37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1335391 |
Time | |
Date | 201602 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | D01.TRACON |
State Reference | CO |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Medium Large Transport |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Final Approach |
Route In Use | Visual Approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Make Model Name | Medium Large Transport |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Final Approach |
Route In Use | Visual Approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Approach Instructor |
Qualification | Air Traffic Control Fully Certified |
Experience | Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 4 |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Speed All Types |
Narrative:
I requested not to train on final because I do not feel proficient or comfortable with the new management mandate to issue 170kts to every aircraft on final. It has dramatically increased our workload on final and added complexity to training. I was ordered to train on FR2 (final radar 2) 16L/17R. There was a very strong northwest wind which made blending aircraft particularly difficult because of wind speed variation at different altitudes. Of the first couple aircraft we had; aircraft X had no one in front of him and my trainee restricted him to 170. Neither of us expected the aircraft to drop so much ground speed. My trainee had no choice but to speed restrict aircraft Y immediately which slowed the descent and resulted in a go around. There were two more nearly identical situations where I told my trainee not to speed restrict the first aircraft to avoid another go around; despite the fact that he made a concerted effort to push aircraft down so that matching speeds would be easier. Pushing aircraft down also put us closer to the 16R final; adding complexity and compromising safety. During our training session there were 6 more times I had to intercede for improper speed control and to compensate for the mandated speed restriction. This feels like a contradiction to how I've been trained and how I've been taught to train. There's currently a recurrent training class being taught in our building that is emphasizing the 7110.65 in relation to speed control. Because of this; I am confused as to my priorities when issuing speeds to aircraft. Remove the 170kt mandate or provide a provision that allows controllers to use their better judgment for operational priority or when it compromises safety. Address improper use of speed control on an individual basis.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: D01 Controller reported of a mandate that has the controllers slowing every aircraft to 170 knots on final. Controller reported they did not like this and wanted the mandate changed.
Narrative: I requested not to train on final because I do not feel proficient or comfortable with the new management mandate to issue 170kts to every aircraft on final. It has dramatically increased our workload on final and added complexity to training. I was ordered to train on FR2 (Final Radar 2) 16L/17R. There was a very strong NW wind which made blending aircraft particularly difficult because of wind speed variation at different altitudes. Of the first couple aircraft we had; Aircraft X had no one in front of him and my trainee restricted him to 170. Neither of us expected the aircraft to drop so much ground speed. My trainee had no choice but to speed restrict Aircraft Y immediately which slowed the descent and resulted in a go around. There were two more nearly identical situations where I told my trainee not to speed restrict the first aircraft to avoid another go around; despite the fact that he made a concerted effort to push aircraft down so that matching speeds would be easier. Pushing aircraft down also put us closer to the 16R final; adding complexity and compromising safety. During our training session there were 6 more times I had to intercede for improper speed control and to compensate for the mandated speed restriction. This feels like a contradiction to how I've been trained and how I've been taught to train. There's currently a recurrent training class being taught in our building that is emphasizing the 7110.65 in relation to speed control. Because of this; I am confused as to my priorities when issuing speeds to aircraft. Remove the 170kt mandate or provide a provision that allows controllers to use their better judgment for operational priority or when it compromises safety. Address improper use of speed control on an individual basis.
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.