Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 60; Flight Crew Total 8200; Flight Crew Type 1100
Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure; Workload
Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
The SIC; who is my new boss; was the flying pilot. Prior to reaching ART we were cleared 'after ART; fly the HABBS3 arrival; expect Runway 24L.' I entered the HABBS3 in the FMS. It showed the arrival only as far as the HABBS Intersection; and I read aloud the part for 24L; HABBS at or below 16;000 FT. As I checked and entered 16;000 FT at HABBS on the FLT PLN page; and answered calls from ATC; also; prepped the performance numbers and pulled up the ILS 24L chart; I saw the flying pilot enter the ILS 24L in the FMS. When I looked back at the flight plan page; not only did the waypoints for the ILS 24L appear; but also additional waypoints from the STAR after HABBS Intersection.We had already discussed that in Canada; ATC expects pilots to adhere to the vertical restrictions of a STAR; even without stating 'descend via'; as in the USA. The flying pilot stated that fact several times; so I knew he was aware of it. The airplane was on autopilot this whole time; and after the FMS was set up; I saw him reviewing the STAR vertical restrictions; which were now also displayed on his FMS VNAV page. Somewhere around HABBS were we told to descend to 8;000; then later 6;000; and later 4;000. I can't remember exactly where each clearance was given; but I was setting up the ILS in the radios and finishing the Approach Checklist while we were abeam the airport; and then passing it. We looked very high; and saw we were only descending at 900 FPM. So I pulled up the STAR again to look at it. I should have been faster and spoke up sooner. By the time I saw exactly where we were and what altitude we should have been at (4;000-2;300); we were given a vector off the STAR; to intercept the ILS. The Controller asked us if we had been flying the HABBS3. I answered 'affirmative' and he announced that we should look again at some of the numbers on it; we had missed some (altitudes; and the 220 KTS). At this point; our LOC and GS needles were up; runway was in sight; but the flying pilot started a quick descent all the way through the GS; down to 1;900. Before I could say anything; the controller came on again with the altimeter setting; and said his system was showing a low altitude alert. I told the flying pilot we should have been at 2;500 at that point; he climbed up and we finished the visual/ILS approach without further incident. These altitude deviations could have been prevented with a more specific approach briefing and more specific statement aloud of what altitude and speeds were required at each point. I admit that I was way less assertive than usual because the person flying is my new boss and I feel have been scrutinized for everything I do or say each of the few times I have flown with him; and rather than inviting discussions; he tends to tell me his decisions without interest in my opinions. He also sounded completely confident in knowing what was expected on the STAR; stating several times that; 'that's how it is in Canada... you have to follow the vertical guides on the STAR etc.' I should have been vigilant; as with other people I fly with; to ensure they were flying the right profile.
A Corporate Jet First Officer; the Captains Supervisor; failed to comply wit the CYUL HABBS3 altitude constraints; first crossing some waypoints high; then receiving a low altitude alert prior to the Runway 24L Final Approach Fix.