Air carrier flight crew reported descent below their planned minimum altitude during visual approach. Flight crew climbed back to correct altitude and continued approach.
Synopsis
Air carrier flight crew reported descent below their planned minimum altitude during visual approach. Flight crew climbed back to correct altitude and continued approach.
Narrative
I was pilot flying on Aircraft X. Cleared for the visual approach with the runway in sight while on a left base heading to the final approach course. We quickly realized we were low for our distance from the runway; we then heard the 'Approaching minimums call out'; as I had bugged the LOC mins of 2300 ft. I disconnected the autopilot; slightly climbed until I had a visual on the PAPIs; and used those to land. The aircraft remained in a landing configuration; stable and landed uneventfully. Although we were visual and maintained terrain and obstruction clearance at all times; the aircraft descended to approx 600-700 ft. AGL crossing the FAF; when we were meant to be 1000 ft. AGL.When cleared for the visual approach; I glanced at the approach plate I had briefed. I called out to my Captain; pilot monitoring; that I would set 2300 for the next altitude (thinking it was the final approach fix altitude). I was looking at the MDA box; located right next to the FAF altitude on the Jepp chart in the briefing strip. Captain confirmed with me that 2300 ft. was correct. We began our descent to this altitude and quickly realized we were low. The downsloping terrain in the area created an illusion that we were higher than we were. Iisconnected autopilot; slightly climbed and handflew the plane to a more suitable visual glidepath with the PAPIs.Confirmation bias; we had both glanced at the wrong box on the Jepp chart. Suggestions: In the future; I will be more thorough and methodical in my briefs; even if it is a visual approach. Take special notice of airports with higher elevations than I am used to; I think this was a huge contributing factor to mistakenly setting the incorrect altitude. Refer to the same part of the Jepp chart as usual; I typically look at the profile view to confirm the FAF altitude; but this time I looked at the briefing strip; which led to reading the wrong altitude.Slow down when it comes to selecting altitudes I am choosing myself (not ATC assigned; in the case of visual approaches). Slow down when feeling rushed (we were left high on the arrival and it created a sense of urgency to get down and configured in time). Take more time to get prepared when conducting non-precision approaches without vertical guidance.
Second reporter narrative
While pilot monitoring going into ZZZ we were kept high and trying to descend. On left base we were cleared for the visual; still descending and turning final the PF called out setting the FAF altitude of 2300 ft; I glanced at the app plate and confirmed 2300 which I mistakenly read instead of 3300. Realizing we were low for the distance from the runway (approx 600-700 AGL) we received the approaching minimums" call at which point we leveled off and climbed until on PAPI proper path. We continued the visual and landed without incident.When cleared for the visual app we both looked at the wrong box and set 2300 ft instead of 3300 ft. I was head down in the process of switching from approach control to tower looking for the clearance to land and didn't slow down to look closer at the app plate. Contributing to the decent was the downsloping terrain towards the runway which gave us the feeling of being too high.Suggestions: Take a delay vector to lose altitude rather than rushing the descent; look at the chart closer and with more time before confirming altitudes. Don't rush and just slow down."
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.