained and executed a go-around. Contributing factors to this event are my inexperience in the left seat of the aircraft; confusion about inputs from Tower; the First Officer and the conflicting information from the aircraft systems I was receiving. I was too slow processing the information. I was unsure about the Tower alert call; what it meant. If they had said the LOC went down or inoperative; it would have helped. However; I should have failed to a go-around regardless; even after acquiring the runway visually. This was my first leg after IOE checkout; first leg of a 3-day trip; and with the First Officer (we had not flown together previously). I did not make the safest decision. The decision to land was more by default. Lessons learned: No matter what; if something doesn't look normal; even with conflict information; go-around and discuss it later. My confusion and inaction lead to a less than optimum decision. Supplemental information from ACN 829207: Approximately 900 FT AGL; the FD course guidance and LOC raw data information disappeared from my Primary Flight Display. The Control Tower informed us that they had an alarm on the LOC. I responded that we concur; as I had no LOC information on my flight display. I expected the Captain (pilot flying) to execute a go-around due to the loss of the LOC. He did not execute a go-around. He indicated that he had LOC course data in his HUD. He did have course guidance in his HUD that he mistakenly thought was valid LOC course guidance. My failure to communicate better with the Captain or suggest that we execute a go-around were my major errors. After acquiring the runway visually; a more prudent decision would have been to execute a go-around since we were not lined up with the runway centerline without maneuvering. I think the Control Tower's use of the term an 'alarm' confused the Captain; had they simply directed us to go-around due to their equipment problem; there would have been no problems. Callback conversation with Reporter ACN 829531 revealed the following information: Reporter stated that was his first flight after an IOE. He was so focused on the approach; and wanted everything to be right; he just didn't have a clear understanding of the Control Tower's alert about the failed Localizer signal and what data he should have been aware of that was displayed on the HUD screen. Callback conversation with Reporter ACN 829207 revealed the following info: Reporter stated although he flew F-16's in the Air Force using the 'Head-Up Display' (HUD) system; only the Captain's position has a HUD screen on their B737-800's. Reporter stated they were not flying an unstabilized approach. The issue was the Captain's unfamiliarity with; and recognizing the course data in his HUD; was not have a valid Localizer course guidance. Reporter stated he believes the reason they were a little right of the runway; after they broke out at 600 FT AGL; was due to the HUD using the last Localizer fix; prior t

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.