Narrative:

I was in the north tower at ord. The conditions were IFR ceiling and visibility; plus freezing precipitation. Runway 9L hadn't been used all night and my first arrival was aircraft X. I asked them for a braking action PIREP and they gave me fair to good. I passed that to the next arrival; who passed a good braking action report to me. I only received good braking action reports for the next hour. After the first 2-3 arrivals; city [vehicle] asked for a runway inspection. I gave them 3 minutes between 2 arrivals and they finished. Then; the final picked up and I landed about 10 more aircraft. City [vehicle] came back for another inspection and I was instructed to pull out aircraft Y on about a 15 mile final. This was a critical runway inspection. After city [vehicle] finished; I asked why the second inspection. They stated that they needed mu [testing friction; mu is the co-efficient of friction] readings; which were all above 40. I landed 10 more aircraft; none with less than a good braking action. The freezing precipitation continued. I was instructed to send around all aircraft on my final due to another critical runway inspection. City [vehicle] was put back on runway 9L. Aircraft Z was short final; under the cloud deck when I sent it around. The next 3 aircraft were kept in line on approach until they were turned back along the arrival area and handed off to C90 (TRACON). All morning; pilots were reporting rain above 2;300 MSL and light rime ice below 2;300. So at least 2 of these go arounds were forced to re-enter icing conditions. All this because of two critical runway inspections; during times when aircraft were constantly giving me good braking action reports and mu readings were above 40. I was later told that they need to check the runway every 25 minutes. This put aircraft that were landing in good conditions back into known icing conditions. First; I think the procedure is over-restrictive. If a runway has good conditions; there is no need to force a go around to confirm that it is indeed good. But; if we are to continue this procedure; then better coordination needs to happen. We should have the finals dry up every 25 minutes to let the city vehicles do their inspections. This would require better communication between the tower supervisor; the tmcs at the tower and TRACON; and the city operations. This should also trigger a lower arrival rate to accommodate the runways closing for inspections. Go-arounds always put flight crews in a high workload situation; especially ones that are issued inside a 2 mile final. This was a waste of fuel; waste of time for passengers; and more importantly puts the aircraft at a greater risk than necessary.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ORD Tower Controller reported an unsafe situation where the Local Controller sent aircraft around to do a runway braking action check every 25 minutes.

Narrative: I was in the North tower at ORD. The conditions were IFR ceiling and visibility; plus freezing precipitation. Runway 9L hadn't been used all night and my first arrival was Aircraft X. I asked them for a braking action PIREP and they gave me Fair to Good. I passed that to the next arrival; who passed a Good braking action report to me. I only received Good braking action reports for the next hour. After the first 2-3 arrivals; City [Vehicle] asked for a runway inspection. I gave them 3 minutes between 2 arrivals and they finished. Then; the final picked up and I landed about 10 more aircraft. City [Vehicle] came back for another inspection and I was instructed to pull out Aircraft Y on about a 15 mile final. This was a critical runway inspection. After City [Vehicle] finished; I asked why the second inspection. They stated that they needed Mu [testing friction; mu is the co-efficient of friction] readings; which were all above 40. I landed 10 more aircraft; none with less than a Good braking action. The freezing precipitation continued. I was instructed to send around all aircraft on my final due to another critical runway inspection. City [Vehicle] was put back on Runway 9L. Aircraft Z was short final; under the cloud deck when I sent it around. The next 3 aircraft were kept in line on approach until they were turned back along the arrival area and handed off to C90 (TRACON). All morning; pilots were reporting rain above 2;300 MSL and Light Rime Ice below 2;300. So at least 2 of these go arounds were forced to re-enter icing conditions. All this because of two critical runway inspections; during times when aircraft were constantly giving me Good braking action reports and Mu readings were above 40. I was later told that they need to check the runway every 25 minutes. This put aircraft that were landing in good conditions back into known icing conditions. First; I think the procedure is over-restrictive. If a runway has good conditions; there is no need to force a go around to confirm that it is indeed good. But; if we are to continue this procedure; then better coordination needs to happen. We should have the finals dry up every 25 minutes to let the city vehicles do their inspections. This would require better communication between the tower supervisor; the TMCs at the tower and TRACON; and the city operations. This should also trigger a lower arrival rate to accommodate the runways closing for inspections. Go-arounds always put flight crews in a high workload situation; especially ones that are issued inside a 2 mile final. This was a waste of fuel; waste of time for passengers; and more importantly puts the aircraft at a greater risk than necessary.

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.