Phl controller described a loss of separation event between aircraft landing both runway 27R and run...

Narrative:

Final vector position was split between me; north arrival (na); and south arrival (sa). I was working air carrier X and air carrier Y from the north; both on vectors to runway 27R. Sa was working 2 aircraft; both being vectored to runway 35; the runways intersect. Sa and I did not coordinate sequencing to the airport. I mistakenly assumed sa was sequencing a slow piston aircraft to runway 35 number 1. I cleared air carrier X for a close in right downwind and instructed the pilot to make a short approach as they were number 1 for the airport. Sa had decided to make a CRJ2 number 1 for runway 35 and assumed I was going to make air carrier X number 2 to the airport. I had already switched air carrier X to the tower; and sa realized that our sequence was not going to work and cancelled the approach clearance for his CRJ2 and pulled that aircraft out of the situation. We both realized that situation was happening as air carrier X was not making as short an approach as I had assumed. I hadn't noticed that air carrier Y had closed up the gap between air carrier X and air carrier Y as I was watching the other situation and was relying on the crda to sequence air carrier Y behind the runway 35 arrival and was assuming air carrier X would make the short approach and there would have been plenty of space between air carrier X and air carrier Y. I noticed that I was losing separation between air carrier Y and air carrier X; so I cancelled air carrier X's approach clearance; climbed and turned the aircraft to the south; and ended up giving them a 360 and re-sequencing them. I usually don't try to 'jam' an aircraft in on a short approach unless I am sure it is what the pilot wants and will be able to do. This time I made a poor decision; and I lost my focus on the rest of the situation. In our facility; the SOP spells out that na sets the landing sequence when fv is not opened; but I just assumed that sa and I were on the same page. I recommend that even when the traffic is light; we make the effort to actually 'voice' the sequence to avoid all misunderstandings.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PHL Controller described a loss of separation event between aircraft landing both Runway 27R and Runway 35. The confused coordination and assumptions between the two controllers involved were listed as causal factors.

Narrative: Final Vector position was split between me; North Arrival (NA); and South Arrival (SA). I was working Air Carrier X and Air Carrier Y from the North; both on vectors to Runway 27R. SA was working 2 aircraft; both being vectored to Runway 35; the runways intersect. SA and I did not coordinate sequencing to the airport. I mistakenly assumed SA was sequencing a slow piston aircraft to Runway 35 number 1. I cleared Air Carrier X for a close in right downwind and instructed the pilot to make a short approach as they were number 1 for the airport. SA had decided to make a CRJ2 number 1 for Runway 35 and assumed I was going to make Air Carrier X number 2 to the airport. I had already switched Air Carrier X to the tower; and SA realized that our sequence was not going to work and cancelled the approach clearance for his CRJ2 and pulled that aircraft out of the situation. We both realized that situation was happening as Air Carrier X was not making as short an approach as I had assumed. I hadn't noticed that Air Carrier Y had closed up the gap between Air Carrier X and Air Carrier Y as I was watching the other situation and was relying on the CRDA to sequence Air Carrier Y behind the Runway 35 arrival and was assuming Air Carrier X would make the short approach and there would have been plenty of space between Air Carrier X and Air Carrier Y. I noticed that I was losing separation between Air Carrier Y and Air Carrier X; so I cancelled Air Carrier X's approach clearance; climbed and turned the aircraft to the South; and ended up giving them a 360 and re-sequencing them. I usually don't try to 'jam' an aircraft in on a short approach unless I am sure it is what the pilot wants and will be able to do. This time I made a poor decision; and I lost my focus on the rest of the situation. In our facility; the SOP spells out that NA sets the landing sequence when FV is not opened; but I just assumed that SA and I were on the same page. I recommend that even when the traffic is light; we make the effort to actually 'voice' the sequence to avoid all misunderstandings.

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.

Attributes
ACN	1014697
Time
Date	201206
Local Time Of Day	0001-0600
Place
Locale Reference	PHL.Airport
State Reference	PA
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Final Approach
Route In Use	Visual Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Dash 8-300
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Final Approach
Route In Use	Visual Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Approach
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Conflict Airborne Conflict Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Phl controller described a loss of separation event between aircraft landing both runway 27R and runway 35. The confused coordination and assumptions between the two controllers involved were listed as causal factors.