Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Flight Crew Total 14553; Flight Crew Type 1704
Confusion; Situational Awareness
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Aircraft; Procedure
ATIS for our arrival to IAH offered the ability to request the RNAV (RNP) Y Rwy 26R. A recent pilot bulletin does not use the correct title of the approach; RNAV (RNP) Y Rwy 26R. The bulletin states that 'the DRLLR or MASOT arrivals are RNP qualified; check the ATIS. If the ATIS is advertising RNAV RNP Y 26R approach in use; be prepared to fly the RNAV RNP Y 26.'In the spirit of improving efficiencies of arrivals to IAH my crew loaded the approach to fly for the arrival. Multiple checks were made of the arrival and the approach to ensure successful completion of the procedure. The DRLLR 5 RNAV arrival RWY 26R was flown for the arrival dated 20 MAY 2016. That arrival states 'From DOMNO on track 087-degrees to SKLER. Expect vectors to final approach course'. SKLER on the DRLLR approach depicts a 210 KIAS speed. The approach chart for RNAV (RNP) Y Rwy 26R in ball note 2 states SKLER MAX 210 KIAS; the two speeds at SKLER on the approach and arrival charts do not coincide. The approach chart has a hard speed of 210 KIAS and the approach chart has a max speed of 210 KIAS. On the DRLLR approach chart the 'ROUTING' for 26R states 'EXPECT vectors to final approach course'. Nowhere does it state or transition to the RNAV (RNP) Y Rwy 26R. It also appears that SKLER is labeled IF instead of IAF on the RNAV (RNP) Y Rwy 26R. The CDU correctly displayed the points to fly the DRLLR arrival and transition to the RNAV (RNP) Y Rwy 26R; no discontinuity existed on the CDU which showed a turn from DRKAR to SOOPR. On the map display the correct magenta line to fly the arrival and approach was depicted. In addition; a magenta line from SKLER for a 087 vector (thru DRKAR) was displayed. In other words two magenta tracks were depicted on the map from DRKAR for the arrival and the approach. One for the 087-degree track for a vector out of SKLER and one for the turn to SOOPR on the RNAV (RNP) Y Rwy 26R from DRKAR. Again; I note no discontinuity existed on the CDU.At DRKAR the aircraft continued to track on a 087-degree heading and did not make the turn to SOOPR as we expected. Shortly after not starting the turn at DRKAR to SOOPR ATC intervened in the approach with a vector and a visual approach to 26R was completed.The arrival and approach do not appear to be mature enough for operational use and seem to need further evaluation. I recommend a check of the nav data base for continuity for transition from the DRLLR arrival to the RNAV (RNP) Y Rwy 26R approach. It would also be prudent to check the transition on other arrivals. Also; additional verbiage on the ROUTING section of the arrivals for the Jeppesen charts should include language to allow for the transition to the RNAV (RNP) Y Rwy 26R as well as vectors to the final approach course.
Air carrier Captain reported that the DRLLR5 RNAV Arrival and the RNAV (RNP) Y Runway 26R Approach to IAH do not appear to connect up properly in the FMC and seem to need further evaluation.