EMB ERJ 135 ER/LR
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Aircraft; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Localizer signal unreliable/intermittent. On approach into BUF; we received an intermittent and unreliable signal for Runway 05. We acknowledged the NOTAM that coupled approaches were not allowed for the ILS 05. The First Officer hand flew the approach as we intercepted the LOC; 5 miles outside of ZOBSO. At 3 miles outside of ZOBSO; our CDI showed a red X; indicating that we lost the signal. After about 2 seconds; it came back and we recaptured and continued the approach. Moments later at ZOBSO; we lost LOC signal again. This time I conferred with First Officer and said we should consider abandoning the approach and try something else. He concurred and we told ATC of our issues of the signal reception. He stated the current weather and pointed out the airport to us; that we can continue visually. We discussed our options; saw the airport straight ahead and continued our approach visually. I monitored the LOC signal as we continued. The signal was lost two more times and when we did receive the signal; it swung back and forth in an unreliable manner. After landing; we relayed to the tower that we had issues with the localizer signal. The airplane was not written-up as we had used the localizer at LGA 22 and CLE 24L and it worked correctly. This LOC signal has a history of issues. I have written previous reports for GRR 26L; LGA 04. Another LOC with reliability issues is LEX 22.
EMB-135 Captain finds the localizer for Runway 05 at BUF to be unacceptable even though it is NOTAMed to prohibit coupled approaches. Other airport localizers are cited as not being well received by aircraft that he flies.