Narrative:

I was working at local control when aircraft X was shipped to me from sct. The aircraft was on about a ten-mile final and had been cleared for the visual approach to rwy 8 at bur. Upon the aircraft checking in; I cleared him to land. Aircraft X was the only IFR aircraft on my frequency and the only other aircraft in the class C airspace at the time was a police helicopter who was three miles south of the airport and not a factor for aircraft X. When aircraft X was about a mile (maybe slightly less) from touching down; the pilot informed me that he was too high and was executing a go-around. I have previously filed a report about how ridiculously unsafe the situation is at bur for missed approaches. The procedure in years past was to assign IFR aircraft the SID heading and altitude regardless of whether the aircraft was on an instrument approach or a visual approach; effectively turning the aircraft into a 'departure' in order to be handed off to tracon and re-sequenced. As of about a year ago; that procedure has been deemed illegal and all aircraft on an instrument approach must be instructed to execute the published missed approach (even though that puts them into direct conflict with any other aircraft on approach; which was the basis of my prior report). Since there is no missed approach procedure for a visual approach; however; there is no procedure at bur for an IFR aircraft on a visual approach who executes a missed approach. We have been instructed by management that if an IFR aircraft on a visual approach goes around; we must keep that aircraft in the pattern since there is no published missed approach for them to perform and we cannot issue them vectors nor a climb like in years past. With this restriction; the only option I had was to have aircraft X enter a right downwind for runway 8 (high terrain northeast of the field prohibits a left downwind for runway 8 or 15). We coordinated the go-around with sct and I instructed aircraft X to enter a right downwind for rwy 8 and I cleared him to land (fortunately there was nobody on final behind aircraft X at the time). Aircraft X continued his right downwind. As instructed previously by management; I did not give him any altitude restrictions nor make any adjustments to his pattern. The aircraft continued west toward vny's class D airspace (about 6 miles west of bur). At that point I asked the pilot if he was able to start his base turn; as he was approaching vny's airspace. Coordination had been performed with vny so they were aware of his presence; but I wanted to avoid the airspace as there was a VFR cessna about a mile east of vny at around 1;300 and I wanted to be sure that aircraft X started his base turn early enough so as to avoid that traffic. The pilot replied in the affirmative; and I observed on the radar that the aircraft was starting a northbound turn. However; a few sweeps later; I noticed that the aircraft had turned back westbound. He continued west for a few sweeps and then turned north for his base leg. At that point sct (valley sector) called on the shout line and asked what we were doing with aircraft X because they had released an IFR aircraft (aircraft Y) off of vny rwy 16R. I informed them that the aircraft X was turning inbound and they told me to tell him to maintain at or above 3;100 so that he would be out of the way of the departure. At that time I saw the departure coming off vny on the radar just as aircraft X was turning right towards it (about a mile south of the departure end of rwy 16R). I called the traffic to aircraft X. The pilot of aircraft X never got the other aircraft in sight; as they were converging as soon as aircraft Y lifted off from vny. The aircraft never lost vertical separation; but that was only from luck. There was no positive separation at all.the missed approach situation at bur is without a doubt the most dangerous thing I have encountered in my entire career. It completely blows my mind that in an IMC situation; we are expected to tell an aircraft who goes missed to execute the published missed approach even though we know it will place them in conflict with the aircraft behind them; and we are then supposed to ship the aircraft to sct and let them handle it since we are no longer allowed to vector IFR aircraft from bur tower. Since there is no published missed approach for a visual approach; management has instructed us that we must keep all go-a-rounds on a visual approach in the pattern. This specific situation is an example of how bad of an idea that is. We have mountains to the east; a class D airport six miles to the west; and another class D airport five miles to the north. We do not have options in regards to keeping an IFR aircraft in the pattern; especially when he's going 130 knots or more. There is no way to provide positive control of the situation; and there is also no way to miss the airspace of the airports adjacent and what happens when the aircraft who goes around on a visual approach is number one in a line of four? I've been instructed that I must keep the aircraft in my pattern; so apparently I must work him until he's fifteen miles out of my airspace in order to get him back into line. My recommendation is the same as the last time I filed an report. Bur needs to be authorized to issue vectors to IFR aircraft on a missed approach. If the aircraft today had been issued the SID heading and altitude like we used to do for years and years; then he would simply have been vectored out and resequenced. As it is; I was forced to put this plane into a dangerous situation. I understand that sct has been trying to work on getting dvas in order to allow bur to issue SID vectors to aircraft on a missed approach. That was some follow-up information I received seven months ago. Something needs to be done; and it needs to be done now. This is an incredibly dangerous situation and it is just a matter of time until there is an incident because of it.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: BUR Tower Controller reports of a visual approach aircraft that goes missed approach due to altitude. Aircraft then gets close to another aircraft departing an airport close by.

