Narrative:

I was working approach control with 3 inbound aircraft all on vectors to the ILS 4 final approach course. The 2 aircraft involved were both small transport's. When the first small transport X was approaching the facility, the controller working the other sector suggested I solicit an ASR for the second small transport Y to an alternate runway. The pilot concurred and control and communications were given to the final controller. The final controller was instructed his aircraft was #2 for the airport behind the small transport X. The final controller acknowledged the sequence. At approximately 6 1/2 mi the first small transport X was cleared for the ILS approach and instructed to contact the tower controller. At 2 mi the final controller had not yet received a landing clearance, and instead of following procedure and instructing small transport Y to make a climbing right turn away from the airport, allowed the aircraft to continue to the airport. The local (tower) controller finally initiated a go around as small transport Y was nearing the runway threshold. Suggested solutions: 1) do not solicit ASR approachs in low IFR conditions when chances utilizing visibility sep are minimal at best. 2) follow procedures if aircraft should go around at 2 mi, send it around. 3) tower controller should not wait to send either aircraft around if an imminent situation is developing.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: APCH CTLR FAILED TO ISSUE A MISSED APCH TO ATX Y AT 2 MILES WHEN TWR LNDG CLRNC HAD NOT BEEN RECEIVED. OPERATIONAL DEVIATION.

Narrative: I WAS WORKING APCH CTL WITH 3 INBND ACFT ALL ON VECTORS TO THE ILS 4 FINAL APCH COURSE. THE 2 ACFT INVOLVED WERE BOTH SMT'S. WHEN THE FIRST SMT X WAS APCHING THE FAC, THE CTLR WORKING THE OTHER SECTOR SUGGESTED I SOLICIT AN ASR FOR THE SECOND SMT Y TO AN ALTERNATE RWY. THE PLT CONCURRED AND CTL AND COMS WERE GIVEN TO THE FINAL CTLR. THE FINAL CTLR WAS INSTRUCTED HIS ACFT WAS #2 FOR THE ARPT BEHIND THE SMT X. THE FINAL CTLR ACKNOWLEDGED THE SEQUENCE. AT APPROX 6 1/2 MI THE FIRST SMT X WAS CLRED FOR THE ILS APCH AND INSTRUCTED TO CONTACT THE TWR CTLR. AT 2 MI THE FINAL CTLR HAD NOT YET RECEIVED A LNDG CLRNC, AND INSTEAD OF FOLLOWING PROC AND INSTRUCTING SMT Y TO MAKE A CLBING RIGHT TURN AWAY FROM THE ARPT, ALLOWED THE ACFT TO CONTINUE TO THE ARPT. THE LCL (TWR) CTLR FINALLY INITIATED A GAR AS SMT Y WAS NEARING THE RWY THRESHOLD. SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS: 1) DO NOT SOLICIT ASR APCHS IN LOW IFR CONDITIONS WHEN CHANCES UTILIZING VIS SEP ARE MINIMAL AT BEST. 2) FOLLOW PROCS IF ACFT SHOULD GO AROUND AT 2 MI, SEND IT AROUND. 3) TWR CTLR SHOULD NOT WAIT TO SEND EITHER ACFT AROUND IF AN IMMINENT SITUATION IS DEVELOPING.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.