Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Aircraft X was issued and accepted an approach clearance for the RNAV visual to Runway 26R and was on the RNAV track on the downwind. Aircraft Y was on base leg being vectored to follow Aircraft X. I had vectored Aircraft Y away from the RNAV arc to ensure separation. Aircraft X did not turn on the arc and continued downwind so I instructed Aircraft X to turn right immediately heading 200 and issued traffic. I then reissued a 210 heading and reissued the traffic. The pilot replied and said they were looking. I then issued traffic to Aircraft Y and they reported traffic insight so I instructed them to maintain visual separation. After both aircraft were on final and cleared I asked Aircraft X if they noticed that they had not made the turn on the arc. The pilot responded they did and were making a turn. The Operations Manager told me that the pilot later said that they did not have the waypoints in the FMS but I am not sure how this affects whether or no the aircraft turns when they are supposed to. The first recommendation would be to not have base leg traffic while conducting RNAV visual approaches. Secondly; altitude separation would alleviate the safety concern however the altitude of both aircraft was 6;000 FT and that was the altitude issued to the base leg traffic from the previous position and the downwind traffic did not descend fast enough to ensure altitude separation.
Enroute; Captain had briefed visual approach backed up with ILS for 26R. Just prior to approach; we were assigned the RNAV/VISUAL approach. ATC slowed us back to 180 KTS. Captain called for Flaps 8. We loaded RNAV/Visual to 26R into the FMS. We familiarized ourselves with the RNAV visual 26R. Captain said the fixes did not match those on the plate. First Officer read on the page not to change anything in the FMS. On the approach in NAV mode; assigned 7;000 FT and asked if we had the airport insight. First Officer responded 'affirmative; airport in sight.' We were cleared for the RNAV visual to 26R. First Officer read back clearance. ATC said speed up to 210 KTS for 'a little bit more.' First Officer entered the fixes into the FMS page for guidance while Captain speeding up and trying to decide how to handle situation. Followed lateral and vertical targets for approach. Arrived at each fix where we needed to be. Approaching SUUSN aircraft started to turn; but with the 210 KTS assigned; we couldn't comply with the tight turn ATC needed. Received an amber airplane on TCAS with 'Traffic' alert. ATC had us turn to a heading of 280. Conflict cleared. On the ground; asked to call ATL TRACON.Decline the RNAV/VISUAL or say unable since it was not in the FMS database with the correct fixes. In addition; pilot flying could turn off the auto pilot to make a more aggressive turn to heading. Ask for clarification.
A CRJ900 flight crew and the Controller involved; describe an RNAV Visual Runway 26R approach clearance at ATL that does not go according to plan. Not all required waypoints are displayed when the crew selects the procedure in the FMC database.