Narrative:

Air carrier X inbound on the jnc 060 degree radial descending to 13000 ft reported the airport in sight about 35 mi northeast of jnc VORTAC. Approach controller cleared air carrier X for a visual approach to runway 11 and instructed the pilot to 'call tower on the downwind.' I was working local and was not aware of the position of air carrier X or the approach controller's instructions to 'call tower on the downwind.' I knew the approach controller was talking to air carrier X traffic and expected the pilot to contact the tower over palisade as is usually instructed of IFR aircraft on a visual approach from the northeast, because the controller did not specify otherwise. Because the pilot did not report over palisade (had not yet reported) and I did not obtain visual contact with air carrier X I expected the pilot to be further away than palisade (12 mi east). I issued air carrier X traffic to an small transport Y whih departed runway 11. Small transport Y reported 20 DME northeast of jnc. I informed the approach controller of the VFR traffic to the northeast, he immediately instructed air carrier X to contact tower. Air carrier X reported on tower frequency approximately 4 mi ene on downwind. These 2 aircraft apparently passed each other within 5 mi of the gjt airport with adequate TA's. Gjtt is a non radar approach control facility. The tower is not equipped with a BRITE radar to assist us in separating, sequencing and determining aircraft's position. This situation could have resulted in a midair collision. Air carrier X should have been instructed to contact tower at least 10 mi from gjt airport to allow sufficient time for the local controller to issue TA's. (See ATC manual 7110.65 paragraph 2-14(a) and paragraph 2-17(a).) I'm sick and tired of working in an environment where some controllers find entertainment in transferring communications of arriving IFR aircraft to tower on downwind or on a base leg with other traffic in the air traffic area just to see how alert the local controller is.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR X HAD CONFLICT WITH VFR SMT. SEE AND AVOID.

Narrative: ACR X INBOUND ON THE JNC 060 DEG RADIAL DSNDING TO 13000 FT RPTED THE ARPT IN SIGHT ABOUT 35 MI NE OF JNC VORTAC. APCH CTLR CLRED ACR X FOR A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 11 AND INSTRUCTED THE PLT TO 'CALL TWR ON THE DOWNWIND.' I WAS WORKING LCL AND WAS NOT AWARE OF THE POS OF ACR X OR THE APCH CTLR'S INSTRUCTIONS TO 'CALL TWR ON THE DOWNWIND.' I KNEW THE APCH CTLR WAS TALKING TO ACR X TFC AND EXPECTED THE PLT TO CONTACT THE TWR OVER PALISADE AS IS USUALLY INSTRUCTED OF IFR ACFT ON A VISUAL APCH FROM THE NE, BECAUSE THE CTLR DID NOT SPECIFY OTHERWISE. BECAUSE THE PLT DID NOT RPT OVER PALISADE (HAD NOT YET RPTED) AND I DID NOT OBTAIN VISUAL CONTACT WITH ACR X I EXPECTED THE PLT TO BE FURTHER AWAY THAN PALISADE (12 MI E). I ISSUED ACR X TFC TO AN SMT Y WHIH DEPARTED RWY 11. SMT Y RPTED 20 DME NE OF JNC. I INFORMED THE APCH CTLR OF THE VFR TFC TO THE NE, HE IMMEDIATELY INSTRUCTED ACR X TO CONTACT TWR. ACR X RPTED ON TWR FREQ APPROX 4 MI ENE ON DOWNWIND. THESE 2 ACFT APPARENTLY PASSED EACH OTHER WITHIN 5 MI OF THE GJT ARPT WITH ADEQUATE TA'S. GJTT IS A NON RADAR APCH CTL FACILITY. THE TWR IS NOT EQUIPPED WITH A BRITE RADAR TO ASSIST US IN SEPARATING, SEQUENCING AND DETERMINING ACFT'S POS. THIS SIT COULD HAVE RESULTED IN A MIDAIR COLLISION. ACR X SHOULD HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED TO CONTACT TWR AT LEAST 10 MI FROM GJT ARPT TO ALLOW SUFFICIENT TIME FOR THE LCL CTLR TO ISSUE TA'S. (SEE ATC MANUAL 7110.65 PARAGRAPH 2-14(A) AND PARAGRAPH 2-17(A).) I'M SICK AND TIRED OF WORKING IN AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE SOME CTLRS FIND ENTERTAINMENT IN TRANSFERRING COMS OF ARRIVING IFR ACFT TO TWR ON DOWNWIND OR ON A BASE LEG WITH OTHER TFC IN THE ATA JUST TO SEE HOW ALERT THE LCL CTLR IS.

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.