CRJ-900 flight crew reported altitude deviation during approach and conflicting instructions from ATC.
Synopsis
CRJ-900 flight crew reported altitude deviation during approach and conflicting instructions from ATC.
Narrative
ZZZ1-ZZZ flight. Everything was going well. At the end of the approach to ZZZZZ intersection. The ZZZ Approach controllers informed us of the airport is no longer landing north. They vectored us on a heading to land south. We are setup to Land ILS XXR now. Once established on the XXR Localizer we get a glideslope flag. I tell My FO that we can do the ILS with the GS flag showing on our PFD (Primary Flight Display). We Asked to do a GO around. What caught us off guard was that the Approach controller cleared us for the XXR. However just before the go-around he informs us that the glideslope is out of service and we must prepare for an RNAV approach to XXR.We accepted the RNAV XXR. We didn't rush. We received the ATIS and brief the approach in a calm and timely manner. ATC clears us for the RNAV XXR approach. However they call out the wrong intersections on the approach and we started to ask questions. They wanted us to Go to ZZZZZ1 Intersection which was on the ILS approach. We are IMC at this point. After sorting out the fixes that ATC needs us to fly to it led to a distraction of us being 200 feet low at ZZZZZ2 intersection on the RNAV approach. I called the GO around. At this point I could see the tension in the flight deck starting to rise because we also had an alternate to ZZZ2. I took control of the situation and transferred controls to the First Officer as I had to sort out why the distractions were happening. Now the First Officer is flying. We now receive the ILS approach for XXC and landed without issues.Suggestions: Ground workers were working on the ILS antenna and possibly didn't let ATC know that they XXR GS was inoperable. As far as the RNAV approach to XXR. The controllers were calling out incorrect fixes which let to a distraction in the flight deck. Executing the Go around procedure was the right action in the IMC conditions. We worked through the various problems on this approach and landed safely to XXC.
Second reporter narrative
Approaching ZZZ on the ZZZZZ Arrival. Descended to final fix on arrival when the airport runways were flipped from landing North to landing South. Was assigned ILS XXR approach. Was cleared for the ILS XXR approach and told to switch to Tower. Me and the Captain noticed the ILS was not showing up and Tower told us we were supposed to be on the GPS XXR. Shot missed approach. Came back around for the RNAV Z XXR approach. Was told to maintain 2000 feet until 3 miles from the fix ZZZZZ1. Me and Captain were confused as the fix ZZZZZ1 was not on either of our approach plates. As we were trying to communicate with ATC; missed approach altitude was set prior to capturing altitude and descended 200 feet below altitude. Announced our intention to go missed on the RNAV; and were vectored around for the ILS XXC. Aircraft landed on XXC without issue.Suggestions: There was confusion on our part regarding the ILS XXR approach. Me and the Captain had noticed workers working on the antenna for XXR. Having been cleared for the approach; we assumed that the XXR ILS must be operative and information on the ATIS may have been old. Regarding the XXR RNAV; there was confusion on our part as ATC had told us to reference a point that was not on our approach plate. This led to distraction and mistakes being made that led to the deviation in altitude. Do to the distractions we were facing we determined that the best case in both scenarios was to execute the missed approach. The approach/landing for ILS XXC occurred smoothly and error free.
More incidents for this aircraft family →
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.