Narrative:

Initial contact with toncontin approach 45 NM north of talag. Was told we were number 3 for approach and told to slow to 250 KTS and given an expected approach time which was only 1 minute later than our ETA for talag. Student's first flight into tgu; so we slowed even further and reported talag at 10;000 feet maintaining 210 KTS. We were cleared for approach and told to report the runway in sight. We saw the field at approximately 10 NM out and were told to switch to tower frequency and report on downwind. Called tower on downwind while descending to 4;500 feet approaching our first visual 'landmark' on the approach; the reservoir and 'dolly's peaks.' tower then suddenly asked if we had the traffic in sight at 12 o'clock. This was totally unexpected since only 1 cat. C/D aircraft is supposed to be on approach at one time. We thought that the preceding aircraft must be on short final at the time they cleared us for the approach. I had been busy monitoring the student's progress and pointing out landmarks; but looking for the traffic; we now saw an airliner 700 feet-800 feet (estimated) below us and slightly in front. I told the tower we were much too close to the traffic and were breaking off the approach. Tower then asked if we could do a left 360 and re-enter downwind. We agreed and made a left turn heading north over the runway to stay clear of the military area on the east side of the field. At the north end of the runway we started to widen our turn a bit in preparation for a left turn back on downwind. At this time we received a TCAS TA and saw another aircraft (regional jet) over the city descending towards downwind. At the same time tower calls the new traffic and asks if we can follow him on downwind. Incredibly; we are now 3 airliners in the air above the field with very limited possibilities of maneuvering due to the high terrain in close proximity. I refused the tower's request and informed that we were returning to the FAF for a new approach. We re-configured and did another normal visual approach. I did let the tower know we were very unhappy with the situation and the way the traffic was handled. The captain of the leading airliner did the same in no uncertain terms. The company pages for tgu and the tgu field report clearly state that simultaneous operations with cat. C and D aircraft are restricted by ATC. This was a potentially very dangerous situation in a non-radar environment as maneuvering around the airport is severely restricted due to terrain. ATC clearly lost control of the traffic situation. Language was not a factor. The country manager for honduras and nicaragua assured us she would follow up with local authorities. We were also told that there had been other ATC related incidents lately. Request traffic advisories and position of other inbound aircraft prior to commencing the approach. Compliance by ATC regarding operations of cat. C and D aircraft at this airport.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air carrier Captain reports discovering during a visual approach to MHTG that there is another air carrier just ahead. A go-around to the traffic pattern is initiated before a third airliner on approach is discovered and the published missed approach is flown.

Narrative: Initial contact with Toncontin Approach 45 NM north of TALAG. Was told we were Number 3 for approach and told to slow to 250 KTS and given an expected approach time which was only 1 minute later than our ETA for TALAG. Student's first flight into TGU; so we slowed even further and reported TALAG at 10;000 feet maintaining 210 KTS. We were cleared for approach and told to report the runway in sight. We saw the field at approximately 10 NM out and were told to switch to Tower frequency and report on downwind. Called Tower on downwind while descending to 4;500 feet approaching our first visual 'landmark' on the approach; the reservoir and 'dolly's peaks.' Tower then suddenly asked if we had the traffic in sight at 12 o'clock. This was totally unexpected since only 1 Cat. C/D aircraft is supposed to be on approach at one time. We thought that the preceding aircraft must be on short final at the time they cleared us for the approach. I had been busy monitoring the Student's progress and pointing out landmarks; but looking for the traffic; we now saw an airliner 700 feet-800 feet (estimated) below us and slightly in front. I told the Tower we were much too close to the traffic and were breaking off the approach. Tower then asked if we could do a left 360 and re-enter downwind. We agreed and made a left turn heading north over the runway to stay clear of the military area on the east side of the field. At the north end of the runway we started to widen our turn a bit in preparation for a left turn back on downwind. At this time we received a TCAS TA and saw another aircraft (regional jet) over the city descending towards downwind. At the same time Tower calls the new traffic and asks if we can follow him on downwind. Incredibly; we are now 3 airliners in the air above the field with very limited possibilities of maneuvering due to the high terrain in close proximity. I refused the Tower's request and informed that we were returning to the FAF for a new approach. We re-configured and did another normal visual approach. I did let the Tower know we were very unhappy with the situation and the way the traffic was handled. The Captain of the leading airliner did the same in no uncertain terms. The company pages for TGU and the TGU field report clearly state that simultaneous operations with Cat. C and D aircraft are restricted by ATC. This was a potentially very dangerous situation in a non-radar environment as maneuvering around the airport is severely restricted due to terrain. ATC clearly lost control of the traffic situation. Language was not a factor. The Country Manager for Honduras and Nicaragua assured us she would follow up with local authorities. We were also told that there had been other ATC related incidents lately. Request traffic advisories and position of other inbound aircraft prior to commencing the approach. Compliance by ATC regarding operations of Cat. C and D aircraft at this airport.

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.