“I Feel the Need… the Need for (Reducing) Speed”

Having been assigned what they considered to be an unrealistic speed to intercept the localizer, this CRJ200 Flight Crew initiated a speed reduction. According to the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) Sect. 5-5-9, Speed Adjustments: “Pilots should comply with speed adjustments from ATC unless the minimum or maximum safe airspeed for any particular operation is greater or less than the requested airspeed. In such cases advise ATC.” Maverick and Goose of Top Gun would agree.

■ We were assigned 250 knots or better. We maintained 290 knots until descending below 10,000 feet at which time we maintained 250 knots. ATC turned us to a heading of 090 which was going to set us up for about a 15 NM final on the ILS. While on the base leg of the approach, we began slowing to 180 knots in order to begin configuring for landing. ATC questioned what speed we were flying. I reported 180 knots and the Controller informed us that we should not have slowed without telling him. I questioned if we had an assigned speed, to which he responded that we were expected to maintain 250 knots until told to slow.

Being turned on base for a 15 NM final, it is necessary to begin slowing down in order to configure the airplane and be stable by 1,000 feet. I did not even consider that the Approach Controller would still want us at 250 knots as we approached the turn onto the localizer in IMC. Technically, ATC was correct. However, expecting a CRJ200 to be at 250 knots while intercepting a localizer in IMC on a 15 NM final is not a realistic expectation and would have likely resulted in a go around.

Too Many Expectations

Expecting that they would be making a short approach, this Flight Crew slowed before the Controller expected them to. More communication and less expectation on everyone’s part would have helped to clarify the situation.

■ On downwind for Runway 27L, Approach instructed us to slow from assigned 310 knots to 250 knots, descend from 14,000 feet to 7,000 feet, and advised, “Expect a short approach.” The Pilot Flying slowed to 250 knots and asked for Flaps 5 to expedite the descent. Shortly thereafter, we were given further descent to 3,000 feet and once again advised “Expect a short approach.” Since we were still high, the Pilot Flying slowed to 200 knots and asked for Flaps 10 to help get down quicker, thinking Approach was going to turn us on a base soon.

Approach asked our speed and I told him 200 knots. Approach gave us a 20-degree vector to the right to increase spacing. We continued receiving vectors to Runway 27L where we landed uneventfully. As we were exiting the runway, Tower notified us of a possible pilot deviation.

The Controller’s comments about making a short approach several times led us to believe he wanted us to descend and slow for the approach rather than fly fast away from the airport.

It’s OK to Slow, but Let ATC Know

This Flight Crew was given a speed restriction to maintain until the Final Approach Fix THEN cleared for the approach. Their subsequent speed reduction prior to reaching the fix should have been cleared with ATC.

■ On the Arrival, we were told to maintain 250 knots and then it was reduced to 230 knots. This resulted in our being slightly high on the arrival and approach…. I acknowledged another speed assignment of “Maintain 180 knots until [Final Approach Fix] then cleared for the approach.” Two miles from [FAF], the Pilot Flying slowed to 145 knots to prevent being high and fast. He chose to slow then descend fully configured to correct to the glidepath.

We did not inform the Tower of the speed deviation. Tower called out traffic just prior to [FAF] and then asked our speed. Due to the traffic call just ahead, we had thought he was going to say we needed to slow, but when I told him we were at 145 he told us we were in non-compliance with the speed restriction. We had slowed to comply with our stabilized approach criteria, but we did not coordinate that with the Tower.

Holding Up Traffic

On the ATC side of the speed adjustment issue, a Controller’s report confirms how important it is to communicate any need to deviate from an assigned speed, especially when other aircraft are following.

“Cleared for the Approach”

According to the “Air Traffic Control Handbook” (JO 7110.65V) Sect. 7, Speed Adjustment: … “At the time approach clearance is issued, previously issued speed adjustments must be restated if required. Approach clearances cancel any previously assigned speed adjustment. Pilots are expected to make their own speed adjustments to complete the approach unless the adjustments are restated.” This Flight Crew, having been cleared for a visual approach, was correct in believing they had the authority to slow without advising ATC.

Pushing the Limits

The number of “speed deviation” reports submitted to ASRS by Flight Crews that were vectored off of a STAR indicates that there is some confusion about the requirement to adhere to a speed previously assigned by ATC or published on the arrival. In such circumstances, ATC should reiterate any speed restrictions that are to remain in effect while off of the arrival routing.