Italics are mine
Gilles Hudicort wrote
"12) The report failed to indicate if the crew selected a LOC05 in the FMS
(it's a MCDU), and if they manually entered a corrected altitude at the FAF in the FMS, or if they just computed it for the FAF without changing the FMS provided FAF (uncorrected) crossing altitude.
You would enter it in the MCDU at time of briefing, and then the PF checks the MCDU data entry including this change.
13) The report states that the crew computed a corrected MDA of 740 feet. But the report fails to indicate if the crew entered that corrected MDA in the FMS or the regular MDA."
All part of the briefing after entering it in the MCDU and on a Non-Precision approach you add the 50 foot additive. PF cross checks all the data entry into the MCDU as part of his approach briefing.
The TSB report said the pilots did brief the approach, so these entries into the MCDU would have been done at that time, and cross checked by the PF. . DME would be set up to verify FAF passage too, and LOC up on PFD for raw data info. All standard SOPs.
from the TSB report;
"Air Canada’s Airbus A320 Quick Reference Handbook was revised to include the FPA and chart of approach altitude corrections for cold temperatures. The chart was designed to identify the applicable altitude correction (in 100-foot increments) to be added to the FAF and the degree correction to be added to the FPA based on the approach altitude height above the aerodrome and the temperature in degrees Celsius. The Quick Reference Handbook also includes a chart for the cold temperature corrections for the MDA. The investigation determined that the FPA calculated by the flight crew was in accordance with the QRH." which included the cold temperature corrections for FAF and MDA .
I find it hard to believe that Gilles would think none of this was done.
Finally, as stated in the TSB report,
"For a flight in FPA guidance mode, Air Canada’s practice was that,
once the aircraft was past the FAF, the flight crews were not required to monitor the aircraft’s altitude and distance from the threshold, nor to make any adjustments to the FPA."
At Air Canada, the use of the distance/altitude table on the Jeppesen chart as a monitoring tool is not cited during pilot training for LOC/non-precision approaches"
Last Wx report was;
"wind 340°T at 22 knots, with gusts at 28 knots, visibility ¾ sm in light snow and drifting snow, broken cloud at 700 feet AGL, overcast cloud at 1000 feet AGL, temperature −6 °C, dew point −6 °C, and altimeter 29.62 in. Hg."
They were busy with that kind of weather..
So I doubt they would have been cross checking DME versus altitude inside the FAF, but that is speculation on my part.