An Air Carrier flight crew reported during a 360 degree turn for descent at the FAF they climbed due to concerns about rising terrain.
Synopsis
An Air Carrier flight crew reported during a 360 degree turn for descent at the FAF they climbed due to concerns about rising terrain.
Narrative
We were initially planning for the ZZZZZ Arrival with a planned landing on runway XX R. Approx 200 nm from the airport; we deviated west around some thunderstorms; so Center changed our arrival to the ZZZZZ1 and we were cleared direct ZZZZZ and told to cross ZZZZZ at FL 240. Approaching ZZZZZ; we were then cleared the ZZZZZ2 arrival and told to expect runway XY L. While on the arrival; we were then told to proceed direct ZZZZZ3 and descend to 11000' and then cleared for the ILS XY L Approach. Passing ZZZZZ3 in VNAV PATH; the aircraft remained at 11k' instead of descending to 8700' which is what we were expecting for the next waypoint. This new clearance put us high on the glide slope for the ILS and as we approached the FAF; the CA asked me to ask Approach control for clearance to execute a left 360 to lose excess altitude. We were cleared to do so by approach control; but he did confirm we were still VMC; which we were. About a quarter of the way through the turn we leveled at the FAF altitude of 7700'. With the higher terrain in the area; the CA elected to begin a slow climb back up to approx 8200' to ensure more terrain deconfliction. Once we re-established back onto final approach course; the approach controller re-cleared us for the approach and switched us to tower. We never descended below 7700' or received any type of GPWS warning and remained VMC the entire time; however the maneuver was out of the ordinary; hence this report. The landing and taxi was uneventful.Cause: Three arrival changes and an unexpected vector in close to a different IAF caused us to be high. That coupled with the altitude of ZZZZ and the reluctance of the 767 to slow down quickly in that environment led to us being well above glideslope in an unfamiliar airport environment. Suggestions: We had briefed and discussed ad nauseum about the terrain in ZZZZ during preflight and the flight down and during the approach. Handling thunderstorms and then three arrivals made it very difficult to keep ahead of the plane. Unfamiliarity with the terrain on final led to a 360 which was eye opening in VMC; definitely not a maneuver we would have accomplished in IMC. DIGITAL ATIS with auto updates would have been helpful.
Second reporter narrative
We were initially planning for the ZZZZZ Arrival with a planned landing on runway XX R. Approx 200 nm from the airport; we deviated west around some thunderstorms; so Center changed our arrival to the ZZZZZ1 and we were cleared direct ZZZZZ and told to cross ZZZZZ at FL 240. Approaching ZZZZZ; we were then cleared the ZZZZZ2 arrival and told to expect runway XY L. While on the arrival; we were then told to proceed direct ZZZZZ3 and descend to 11000' and then cleared for the ILS XY L Approach. Passing ZZZZZ3 in VNAV PATH; the aircraft remained at 11k' instead of descending to 8700' which is what we were expecting for the next waypoint. This new clearance put us high on the glide slope for the ILS and as we approached the FAF; the CA asked me to ask Approach control for clearance to execute a left 360 to lose excess altitude. We were cleared to do so by approach control; but he did confirm we were still VMC; which we were. About a quarter of the way through the turn we leveled at the FAF altitude of 7700'. With the higher terrain in the area; the CA elected to begin a slow climb back up to approx 8200' to ensure more terrain deconfliction. Once we re-established back onto final approach course; the approach controller re-cleared us for the approach and switched us to tower. We never descended below 7700' or received any type of GPWS warning and remained VMC the entire time; however the maneuver was out of the ordinary; hence this report. The landing and taxi was uneventful.Cause: Condensed approach timeline and VNAV PATH not operating that way we had anticipated Suggestions: Both the CA and I have never been to this airport previously and were unfamiliar with the terrain of the surrounding area. Instead of turning around via a 360 turn to lose altitude; we either could have simply increased our VSI for a short time or executed a go around to prevent turning the aircraft around into unfamiliar terrain.
More incidents for this aircraft family →
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.