Air Carrier Check Airman and new Captain reported misunderstanding ATC and descending below the assigned altitude. The pilots stated the weather was poor; the descent clearance was late and delay vectors were being used to help with the descent.
Synopsis
Air Carrier Check Airman and new Captain reported misunderstanding ATC and descending below the assigned altitude. The pilots stated the weather was poor; the descent clearance was late and delay vectors were being used to help with the descent.
Narrative
We were being vectored for the ILS to [Runway] XX. They leveled us off on the descent at FL180. We now were about 4000 ft. above the normal glide path. Approximately 5-7 miles from ZZZZZ they asked if we were going to be able to get down. I said we could use a turn to the north to buy some time to descend. Controller gave us a 300 degree heading. Shortly after the vector he said turn left to 180. Lots of weather and terrain to the west of our position. I requested a right turn; but he quickly said no; turn left immediately. So we did. We were cleared down to 8000 ft. Then he said turn left to a heading of 140 and descend to 5000 ft. The new Captain and I both pointed to 5000 in the altitude window and verbalized the assigned altitude. While passing through 5600 ft.; the controller said to climb and maintain 6000 ft. and that there was a terrain warning. So we did. We were cleared for the approach and landed Runway XX. After landing we were told to call TRACON because of a possible altitude violation. 5000 ft. is low for ZZZ; but the altitude at ZZZZZ1 is 5100; so I thought that was a MVA altitude to get us under the rain so we could do a visual approach. We are human and sometimes make mistakes; but both of us really believe we heard and read back 5000 ft.Being held up way too high on a vector with lots of weather in the area. Several changes in altitudes and initial approach fixes to join the approach. This was a distraction.Approach offering other options after keeping us held up so high. I've had this happen several times over the years in ZZZ. We even talked about the possibility in our briefing of the approach at cruise.
Second reporter narrative
During the descent to ZZZ; we were assigned a late descent; to cross ZZZZZ at or above 8000 ft. and clear the ILS XX approach. Due to the multiple cells and a very deep descent rate; we asked for a north deviation. A clearance to deviate to the north was approved; followed by a clearance to descend to 8000 ft. Once our altitude was not a factor; we were given a south heading; to what we replied; that we wanted to continue on the north deviation. Controller replied that he was unable; and we were told to turn left to a 180 heading. As we tuned to the south; we were cleared to a further left turn; to a 140 heading and 5000 ft. to intercept the XX localize. Descending through 5600 ft.; we were told that our last assigned altitude was 6000 ft. We stopped the descent and climb back up to 6000 ft. At that point we were given a clearance of; 140 heading; 6000 until establish and clear for the ILS XX.Convective weather; late descent clearance; followed by a multiple clearances that included different way-points; headings; and altitudesSuggestion: A better descent profile to the airport.
More incidents for this aircraft family →
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.