Narrative:

A tbm pilot called established on the ILS inbound for runway 28R; and we were on runway 10L/right configuration; opposite direction to the inbound ILS aircraft. I was on clearance delivery/flight data; when I noticed the local controller tell the aircraft to report his circle north to enter right downwind for runway 10L. The DA40 called for IFR departure from runway 10. Local controller crossed the DA40 on 10R and told him to hold short runway 10L. The local controller then called socal per our LOA for instrument release for the DA40 off runway 10L; socal responded saying release him at our discretion. By this time the tbm was approaching a 4 mile final at 210 KTS; and the local controller departed the DA40 on runway 10L directly towards the inbound unrestricted tbm. The DA40 pilot had a procedure right turn to a heading of 270; and came within 2 miles and 200 ft estimated of the inbound tbm but was almost immediately established on a right turn after departure. The inbound tbm requested runway 28R inside a 4 mile final and was granted a landing clearance on runway 28R inside a 3 mile final; therefore having opposite direction operations inside 10 NM to the departure/landing threshold of both aircraft. Earlier in the day; we were on runway 10 configuration; with our approach being the ILS runway 28R circle to land runway 10L; and socal approach had at least 3 aircraft come inbound on the ILS opposite direction to the previous aircraft landing aircraft on runway 10L ranging from 3/4 mile finals to a 7 mile final. This created an unsafe situation/possible deviation if the landing aircraft decided to go missed; and was clearly inside the 10 NM opposite direction approach point. This in my opinion with the new safety directive needs to be addressed; because the socal east sector controller clearly had no idea about the rule and created multiple possible unsafe situations that I witnessed.I recommend an established point on our approach to be written in an LOA in which the successive aircraft can't cross before the previous aircraft had landed & possibly mark it on our art approach. I also recommend management be informed of the proper opposite direction procedures and that they relay them to the staff more clearly. I also recommend better communication between socal and our facility when we are on runway 10L/right operations; as well as socal east/west sectors becoming more familiar with runway 10L/right operations to prevent further situations from happening.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Controller describes opposite direction approaches and takeoff's at MYF that are potentially dangerous and may violate directives that are currently in effect. Also an issue is the possibility of conflict between a Runway 10L missed approach and other aircraft on the 28R ILS with circle to land instructions.

Narrative: A TBM pilot called established on the ILS inbound for Runway 28R; and we were on Runway 10L/R configuration; opposite direction to the inbound ILS aircraft. I was on Clearance Delivery/Flight Data; when I noticed the Local Controller tell the aircraft to report his circle north to enter right downwind for Runway 10L. The DA40 called for IFR departure from Runway 10. Local Controller crossed the DA40 on 10R and told him to hold short Runway 10L. The Local Controller then called SOCAL per our LOA for instrument release for the DA40 off Runway 10L; SOCAL responded saying release him at our discretion. By this time the TBM was approaching a 4 mile final at 210 KTS; and the Local Controller departed the DA40 on Runway 10L directly towards the inbound unrestricted TBM. The DA40 pilot had a procedure right turn to a heading of 270; and came within 2 miles and 200 FT estimated of the inbound TBM but was almost immediately established on a right turn after departure. The inbound TBM requested Runway 28R inside a 4 mile final and was granted a landing clearance on Runway 28R inside a 3 mile final; therefore having opposite direction operations inside 10 NM to the departure/landing threshold of both aircraft. Earlier in the day; we were on Runway 10 configuration; with our approach being the ILS Runway 28R circle to land Runway 10L; and SOCAL approach had at least 3 aircraft come inbound on the ILS opposite direction to the previous aircraft landing aircraft on Runway 10L ranging from 3/4 mile finals to a 7 mile final. This created an unsafe situation/possible deviation if the landing aircraft decided to go missed; and was clearly inside the 10 NM opposite direction approach point. This in my opinion with the new safety directive needs to be addressed; because the SOCAL East sector Controller clearly had no idea about the rule and created multiple possible unsafe situations that I witnessed.I recommend an established point on our approach to be written in an LOA in which the successive aircraft can't cross before the previous aircraft had landed & possibly mark it on our ART approach. I also recommend management be informed of the proper opposite direction procedures and that they relay them to the staff more clearly. I also recommend better communication between SOCAL and our facility when we are on Runway 10L/R operations; as well as SOCAL East/West sectors becoming more familiar with Runway 10L/R operations to prevent further situations from happening.

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.