Pilot reporter complains about controller use of simultaneous lndgs on intersecting runways.

Attributes
ACN	163664
Time
Date	199011
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : agc
State Reference	PA
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight Phase	landing other
Route In Use	arrival other
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : private
ASRS Report	163664
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : local
Qualification	controller : non radar
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : unable
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

This operation is increasingly being used at many fields with intersecting runways. It is authorized by FAA order 7110.65 paragraph 3-123 which states the conditions for such operations. These include a facility order that describes which runways the simultaneous operations may be conducted on and that the runways must be dry and no tailwind. 7110.65 references 7210.3 for the distances that must be provided for different gauges for aircraft. The aircraft are designated to a group in appendix B of 7110.65. Most of the aircraft are designated to group 2 or above which requires a minimum of 3000' for the hold short of the intersection. The data published in my charts for these operations quotes numerous examples with less than 3000'. Furthermore, it seems most controllers are 'winging' these operations. I was cleared to land at agc on runway 28 hold short of runway 13. I had to stand on the brakes. Afterwards I realized the runway assignment included a slight tailwind and the available length was approximately 2400' where 7210.3 says minimum of 3000' for my aircraft (group 2). This operation at all airports should be reviewed. The controllers are making up the intersecting runway operations 'on the fly' and there seems to be no structure being followed as is called for in the 7110.65 and 7210.3.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT REPORTER COMPLAINS ABOUT CTLR USE OF SIMULTANEOUS LNDGS ON INTERSECTING RWYS.

Narrative: THIS OPERATION IS INCREASINGLY BEING USED AT MANY FIELDS WITH INTERSECTING RWYS. IT IS AUTHORIZED BY FAA ORDER 7110.65 PARAGRAPH 3-123 WHICH STATES THE CONDITIONS FOR SUCH OPS. THESE INCLUDE A FAC ORDER THAT DESCRIBES WHICH RWYS THE SIMULTANEOUS OPS MAY BE CONDUCTED ON AND THAT THE RWYS MUST BE DRY AND NO TAILWIND. 7110.65 REFERENCES 7210.3 FOR THE DISTANCES THAT MUST BE PROVIDED FOR DIFFERENT GAUGES FOR ACFT. THE ACFT ARE DESIGNATED TO A GROUP IN APPENDIX B OF 7110.65. MOST OF THE ACFT ARE DESIGNATED TO GROUP 2 OR ABOVE WHICH REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 3000' FOR THE HOLD SHORT OF THE INTXN. THE DATA PUBLISHED IN MY CHARTS FOR THESE OPS QUOTES NUMEROUS EXAMPLES WITH LESS THAN 3000'. FURTHERMORE, IT SEEMS MOST CTLRS ARE 'WINGING' THESE OPS. I WAS CLRED TO LAND AT AGC ON RWY 28 HOLD SHORT OF RWY 13. I HAD TO STAND ON THE BRAKES. AFTERWARDS I REALIZED THE RWY ASSIGNMENT INCLUDED A SLIGHT TAILWIND AND THE AVAILABLE LENGTH WAS APPROX 2400' WHERE 7210.3 SAYS MINIMUM OF 3000' FOR MY ACFT (GROUP 2). THIS OPERATION AT ALL ARPTS SHOULD BE REVIEWED. THE CTLRS ARE MAKING UP THE INTERSECTING RWY OPS 'ON THE FLY' AND THERE SEEMS TO BE NO STRUCTURE BEING FOLLOWED AS IS CALLED FOR IN THE 7110.65 AND 7210.3.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.