B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 200; Flight Crew Total 13000; Flight Crew Type 3000
Workload; Training / Qualification; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Procedure; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication; Aircraft
We flew the GIBBZ arrival to GIBBZ; and hit an FMC discontinuity [after GIBBZ]. We asked ATC for further instructions and were given a heading. The Controller stated that we should have followed the routing on the small insert in the corner of the arrival procedure. This routing is hard to locate; and does not load from the FMC data base. The procedure appears to be designed to create this error. We were still recovering from numerous changes to the published procedure by ATC when when we arrived at GIBBZ.
The reporter advised they had selected a runway of intended landing but the legs after GIBBZ were not displayed when that runway was selected. He couldn't recall whether their ultimate landing runway was a north or southbound one; but did recall there had been a runway change issued subsequent to their initial clearance 'via' the STAR. He reiterated his complaints with respect to the complexity of the chart and noted specifically that he was aware that there was a note advising that flights advised to expect Runway 12 should expect vectors after an intermediate fix (GYSLO); so he was certain they had not landed on 12. The reporter believed it would be necessary to manually 'build' the legs subsequent to GIBBZ.
A B757 flight crew descending via the GIBBZ RNAV STAR to IAD had to request vectors after GIBBZ because their ND did not display the tracks after GIBBZ associated with their landing runway.