Medium large transport has near midair collision as breaks through overcast at 800 ft.

Attributes
ACN	225391
Time
Date	199210
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : ewr
State Reference	NJ
Altitude	agl bound lower : 800 agl bound upper : 800
Environment
Flight Conditions	Marginal
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : ewr
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Navigation In Use	Other
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Recip Eng
Flight Phase	landing : go around
Route In Use	approach : visual
Flight Plan	VFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : flight engineer
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 250 flight time total : 12800 flight time type : 3300
ASRS Report	225391
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : required legal separation non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : took evasive action other
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Miss Distance	horizontal : 500 vertical : 0
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

Reported WX at ewr overcast with 5 mi haze. In-flight visibility 2 mi with obscured ceiling at approximately 800-900 ft AGL. We were handed off to the local controller on an 8 (approximately) mi final following a commuter mdt by 3 mi at 170 KIAS. After checking in, we heard tower instructing a twin small transport to go around and execute a left turn for a visual landing on runway 29. Since we were still IMC, we began to discuss the possibilities for a potential conflict. Twin small transport acknowledged the left turn and (mistakenly) visual clearance to runway 19. Being familiar with the newark airport, we quickly surmised that the traffic was definitely unfamiliar with this heightened our situational awareness. Unfortunately, we wrongly assumed that the traffic was more of a potential conflict to the mdt ahead of us. I was hand flying the aircraft on the approach and first officer was monitoring and searching for traffic. Tower advised small transport of mdt traffic on final to runway 22L and apparently small transport thought he was to follow mdt to 22L. As we broke out of the overcast, the first officer called traffic at 9 O'clock and closing. Before evasive action could be taken, tower ordered us to go around. Fortunately, small transport saw us and executed an evasive right turn. Unfortunately, he turned out on the final approach course and forced an airplane behind us to also go around. The tower controller later stated to me that the small transport could not perform the published missed approach due to traffic departing runway 22R. Tower should not have tried to salvage situation in MVFR. Small transport pilot should not have tried to salvage situation in MVFR. Missed approach procedures are established for a reason and potential for traffic conflicts are included. Tower should have informed us of traffic instead of leaving it up to us to figure out. The fact that we were never warned of a potential conflict helped us to assume that we would not have one. This was too close and unforgivable at a major airport.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MLG HAS NMAC AS BREAKS THROUGH OVCST AT 800 FT.

Narrative: RPTED WX AT EWR OVCST WITH 5 MI HAZE. INFLT VISIBILITY 2 MI WITH OBSCURED CEILING AT APPROX 800-900 FT AGL. WE WERE HANDED OFF TO THE LCL CTLR ON AN 8 (APPROX) MI FINAL FOLLOWING A COMMUTER MDT BY 3 MI AT 170 KIAS. AFTER CHKING IN, WE HEARD TWR INSTRUCTING A TWIN SMT TO GAR AND EXECUTE A L TURN FOR A VISUAL LNDG ON RWY 29. SINCE WE WERE STILL IMC, WE BEGAN TO DISCUSS THE POSSIBILITIES FOR A POTENTIAL CONFLICT. TWIN SMT ACKNOWLEDGED THE L TURN AND (MISTAKENLY) VISUAL CLRNC TO RWY 19. BEING FAMILIAR WITH THE NEWARK ARPT, WE QUICKLY SURMISED THAT THE TFC WAS DEFINITELY UNFAMILIAR WITH THIS HEIGHTENED OUR SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. UNFORTUNATELY, WE WRONGLY ASSUMED THAT THE TFC WAS MORE OF A POTENTIAL CONFLICT TO THE MDT AHEAD OF US. I WAS HAND FLYING THE ACFT ON THE APCH AND FO WAS MONITORING AND SEARCHING FOR TFC. TWR ADVISED SMT OF MDT TFC ON FINAL TO RWY 22L AND APPARENTLY SMT THOUGHT HE WAS TO FOLLOW MDT TO 22L. AS WE BROKE OUT OF THE OVCST, THE FO CALLED TFC AT 9 O'CLOCK AND CLOSING. BEFORE EVASIVE ACTION COULD BE TAKEN, TWR ORDERED US TO GAR. FORTUNATELY, SMT SAW US AND EXECUTED AN EVASIVE R TURN. UNFORTUNATELY, HE TURNED OUT ON THE FINAL APCH COURSE AND FORCED AN AIRPLANE BEHIND US TO ALSO GAR. THE TWR CTLR LATER STATED TO ME THAT THE SMT COULD NOT PERFORM THE PUBLISHED MISSED APCH DUE TO TFC DEPARTING RWY 22R. TWR SHOULD NOT HAVE TRIED TO SALVAGE SITUATION IN MVFR. SMT PLT SHOULD NOT HAVE TRIED TO SALVAGE SITUATION IN MVFR. MISSED APCH PROCS ARE ESTABLISHED FOR A REASON AND POTENTIAL FOR TFC CONFLICTS ARE INCLUDED. TWR SHOULD HAVE INFORMED US OF TFC INSTEAD OF LEAVING IT UP TO US TO FIGURE OUT. THE FACT THAT WE WERE NEVER WARNED OF A POTENTIAL CONFLICT HELPED US TO ASSUME THAT WE WOULD NOT HAVE ONE. THIS WAS TOO CLOSE AND UNFORGIVABLE AT A MAJOR ARPT.

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.