Narrative: I was working at Local Control when Aircraft X was shipped to me from SCT. The aircraft was on about a ten-mile final and had been cleared for the visual approach to Rwy 8 at BUR. Upon the aircraft checking in; I cleared him to land. Aircraft X was the only IFR aircraft on my frequency and the only other aircraft in the Class C airspace at the time was a police helicopter who was three miles south of the airport and not a factor for Aircraft X. When Aircraft X was about a mile (maybe slightly less) from touching down; the pilot informed me that he was too high and was executing a go-around. I have previously filed a report about how ridiculously unsafe the situation is at BUR for missed approaches. The procedure in years past was to assign IFR aircraft the SID heading and altitude regardless of whether the aircraft was on an instrument approach or a visual approach; effectively turning the aircraft into a 'departure' in order to be handed off to Tracon and re-sequenced. As of about a year ago; that procedure has been deemed illegal and all aircraft on an instrument approach must be instructed to execute the published missed approach (even though that puts them into direct conflict with any other aircraft on approach; which was the basis of my prior report). Since there is no missed approach procedure for a visual approach; however; there is no procedure at BUR for an IFR aircraft on a visual approach who executes a missed approach. We have been instructed by management that if an IFR aircraft on a visual approach goes around; we must keep that aircraft in the pattern since there is no published missed approach for them to perform and we cannot issue them vectors nor a climb like in years past. With this restriction; the only option I had was to have Aircraft X enter a right downwind for Runway 8 (high terrain northeast of the field prohibits a left downwind for Runway 8 or 15). We coordinated the go-around with SCT and I instructed Aircraft X to enter a right downwind for Rwy 8 and I cleared him to land (fortunately there was nobody on final behind Aircraft X at the time). Aircraft X continued his right downwind. As instructed previously by management; I did not give him any altitude restrictions nor make any adjustments to his pattern. The aircraft continued west toward VNY's Class D airspace (about 6 miles west of BUR). At that point I asked the pilot if he was able to start his base turn; as he was approaching VNY's airspace. Coordination had been performed with VNY so they were aware of his presence; but I wanted to avoid the airspace as there was a VFR Cessna about a mile east of VNY at around 1;300 and I wanted to be sure that Aircraft X started his base turn early enough so as to avoid that traffic. The pilot replied in the affirmative; and I observed on the radar that the aircraft was starting a northbound turn. However; a few sweeps later; I noticed that the aircraft had turned back westbound. He continued west for a few sweeps and then turned north for his base leg. At that point SCT (Valley sector) called on the shout line and asked what we were doing with Aircraft X because they had released an IFR aircraft (Aircraft Y) off of VNY Rwy 16R. I informed them that the Aircraft X was turning inbound and they told me to tell him to maintain at or above 3;100 so that he would be out of the way of the departure. At that time I saw the departure coming off VNY on the radar just as Aircraft X was turning right towards it (about a mile south of the departure end of Rwy 16R). I called the traffic to Aircraft X. The pilot of Aircraft X never got the other aircraft in sight; as they were converging as soon as Aircraft Y lifted off from VNY. The aircraft never lost vertical separation; but that was only from luck. There was no positive separation at all.The missed approach situation at BUR is without a doubt the most dangerous thing I have encountered in my entire career. It completely blows my mind that in an IMC situation; we are expected to tell an aircraft who goes missed to execute the published missed approach even though we know it will place them in conflict with the aircraft behind them; and we are then supposed to ship the aircraft to SCT and let them handle it since we are no longer allowed to vector IFR aircraft from BUR tower. Since there is no published missed approach for a visual approach; management has instructed us that we must keep all go-a-rounds on a visual approach in the pattern. This specific situation is an example of how bad of an idea that is. We have mountains to the east; a Class D airport six miles to the west; and another Class D airport five miles to the north. We do not have options in regards to keeping an IFR aircraft in the pattern; especially when he's going 130 knots or more. There is no way to provide positive control of the situation; and there is also no way to miss the airspace of the airports adjacent and what happens when the aircraft who goes around on a visual approach is number one in a line of four? I've been instructed that I must keep the aircraft in my pattern; so apparently I must work him until he's fifteen miles out of my airspace in order to get him back into line. My recommendation is the same as the last time I filed an report. BUR needs to be authorized to issue vectors to IFR aircraft on a missed approach. If the aircraft today had been issued the SID heading and altitude like we used to do for years and years; then he would simply have been vectored out and resequenced. As it is; I was forced to put this plane into a dangerous situation. I understand that SCT has been trying to work on getting DVAs in order to allow BUR to issue SID vectors to aircraft on a missed approach. That was some follow-up information I received seven months ago. Something needs to be done; and it needs to be done now. This is an incredibly dangerous situation and it is just a matter of time until there is an incident because of it.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.