Narrative:

Flm was working local control 2 (LC2) with moderate to busy traffic. Aircraft Y was on final for runway 30 coordinated unrestricted. LC2 had a couple of aircraft in the pattern for runway 25R. LC2 had already sent aircraft X around once on runway 25R due to aircraft landing runway 30 unrestricted. Aircraft X was on final again for runway 25R with aircraft Y on final for runway 30. The intersection looked like it was going to be tight with aircraft X landing (with a full stop); but LC2 did not issue any instructions for a go around; and let aircraft X continue on final for the option (which I am assuming aircraft X was issued due to events that transpired). I was working ground control next to LC2 aware that this intersection was going to be tight. LC2 scans and asks out loud 'what do I have going on here?' at this point in time aircraft X was just touching down on runway 25R and aircraft Y was arriving over the pavement for runway 30 but not over the displaced threshold. I say to LC2 'well you have aircraft X on the runway' and he acknowledges. He keys up to talk to aircraft X (which he should have at this time told the aircraft to make a full stop) and asks aircraft X 'is this a touch and go?' to which the aircraft transmitted (I don't know what was said) and aircraft X started his roll for his touch and go. Aircraft X was upwind now; just east of runway 30 with aircraft Y over the threshold for runway 30. Once again; no additional instructions were given for an early turn to avoid runway 30 intersection. As aircraft X is flying past the intersection and aircraft Y is past the threshold for runway 30 the flm states 'that was a close one'; as I say something along the lines to reference that 'it was way too close and it didn't work'. I don't know if the flm really thought that aircraft X had separation with the unrestricted jet landing runway 30; or if he was trying to make light of the situation. Regardless; the proper separation was not applied. If a flm is going to work a position; they need to uphold the rules. I don't think that flms receive enough pro time here to work the same level of traffic that a cpc is expected to work. The volume of traffic was too much for the flm to handle safely. The flm either needs more pro time or remedial training to either work the level of traffic that a cpc can; or they need the training to understand the rules better if they actually thought they had the separation. There are numerous times also that the flm will be working clearance delivery combined with the controller in charge desk and pass IFR strips with incorrect marking or another mistake that ground has to fix. I do not think that flm's at this facility have sufficient training to work complex or busy traffic. I think that this is dangerous and another thing that is dangerous is that if they do wrong; like in this case; they do not have anyone to hold them accountable. This is unsafe.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LGB Ground Controller reported of a runway incursion attributed to the Front Line Manager not being proficient in working traffic.

Narrative: FLM was working Local Control 2 (LC2) with moderate to busy traffic. Aircraft Y was on final for Runway 30 coordinated unrestricted. LC2 had a couple of aircraft in the pattern for Runway 25R. LC2 had already sent Aircraft X around once on Runway 25R due to aircraft landing Runway 30 unrestricted. Aircraft X was on final again for Runway 25R with Aircraft Y on final for Runway 30. The intersection looked like it was going to be tight with Aircraft X landing (with a full stop); but LC2 did not issue any instructions for a go around; and let Aircraft X continue on final for the option (which I am assuming Aircraft X was issued due to events that transpired). I was working ground control next to LC2 aware that this intersection was going to be tight. LC2 scans and asks out loud 'what do I have going on here?' At this point in time Aircraft X was just touching down on Runway 25R and Aircraft Y was arriving over the pavement for Runway 30 but not over the displaced threshold. I say to LC2 'well you have Aircraft X on the runway' and he acknowledges. He keys up to talk to Aircraft X (which he should have at this time told the aircraft to make a full stop) and asks Aircraft X 'is this a touch and go?' to which the aircraft transmitted (I don't know what was said) and Aircraft X started his roll for his touch and go. Aircraft X was upwind now; just east of Runway 30 with Aircraft Y over the threshold for Runway 30. Once again; no additional instructions were given for an early turn to avoid Runway 30 intersection. As Aircraft X is flying past the intersection and Aircraft Y is past the threshold for Runway 30 the FLM states 'that was a close one'; as I say something along the lines to reference that 'it was way too close and it didn't work'. I don't know if the FLM really thought that Aircraft X had separation with the unrestricted jet landing Runway 30; or if he was trying to make light of the situation. Regardless; the proper separation was not applied. If a FLM is going to work a position; they need to uphold the rules. I don't think that FLMs receive enough pro time here to work the same level of traffic that a CPC is expected to work. The volume of traffic was too much for the FLM to handle safely. The FLM either needs more pro time or remedial training to either work the level of traffic that a CPC can; or they need the training to understand the rules better if they actually thought they had the separation. There are numerous times also that the FLM will be working Clearance Delivery combined with the Controller in Charge desk and pass IFR strips with incorrect marking or another mistake that Ground has to fix. I do not think that FLM's at this facility have sufficient training to work complex or busy traffic. I think that this is dangerous and another thing that is dangerous is that if they do wrong; like in this case; they do not have anyone to hold them accountable. This is unsafe.

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.