EMB ERJ 190/195 ER/LR
Distraction; Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Workload; Training / Qualification
ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation
Aircraft; Chart Or Publication; Procedure; Manuals; Human Factors
The Captain was the pilot flying. I was the pilot monitoring. The ATIS for LGA had listed the VOR 4 approach in use for Runway 4. We set up for the VOR 4 LGA and accomplished all applicable checklists to set up for the approach. Outside QATAR; LGA Approach cleared us for the visual approach to Runway 4 and to keep speed up to 180 knots until 5 NM final. Once cleared for the approach; the Captain set up the autopilot (AP)/flight director (FD) to fly the VOR 4 approach. As specified in the QRH; the Captain dialed the altitude to the FAF [NORAY] altitude of 1;700 feet. However; he did this outside of QATAR which was listed as an intermediate fix (IF). QATAR was not published in the FMS nor was the 3;000 foot altitude restriction prior to crossing QATAR. Once he activated the approach on the guidance panel; the airplane started descending below 3;000 feet prior to QATAR. The Captain was concerned that we were getting too low and expressed his intent to level off and possibly climb until we got closer to NORAY. He then attempted to level off but was unsuccessful. He ended up pressing the TOGA button and the airplane started a climb with full power. He then disconnected the autopilot and the autothrottles. At this point; I tried to assist him in trying to re-engage the approach mode so we could get back on profile. We were both task saturated at this point. He was hand flying the plane with no automation and I was trying to help him figure out how to get the airplane back onto profile with the FD. GA/Track was displayed on the FMA. At this point our speed had decreased down to approximately 150-160 knots. Approach called us and said we needed to be at 180 knots until 5 DME. We then increased our speed to comply. The Captain ended up flying a visual approach with the AP and FD off. We had an uneventful landing.Simply put; both the Captain and I were task saturated. Although the Captain was utilizing the flight guidance panel in accordance with QRH procedures for a VOR approach; we thought the airplane was descending too low too early because the altitude restriction of 3;000 feet prior to QATAR was not part of the approach in the FMS. After the TOGA button was pressed we both got behind the airplane and then ATC requested [a] speed restriction of 180 knots [that] was not complied with.I think part of issue was that QATAR was not part of the VOR approach built in the FMS. If it was; then the airplane would have leveled off at 3;000 feet as published on the approach plate. In this scenario; he shouldn't have dialed in the FAF altitude but should have dialed in the 3;000 feet altitude instead. I also think more training on the TOGA button and what it does would be beneficial. We don't really execute go-arounds on the line except on rare occasions so I don't think many pilots are entirely comfortable with it.
An ERJ-190 flight crew; anticipating a VOR Runway 4 at LGA per the ATIS; was cleared instead for a visual by approach control but opted to utilize the constraints of the IAP as a backup.  Because the IF; QATAR (crossing altitude 3;000); was not included in their nav database they descended prematurely toward the FAF (crossing altitude 1;700) and; when the Captain became concerned they were too low and attempted to climb he activated TOGA which created momentary chaos while they re-established an appropriate flight path by turning off the autoflight.  A safe approach and landing resulted.