 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Tucson tower controller reported an unsafe opposite direction operation resulting in an airborne conflict.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1608317 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201901 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | TUS.Airport |
| State Reference | AZ |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Make Model Name | Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer |
| Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Other / Unknown |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Conflict Airborne Conflict Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
I was off position but in the tower cab and I noticed an unsafe opposite direction situation occur with multiple arrivals to our crossing runway.one aircraft; [aircraft X]; was brought in for an approach to runway 21. At the same time; two aircraft were brought in for a runway 03 approach [aircraft Y and aircraft Z]. Neither aircraft to runway 03 were apreq [approval request] with the tower which is in violation of the locally coordinated procedures at the time. The second aircraft inbound to runway 03; aircraft Y; was also less than a mile away from the first aircraft [aircraft X] to runway 03; and did not have the first aircraft in sight. When the aircraft to runway 21 touched down; both arrivals to runway 03 were well inside our local cutoffs for opposite direction operations. There was no contingency plan put in place by approach control if the runway 21 arrival went around.operations to our crosswind runway should be coordinated by the approach control before aircraft are brought in for the approach.opposite direction operations need to be better defined in the LOA.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Tucson Tower Controller reported an unsafe opposite direction operation resulting in an airborne conflict.
Narrative: I was off position but in the Tower cab and I noticed an unsafe opposite direction situation occur with multiple arrivals to our crossing runway.One aircraft; [Aircraft X]; was brought in for an approach to RWY 21. At the same time; two aircraft were brought in for a RWY 03 approach [Aircraft Y and Aircraft Z]. Neither aircraft to RWY 03 were APREQ [Approval Request] with the Tower which is in violation of the locally coordinated procedures at the time. The second aircraft inbound to RWY 03; Aircraft Y; was also less than a mile away from the first aircraft [Aircraft X] to RWY 03; and did not have the first aircraft in sight. When the aircraft to RWY 21 touched down; both arrivals to RWY 03 were well inside our local cutoffs for opposite direction operations. There was no contingency plan put in place by Approach Control if the RWY 21 arrival went around.Operations to our crosswind runway should be coordinated by the Approach Control before aircraft are brought in for the approach.Opposite direction operations need to be better defined in the LOA.
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.