A bhm tower local controller did not slow an aircraft following a slower aircraft on final approach ...

Narrative:

My supervisor and I were conducting a skill check on the local control position that was currently combined with ground control. The field was VFR with ceilings around 2;700 feet and visibility 6 miles with haze. Aircraft X was established on the ILS and ground speed was showing 90 knots inside the final approach fix. Aircraft Y was established on the ILS and ground speed was showing 200 knots inside the initial approach fix.compression was observed and we began to discuss the possibility of a go around for aircraft Y. An airport vehicle began to call for request to transition between multiple points to help with a disabled aircraft on a taxiway and another aircraft was calling for taxi from a FBO that encroaches on the taxiway. I began to develop a plan for the vehicles and aircraft on the taxiways and my attention was taken away from the compression issue developing on final. The radar controller keyed the line to ask if I had slowed aircraft Y. I told radar I had not attempted to slow the aircraft at that time. I then keyed up to instruct aircraft Y to slow down and his response was blocked by another aircraft. I was then going to initiate the go around which would have resolved the issue; but the landline from radar was keyed up again to ask if I could provide visual separation with aircraft X and aircraft Y. I responded that I could not provide and at that time separation was lost due to the communication disruption.I initiated the go around to aircraft Y and the pilot would not execute the go around because he would have to declare minimum fuel. I immediately went to aircraft X and told the pilot to go around. A turn was issued to resolve any further loss of separation. After the incident my supervisor informed me that he had visual on aircraft Y prior to the loss of separation through his binoculars. Due to the distractions on the taxiway I was unable to quickly identify aircraft Y on final for my landline coordination with the radar controller.anytime there is a distraction on the local or ground control position have local and ground positions split.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A BHM Tower Local Controller did not slow an aircraft following a slower aircraft on final approach in a timely manner. The first aircraft had to be issued go-around instructions.

Narrative: My supervisor and I were conducting a skill check on the Local Control position that was currently combined with Ground Control. The field was VFR with ceilings around 2;700 feet and visibility 6 miles with Haze. Aircraft X was established on the ILS and ground speed was showing 90 knots inside the final approach fix. Aircraft Y was established on the ILS and ground speed was showing 200 knots inside the initial approach fix.Compression was observed and we began to discuss the possibility of a go around for aircraft Y. An airport vehicle began to call for request to transition between multiple points to help with a disabled aircraft on a taxiway and another aircraft was calling for taxi from a FBO that encroaches on the taxiway. I began to develop a plan for the vehicles and aircraft on the taxiways and my attention was taken away from the compression issue developing on final. The Radar Controller keyed the line to ask if I had slowed aircraft Y. I told Radar I had not attempted to slow the aircraft at that time. I then keyed up to instruct aircraft Y to slow down and his response was blocked by another aircraft. I was then going to initiate the go around which would have resolved the issue; but the landline from Radar was keyed up again to ask if I could provide visual separation with aircraft X and aircraft Y. I responded that I could not provide and at that time separation was lost due to the communication disruption.I initiated the go around to aircraft Y and the pilot would not execute the go around because he would have to declare minimum fuel. I immediately went to aircraft X and told the pilot to go around. A turn was issued to resolve any further loss of separation. After the incident my supervisor informed me that he had visual on aircraft Y prior to the loss of separation through his binoculars. Due to the distractions on the taxiway I was unable to quickly identify aircraft Y on final for my landline coordination with the Radar Controller.Anytime there is a distraction on the Local or Ground control position have Local and Ground positions split.

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.

Attributes
ACN	1329024
Time
Date	201601
Local Time Of Day	1801-2400
Place
Locale Reference	BHM.Airport
State Reference	AL
Environment
Flight Conditions	Marginal
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Small Transport
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	Final Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Military Trainer
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	Final Approach
Route In Use	Visual Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Local
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Experience	Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 3.0
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Conflict Airborne Conflict Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Speed All Types Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue

A bhm tower local controller did not slow an aircraft following a slower aircraft on final approach in a timely manner. The first aircraft had to be issued go-around instructions.