ACR CAPTAIN REPORTS BEING VERY HIGH ON LOC DME BC RWY 34L AT RNO DUE TO ATC HANDLING AND BEING PUSHED TO ACCEPT A VISUAL APPROACH.

Narrative

I'VE ENCOUNTERED RECURRING PROBS WITH APCH CTL WHILE OPERATING AND LNDG IN BOTH N/S DIRECTIONS AT RNO DURING MULTIPLE ARRS IN THE MONTH OF APR 2007. TO ME IT SEEMS AS IF RENO APCH HAS BECOME SO ACCUSTOMED TO WHAT IS TERMED BY OUR CREWS AS THE 'VISUAL;' EXPECTING CREWS TO ACCEPT A VISUAL APCH IN ALL METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS; INCLUDING IMC; THAT THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO ADEQUATELY AND SAFELY VECTOR AN ACFT TO A STABILIZED INST APCH. WITH WX CONDITIONS INDICATING A 26 KT XWIND; OVCST AT 4000 FT BROKEN; AND MDT TURB BELOW 13000 FT AND NOTAMS SHOWING THE RWY 34L PAPI OTS (PER THE CURRENT ATIS FOR THE DAY); RNO APCH DELIVERED OUR ACFT TO 14000 FT APPROX 2 MI FROM WAGGE WITH CLRNC TO CONDUCT A LOC DME BACK COURSE RWY 34L. IN THE WX; HIGH AND SOMEWHAT FAST; THE FO AS PF WAS BARELY ABLE TO ACHIEVE STABILIZED APCH PARAMETERS AT 1000 FT AGL AS REQUIRED BY COMPANY REGS. THIS IS EXTREMELY INDICATIVE OF THE LACK OF SUPPORT WE'VE RECEIVED ON EVERY ARR INTO RNO THIS MONTH. YEARS AGO; WE FLEW THE B727 INTO RNO. THAT ACFT IS CAPABLE OF A 'SLAM-DUNK; ELEVATOR APCH;' ABLE TO DSND RAPIDLY AND SLOW QUICKLY. IT IS POSSIBLE OVER THE YEARS THAT THE RNO CTLRS ARE ACCUSTOMED TO SUCH APCHS; CONSIDERING THEM SO NORMAL THEY EVENTUALLY BECAME EXTREMELY LAX IN ACTUALLY CTLING ACFT TO REAL INST APCHS. FURTHER; THIS ACFT HAS A VERY CLEAN WING; RESULTING IN A SIGNIFICANTLY DECREASED ABILITY TO DSND AND SLOW AT THE SAME TIME. THEIR PERCEIVED LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT OUR ACFT CAPABILITIES COMBINED WITH THE FACT I RARELY FLY INTO RNO CREATED WHAT I CONSIDERED A DANGEROUS; VOLATILE SITUATION THAT COULD HAVE RESULTED IN DISASTER HAD WE NOT REMAINED HEADS-UP ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH WE OPERATED. AS A CREW WE BEGAN OUR APCH PREPARATIONS OVER 500 MI FROM RNO; HIGHLY COGNIZANT OF THE APCH AND WX LIMITATIONS BY REVIEWING THE WX; STUDYING LOC BACK COURSE AND RNAV APCH PROCS FROM OUR COMPANY FLT MANUAL; BRIEFING AND STUDYING THE DIFFERENT APCHS AND OPTIONS AVAILABLE INTO RNO; DISCUSSING COMPANY APPROVED METHODS TO FLY BOTH APCHS USING FMS AND FGS; AUTOPLT; CONFIGN; BRAKING OPTIONS; REPEATEDLY CHKING THE WX/NOTAMS FOR OTHER OPTIONS (OF WHICH THERE WERE NONE); AND OTHER SUCH NORMAL PREPARATIONS AS ARE NECESSARY FOR ANY APCH. I BELIEVE AS A CREW WE WERE EXCEPTIONALLY OVER-PREPARED AND ARMED WITH ALL RELEVANT INFO TO CONDUCT A SAFE APCH INTO RNO. ADDITIONALLY; BOTH OF US HAVE OVER 6+ YRS EXPERIENCE IN OUR CURRENT CREW POS WITH OUR COMPANY. I'VE HAD AS MUCH ABUSE FROM RENO APCH CTL AS I CAN PROFESSIONALLY TOLERATE. I RESPECTFULLY RECOMMEND ALL RENO CTLRS RECEIVE ADDITIONAL TRAINING CONCERNING THEIR BASIC JOB DUTIES AS AIR TFC CTLRS WITH REGULAR FOLLOW-UP TO INCLUDE NO-NOTICE PROFICIENCY CHKS. PERSONALLY SPEAKING; I WOULD PREFER TO CONDUCT INST APCHS INTO SUCH MOUNTAINOUS TERRAIN ARPTS AS THAT SURROUNDING RNO; ESPECIALLY DURING NIGHT OPS AND IMC. TO ACHIEVE THAT OBJECTIVE; I FIRMLY BELIEVE RENO APCH SHOULD REVERT BACK TO A MORE INST-ORIENTED OUTLOOK TO ARR ACFT INSTEAD OF THE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED VISUAL MENTALITY OF REPEATEDLY QUESTIONING 'DO YOU HAVE THE FIELD?