Widebody Transport
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Communication Breakdown; Confusion
ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
General None Reported / Taken
Aircraft; Procedure; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication
Two things of interest to mention. First; we realized later in the flight that we didn't brief the climb gradient for our departure. We made our crossing restriction but during the debrief of how it happened we realized that Commercial Chart doesn't have the familiar % climb gradient available. Adding to the confusion; as the pilot not flying followed the departure briefing on the EFB; the climb (FT/NM) box was not in view when viewing the briefed route. With the only level of zoom available; the climb box is not readable/noticeable when viewing the full chart. We should have caught this but we didn't with the new charts and difficult to ready EFB. Second; we were filed for the TAMMY4. At one point we were given direct UJM. Later we were give a 45 degree turn Direct ELD and the TAMMY4 again. Later we were cleared direct FAYEE; descend via the TAMMY4; 300 KTS or greater. We flew 330 KTS as we were given a late descent to begin with and this would allow us to catch up. Checking in with the next Memphis Controller; we advised of our speed restriction and ask if we should fly the assigned or published speeds. Response was 300 or greater. Less then a minute later we were told to fly the published speeds. We began slowing with speed brakes and are high on profile again. Next we were asked if we were a /W or a /Q. I do not have our equipment codes memorized I had to look it up. I found a /W on our equipment code list and told him /W. He said we can't do the TAMMY4 unless we are a '/Q' and we would have to do the UJM4. I told him we are RNAV capable. Again; in an insistent voice; he asked if we were /Q or /W. I then asked if he would prefer to us on the UJM4 and he said yes. Meanwhile we are still hustling to get back on profile. We got the new arrival in but had some added confusion with the RNAV 36L 'special procedure' loading that is currently in effect. We got it built; still close on profile; and were handed off to MEM Approach. When I went to switch frequencies I put the clipboard I was holding on the pedestal unknowingly switching the ALT Report of the XPNDR to off. When I checked in I reported leveling at 10;000 as we were almost there and almost at TAMMY. He said I'm not getting your altitude say altitude. I said leveling at 10;000. I looked down and saw what had happened and turned the ALT reporting back on. He came back and said; I got it not now and show you descending through 10;200 for 10;000 FT and gave us a vector toward the final. I feel that the Controller may have gotten the idea we were trying to hide something with the ALT switch and that simply was not the case. After getting on the ground I looked up /W and /Q in the FOM. /W = RVSM Certified and /Q = (not allocated.) I called Dispatch and he thought that a /Q for ATC means RNAV and perhaps when our strip got passed up from Mexico the data got dropped off. It was the wrong time to get this confusion thrown in the mix. I felt I communicated directly to ATC that we were RNAV capable. The Controller was insistent that we must be a /Q to do the TAMMY4. Per our Flight Operations Manual; this does not seem to be possible to see a /Q equipment code. This confusion and late getting the arrival built may have had us 200 FT high at TAMMY. 1) Better picture quality on the EFB...Using the iPad as the primary means of a pilot data device will/does made things much clearer. 2) Have the same equipment codes in use for ATC and the flight plan and when there is confusion and the answer is communicated in 'long hand' vs. the equipment code; accept the 'long hand' version as there was no question at that point; the capability of the aircraft to fly the TAMMY4.
Wide body Captain discusses several topics including chart view ability in an iPad EFB and ATC intervention during an RNAV then non-RNAV arrival to MEM.