Narrative:

Scheduled air carrier flight clt-ewr. WX in the ny area requires extensive holding en route. Consequently, most of our planned holding fuel was used leaving only destination, alternate, and reserve fuel. Reaching the terminal area, we were vectored for an ILS 22L approach to ewr. Windshear alerts were in effect with a landing crosswind component of approximately 25 KTS on a wet runway. At approximately 1300 ft AGL on the approach in IMC, the tower controller requested us to sidestep to 22R. At 1000 ft AGL, with the 22L runway finally in view, we declined the request. Tower then sent us around since there was an aircraft holding for takeoff on runway 22L (that aircraft was not initially seen by us). The resultant missed approach required that we decide whether to proceed directly to our alternate (alb) or to try another approach. The alternate's WX was marginally better than ewr. However, the ewr WX was a 'known' factor and ny approach agreed to move us up in the approach sequence to ewr. Therefore, we chose to try another approach at ewr. The second approach was completed successfully. Recapping to conditions at the time of the sidestep request: 1) WX above mins but not exactly VFR. 2) night time. 3) light rain falling. 4) windshear alert. 5) wet runway. 6) landing crosswind component near limits of aircraft. 7) no operating VASI lights on 22R. Combined, these factors made a sidestep approach dangerous and unwise. The tower controller should be able to recognize the difficulty of a sidestep in such conditions and not rely on the flight crew to perform such a maneuver to help expedite his departures -- even when a sidestep min is published as it was for this approach.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MISSED APCH COMMANDED BY TWR CTLR TO ACR MLG TO AVOID LNDG ON OCCUPIED RWY.

Narrative: SCHEDULED ACR FLT CLT-EWR. WX IN THE NY AREA REQUIRES EXTENSIVE HOLDING ENRTE. CONSEQUENTLY, MOST OF OUR PLANNED HOLDING FUEL WAS USED LEAVING ONLY DEST, ALTERNATE, AND RESERVE FUEL. REACHING THE TERMINAL AREA, WE WERE VECTORED FOR AN ILS 22L APCH TO EWR. WINDSHEAR ALERTS WERE IN EFFECT WITH A LNDG XWIND COMPONENT OF APPROX 25 KTS ON A WET RWY. AT APPROX 1300 FT AGL ON THE APCH IN IMC, THE TWR CTLR REQUESTED US TO SIDESTEP TO 22R. AT 1000 FT AGL, WITH THE 22L RWY FINALLY IN VIEW, WE DECLINED THE REQUEST. TWR THEN SENT US AROUND SINCE THERE WAS AN ACFT HOLDING FOR TKOF ON RWY 22L (THAT ACFT WAS NOT INITIALLY SEEN BY US). THE RESULTANT MISSED APCH REQUIRED THAT WE DECIDE WHETHER TO PROCEED DIRECTLY TO OUR ALTERNATE (ALB) OR TO TRY ANOTHER APCH. THE ALTERNATE'S WX WAS MARGINALLY BETTER THAN EWR. HOWEVER, THE EWR WX WAS A 'KNOWN' FACTOR AND NY APCH AGREED TO MOVE US UP IN THE APCH SEQUENCE TO EWR. THEREFORE, WE CHOSE TO TRY ANOTHER APCH AT EWR. THE SECOND APCH WAS COMPLETED SUCCESSFULLY. RECAPPING TO CONDITIONS AT THE TIME OF THE SIDESTEP REQUEST: 1) WX ABOVE MINS BUT NOT EXACTLY VFR. 2) NIGHT TIME. 3) LIGHT RAIN FALLING. 4) WINDSHEAR ALERT. 5) WET RWY. 6) LNDG XWIND COMPONENT NEAR LIMITS OF ACFT. 7) NO OPERATING VASI LIGHTS ON 22R. COMBINED, THESE FACTORS MADE A SIDESTEP APCH DANGEROUS AND UNWISE. THE TWR CTLR SHOULD BE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE THE DIFFICULTY OF A SIDESTEP IN SUCH CONDITIONS AND NOT RELY ON THE FLC TO PERFORM SUCH A MANEUVER TO HELP EXPEDITE HIS DEPS -- EVEN WHEN A SIDESTEP MIN IS PUBLISHED AS IT WAS FOR THIS APCH.

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.