37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1650494 |
Time | |
Date | 201905 |
Local Time Of Day | 0001-0600 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | PAE.Tower |
State Reference | WA |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Final Approach |
Route In Use | Visual Approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Make Model Name | Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | Final Approach |
Route In Use | None |
Flight Plan | VFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Instructor Local |
Qualification | Air Traffic Control Fully Certified |
Experience | Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 4.0 |
Person 2 | |
Function | Trainee Local |
Qualification | Air Traffic Control Developmental |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Conflict NMAC Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
Aircraft X was inbound IFR on a visual approach to runway 16R on a right base. Aircraft Y was on roughly a three mile final for runway 16R. Aircraft X entered pae class delta at high speed on a right base visual approach to runway 16R. Aircraft X was not in communication with pae until well within the class delta surface area and aircraft X heading and altitude put him in conflict with aircraft Y. Traffic was issued to both aircraft; aircraft X reported traffic in sight. However; after reporting traffic in sight aircraft X continued to fly directly toward aircraft Y within 200 feet of aircraft Y's altitude. The two aircraft appeared to merge on the radar screen; but out the window it was obvious that aircraft X was taking evasive action to avoid aircraft Y by descending below aircraft Y's altitude and continuing eastbound. Around the time the targets merged on the radar screen LC1 instructed aircraft Y to climb to avoid conflict. LC1 judged that aircraft X was executing an RA and once aircraft X was clear of traffic LC1 instructed aircraft X to fly heading 360 and maintain 3;000 feet. Once aircraft X was stabilized and climbing to the north LC1 instructed aircraft X to contact seattle departure. I believe it was the late communication transfer of aircraft X from S46 on the visual approach and the lack of coordination from S46 that led to this conflict. Aircraft X's approach to runway 16R was very unexpected.it states in the pae/S46 LOA that S46 must transfer communication of jet aircraft eight miles out. Had S46 adhered to this requirement the conflict would have been avoided. Also; had S46 coordinated that they were going to bring aircraft X in on a tight right base visual approach to runway 16R; pae would have been able to prepare for it. The traffic that conflicted with aircraft X on final for runway 16R at pae was clearly depicted on the radar screen at the time of the event.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: PAE Tower controllers reported Approach Control gave them an aircraft on a base leg in conflict with straight in traffic which resulted in an NMAC.
Narrative: Aircraft X was inbound IFR on a visual approach to Runway 16R on a right base. Aircraft Y was on roughly a three mile final for Runway 16R. Aircraft X entered PAE Class Delta at high speed on a right base visual approach to Runway 16R. Aircraft X was not in communication with PAE until well within the Class Delta surface area and Aircraft X heading and altitude put him in conflict with Aircraft Y. Traffic was issued to both aircraft; Aircraft X reported traffic in sight. However; after reporting traffic in sight Aircraft X continued to fly directly toward Aircraft Y within 200 feet of Aircraft Y's altitude. The two aircraft appeared to merge on the radar screen; but out the window it was obvious that Aircraft X was taking evasive action to avoid Aircraft Y by descending below Aircraft Y's altitude and continuing eastbound. Around the time the targets merged on the radar screen LC1 instructed Aircraft Y to climb to avoid conflict. LC1 judged that Aircraft X was executing an RA and once Aircraft X was clear of traffic LC1 instructed Aircraft X to fly heading 360 and maintain 3;000 feet. Once Aircraft X was stabilized and climbing to the north LC1 instructed Aircraft X to contact Seattle Departure. I believe it was the late communication transfer of Aircraft X from S46 on the visual approach and the lack of coordination from S46 that led to this conflict. Aircraft X's approach to Runway 16R was very unexpected.It states in the PAE/S46 LOA that S46 must transfer communication of jet aircraft eight miles out. Had S46 adhered to this requirement the conflict would have been avoided. Also; had S46 coordinated that they were going to bring Aircraft X in on a tight right base visual approach to Runway 16R; PAE would have been able to prepare for it. The traffic that conflicted with Aircraft X on final for Runway 16R at PAE was clearly depicted on the radar screen at the time of the event.
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.