ATC supervisor reported a controller complied with the rules and cleared an aircraft for a visual ap...

Narrative:

I was not actually working during the event. I am the operation supervisor of the employee who had the event. I worked the day shift on the day of and the employee worked the night shift. The following day I became aware of the event and conducted a performance discussion with him. The employee and I reviewed the event and discussed factors that contributed to [it] and mitigations for the future. The employee was very engaged and receptive. The employee's normal performance is excellent. After reviewing the event the controller did not violate any rules and never lost separation. Aircraft X was cleared for a visual approach following traffic and switched to the tower. The aircraft was turning to final from the left base when he went through final and conflicted with an aircraft on a parallel runway. We discussed the dangers of using the same altitude on opposing bases but I felt that was not a contributing factor in this instance. The controller also issued a 30 degree intercept in a timely manner. It was the pilot's error of going through final that caused the event. I honestly believe that the 7110.65; 7-4-4; is responsible for placing these two aircraft in an unsafe proximity. I have had to have way too many performance discussions with employees about this very same scenario of vectoring aircraft to parallel runways during visual approaches. The procedure does not prevent aircraft from being vectored to the same point on the finals at the same altitude as long as a controller issues the visual approach to only one aircraft. It also only gives best practices and not direction on how to keep the planes separated. I see far too many close calls where planes don't collide from pure luck. The 7110.65; 7-4-4 needs to be changed to require aircraft to have standard separation until established inbound on the final approach course. Until then we will continue to have these very unsafe events at airports around the NAS.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ATC Supervisor reported a Controller complied with the rules and cleared an aircraft for a visual approach which subsequently conflicted with parallel runway traffic by flying through the final approach course.

Narrative: I was not actually working during the event. I am the Operation Supervisor of the employee who had the event. I worked the day shift on the day of and the employee worked the night shift. The following day I became aware of the event and conducted a performance discussion with him. The employee and I reviewed the event and discussed factors that contributed to [it] and mitigations for the future. The employee was very engaged and receptive. The employee's normal performance is excellent. After reviewing the event the controller did not violate any rules and never lost separation. Aircraft X was cleared for a visual approach following traffic and switched to the Tower. The aircraft was turning to final from the left base when he went through final and conflicted with an aircraft on a parallel runway. We discussed the dangers of using the same altitude on opposing bases but I felt that was not a contributing factor in this instance. The Controller also issued a 30 degree intercept in a timely manner. It was the pilot's error of going through final that caused the event. I honestly believe that the 7110.65; 7-4-4; is responsible for placing these two aircraft in an unsafe proximity. I have had to have way too many performance discussions with employees about this very same scenario of vectoring aircraft to parallel runways during visual approaches. The procedure does not prevent aircraft from being vectored to the same point on the finals at the same altitude as long as a Controller issues the visual approach to only one aircraft. It also only gives best practices and not direction on how to keep the planes separated. I see far too many close calls where planes don't collide from pure luck. The 7110.65; 7-4-4 needs to be changed to require aircraft to have standard separation until ESTABLISHED INBOUND on the final approach course. Until then we will continue to have these very unsafe events at airports around the NAS.

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.

Attributes
ACN	1756520
Time
Date	202008
Local Time Of Day	1801-2400
Place
Locale Reference	ZZZ.TRACON
State Reference	US
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Medium Transport Low Wing 2 Turbojet Eng
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	Final Approach
Route In Use	Visual Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Final Approach
Route In Use	Vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Supervisor / CIC
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Experience	Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 6
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Conflict Airborne Conflict Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Track / Heading All Types

ATC supervisor reported a controller complied with the rules and cleared an aircraft for a visual approach which subsequently conflicted with parallel runway traffic by flying through the final approach course.