Date: 201309
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZTL.ARTCC, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZTL
ATC / advisory: Center ZTL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The flight began at an arrival at the airplane an hour before departure. The aircraft was completely unpowered as the GPU was unable to maintain power to the aircraft. This began a series of resets of systems in the aircraft and eventually ended in a call to Maintenance Control for the final reset that [we] were not able to accomplish. Maintenance Control had to walk us through a reset for the 'terrain' fault. We continued to prep the airplane; get our clearance and we chose to do an in depth route review do to the very short flight duration.  [We] did a complete speed and altitude verification of the IVANE2 arrival at this time. We were pressed to get off in time for our 'wheels up' time as the ground crew was new and things were going very slowly but we made it to the end of the runway with a couple of minutes to spare. Our take off clearance was to climb on a 050 degree heading to 5;000 FT.Takeoff was normal; clean up was normal; and we were handed off to Departure. They climbed us to 11;000 FT and a left turn to 310 heading. Again all was normal. Our flight plan routing was radar vectors to MAJIC; IVANE2 arrival to CLT. At this time First Officer pulled the IVANE2 chart and the RNAV 36R approach to CLT out. We reviewed all the speed and crossing restrictions on the IVANE2 and briefed the approach. We were switched over to Atlanta Center and on contact we were cleared to climb to 13;000 FT; direct MAJIC; descend on the IVANE2 North arrival. We climbed to 13;000 and began the descent and approach checklist. First Officer selected the managed descent for the arrival and I gave the passenger arrival announcement. Moments into the announcement Atlanta Center called us and asked for our altitude. We replied 11;800 FT descending on the IVANE2 North. His reply was MAJIC has a 13;000 FT crossing altitude; climb back to 13;000 FT and resume the arrival. On two occasions the speed and altitudes on the arrival were checked. First Officer felt that when he had selected the managed descent that the aircraft would maintain 13;000 FT until passing MAJIC and follow the path down on the arrival. The problem was; we think; that when Atlanta issued the climb to 13;000 FT it dropped out the 13;000-17;000 FT crossing at MAJIC or it dropped out when First Officer selected managed descent for the arrival. Either way the MAJIC speed of 250 KTS remained; but the altitude restriction dropped out and did not restrict the aircraft from beginning a 1;000 FT per minute descent. In researching this in my limited spare time today I have found that the same problem has occurred on the arrival with flights originating from ZZZ to CLT. Problem there takes place with the FL260 crossing. I believe this scenario occurred because of multiple events taking place in a very short time; but the primary reason is that the flight plan to CLT from ZZZ1 is at 12;000 FT. When the route is loaded it loads a predetermined and set arrival conditions for the IVANE2 arrival so that when it is reviewed on the ground it looks fine. But when the 13;000 FT climb clearance is given by Atlanta Center; the altitude restriction drops out. I enjoy flying the Airbus and have done so for many years but even after all these years it does things that I cannot explain. Automation is primarily to reduce the work on the pilot. However; it requires more attention to be directed with our monitoring skills; there lies its faults.Even though I was not flying the aircraft; I accept responsibility for the incorrect path that it took. My job was the pilot not flying. My lesson that I learned today was that it is necessary to review the crossing restrictions and speeds on these RNAV arrivals but the pitfall is that even after you have reviewed and verified the restrictions; you cannot follow the flight path on the ND screen as I believe I was taught. One must use the arrival page to verify the aircraft will meet every restriction published. I have found that there are too manytimes that the crossing restrictions and/or altitudes drop out when certain criteria are changed from the published and programmed arrival. All of this works very well on paper and when it is flown just exactly like the arrival is set up. My own personal opinion is that the first time that a change from the designed program occurs; ATC should take back positive control of the aircraft's arrival. On the Airbus; assigned speed decreases will take the aircraft off the flight path almost instantly and there is a short window that the speed brake can adjust before it leaves the programmed decent path. Bottom line suggestion for this case; emphasize verifying speed and crossing restriction off of the page in the book and do not trust that just because the pilot JUST checked and verified every restriction prior to beginning the arrival that it will still be there when you get to it. Until this day; I have always reviewed and verified from the page to the ND and MCDU then used the ND to make sure all of the restriction are met. From this day forward I will be using the arrival page to verify the aircraft will meet the restrictions not what is shown on the ND.


Second narrative: During the climbout; approximately 20 NM from MAJIC Intersection; we received an FMS amber message 'Speed discrepancy at MAJIC.' While I was troubleshooting the problem we were given clearance to 'Descend via the IVANE2; North Transition.' I looked at the ND; verified the restriction at MAJIC; and selected Managed Descent expecting the aircraft to maintain 13;000 FT until reaching MAJIC. Again; the 'Speed Discrepancy' message appeared and I returned to dealing with that problem. The ND and FMS indicated the correct speed of 250 KIAS at MAJIC but there was no pink 'slow down' point indicated on the ND map display. I activated Selected Speed to slow the aircraft to 250 KIAS from 310 KIAS to avoid a speed infraction at MAJIC. I continued to troubleshoot the speed issue; as we were required to use managed speed to meet speed restrictions further into the arrival.As I continued to troubleshoot the 'Speed Discrepancy' issue; apparently the aircraft began a 1;000 FPM descent. At approximately 10 NM from MAJIC I realized our altitude was 11;500 FT and then we both saw that the MAJIC altitude restriction of 13;000 FT was no longer in the FMS.We used procedures; policies; and flows to verify the arrival procedure two (2) times and overly depended on the automation to maintain the correct restrictions. Ultimately we failed to adequately monitor the arrival as I became fixated on the Managed Speed issue. I may have erred by not editing the FMS cruise altitude to 13;000 FT before our departure; however; I honestly believe that this had no bearing on the 'disappearing' restriction at MAJIC as we verified the arrival restrictions two times before being cleared. Faulty software? The FMS indicated the correct speed restriction yet it repeatedly warned us of a false discrepancy. Also; the inadvertent removal of the crossing altitude restriction at MAJIC. Several other issues (related to our flight; but not related to the arrival) before our departure may have task loaded the crew ('In The Yellow'); although we did not feel overwhelmed ('In The Red'). First; I think that maybe we should not be issued RNAV arrivals if we are at departing from an airport very close to Charlotte as both crewmembers are very task saturated during these flights. Second; even after the arrival verification; I think that both crew members should verify each restriction during the arrival using both the FMS and the arrival chart plate. Third; Dispatch should not file flight plans with a cruise altitude lower than the minimum altitude at an initial fix on an RNAV arrival i.e.; 12;000 FT filed altitude with a minimum crossing of 13;000 FT at MAJIC last; I think that it may alleviate errors if the controllers would verify the initial altitude restriction on the first fix of the arrival i.e.; we were cruising at 13;000 FT toward a 13;000-16;000 foot altitude window at MAJIC. It may have helped us if we were cleared 'Descend via the IVANE2 RNAV Arrival; North Transition. Maintain 13;000 until MAJIC.'


Synopsis: A319 flight crew reported an altitude deviation on IVANE2 arrival to CLT.