Narrative:

I was conducting an annual 121 line check on the captain from the observer's seat. During the initial descent; the captain and first officer were discussing how akron canton approach control always leaves them high and 'slam dunks' them for the approach. When given a descent from 7;000 to 3;000 (ILS 1); the required rate of descent was about 2;500 ft per minute to get down to the glide slope intercept altitude at the final approach fix. They were also slowed to 170 KTS by ATC (I'm assuming for traffic on the ILS 5); further hindering their descent to capture the glide slope (at this point we were cleared for the ILS 1). The crew was then told to reduce to final approach speed. The captain was able to comply with ATC's instructions; as well as capture the glide slope prior to the final approach fix. The crew was then switched to tower. Upon checking in with the tower; ATC again told our flight to reduce to final approach speed. The captain had already been at approach speed; and was now descending through 1;000 ft afe; on glide slope and on a stabilized approach. The crew advised ATC they were at their final approach speed. ATC instructed our flight to perform 'south' turns. The crew advised they were unable. ATC then instructed them to execute a right 360 and re-join the localizer. The crew advised they were unable and executed a missed approach. The flight later landed without incident. The cause was ATC's poor planning. I'm not sure why ATC has to leave us high when approaching from the south; but this is obviously a common problem here. Also; poor traffic separation to intersecting runways. This was one of the worst ATC experiences I've seen in a long time.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An Air Carrier on approach to CAK Runway 1 exectuted a go around when unable to comply with ATC's requests to maneuver and reduce speed. The reporter noted poor planning/separation on the part of ATC with regard to intersecting runway traffic.

Narrative: I was conducting an annual 121 Line Check on the Captain from the observer's seat. During the initial descent; the Captain and First Officer were discussing how Akron Canton Approach Control always leaves them high and 'Slam Dunks' them for the approach. When given a descent from 7;000 to 3;000 (ILS 1); the required rate of descent was about 2;500 FT per minute to get down to the glide slope intercept altitude at the final approach fix. They were also slowed to 170 KTS by ATC (I'm assuming for traffic on the ILS 5); further hindering their descent to capture the glide slope (at this point we were cleared for the ILS 1). The crew was then told to reduce to final approach speed. The Captain was able to comply with ATC's instructions; as well as capture the glide slope prior to the final approach fix. The crew was then switched to Tower. Upon checking in with the Tower; ATC again told our flight to reduce to final approach speed. The Captain had already been at approach speed; and was now descending through 1;000 FT AFE; on glide slope and on a stabilized approach. The crew advised ATC they were at their final approach speed. ATC instructed our flight to perform 'S' turns. The crew advised they were unable. ATC then instructed them to execute a right 360 and re-join the localizer. The crew advised they were unable and executed a missed approach. The flight later landed without incident. The cause was ATC's poor planning. I'm not sure why ATC has to leave us high when approaching from the south; but this is obviously a common problem here. Also; poor traffic separation to intersecting runways. This was one of the worst ATC experiences I've seen in a long time.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.