Airbus 318/319/320/321 Undifferentiated
Training / Qualification; Human-Machine Interface; Confusion
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Manuals; Procedure; Human Factors; Aircraft
The VOR DME 25 approach requires the A320 to select 'No Star' after selecting the VOR 25 approach. After selecting 'No Star' then selecting 'Cat 1' will program the correct outbound heading after crossing the CAT VOR. Although the 10-7 [briefing] page does note that this is to be done; there is no caution or emphasis to the fact that if CAT 1 is not selected that the aircraft as programmed will in actuality fly the heading/reciprocal 065 heading. Having seen this approach twice and witnessing the incorrect procedure; this can be avoided by confirming in the FMS that the actual heading outbound of the CAT VOR is and will be 090. If CAT 1 is not selected the FMS will depict a course that looks like the depicted and correct procedure; however it is not. Crews must confirm that CAT 1 is first selected as directed by the 10-7 page and that the FMS shows the proper outbound course. A caution or emphasis to this situation should be added to the 10-7 page.
FO's leg into MSLP; night; VFR; nothing unusual. Eventually cleared to cross CAT VOR at 5000 MSL and cleared the VOR/DME 25. I requested to enter the hold for alignment and descent to 3000 MSL. Declined due to departing traffic. Re-cleared one of the ARC approaches. FO and I decided that we could do the original approach and requested to remain with our original clearance. We slowed and began to configure; turn outbound on the teardrop and descend to 3000 MSL. Approaching 8 DME A/C started the left turn toward final and we continued to 2500 MSL. Blocked transmission from approach. I queried and we were told to turn right to 170 degrees and climb to 5000 MSL. The FO initially began this; but I had the airport in sight and was concerned about the volcano that was visible to our right. I relayed this to him and we decided to continue the left turn to final and complete the approach and I relayed this information to approach control. We were subsequently recleared the approach. As a result of the initial climb we appeared a little high but felt confident we could complete a stabilized approach. We landed on speed within the touchdown zone.After discussing this and discovering that we did not proceed outbound on the 090 degree radial on the VOR/DME approach I think the following: Reviewing the -7 company pages; I thought I followed the directions except when it said 'No STAR' I did not realize that was an action item (i.e. push the button). I fell down in my monitoring job of 'monitoring' the raw data for the VOR. I had it set up; but it was a clear night and... The FO and I were not confident with our handling by approach control. This was not due to language; but due to perception. There are RNAV approaches in the box; but not in the JEPPS. Perhaps that can be rectified.
A320 series flight crew experiences a track deviation and an unstabilized approach during the VOR DME 25 approach to MSLP. The company briefing page requires that 'No Star' be selected in the FMC after selecting the VOR DME 25 procedure; in order for the correct outbound course to displayed and programed. This was not done; causing the aircraft to fly outbound on the inbound course (066 Radial) and ATC to issue a vector. The vector is declined and the approach continued visually; but unstabilized; to landing.