Potential conflict after radar vectoring places aircraft X in proximity of multiple aircraft.

Attributes
ACN	276230
Time
Date	199407
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : msp
State Reference	MN
Altitude	msl bound lower : 4000 msl bound upper : 4000
Environment
Flight Conditions	Marginal
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : msp
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	cruise other cruise other
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	Other Other
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	approach : straight in
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : cfi pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 14000 flight time type : 7500
ASRS Report	276230
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : commercial pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 195 flight time total : 17600 flight time type : 12800
ASRS Report	276228
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

On downwind for landing runway 11R ILS msp, heading 310 degrees, approach requested a turn to 070 degrees for base leg. At about 030 degrees, TCASII showed traffic conflict and we saw a 757 at 12 O'clock. Approach immediately said turn left 360 degrees vectoring us behind the 757. We told approach we had 757 in sight. We were now passing through runway 11R ILS localizer and were worried about traffic on ILS runway 11L. Seconds later we spotted a 727 turning final for runway 11L approximately 1000 ft above us. Controller requested an immediate turn to 140 degrees. TCASII was showing conflict with 727. We passed through ILS runway 11R again and controller asked if we were intercepting ILS to runway 11R. We stated we had not been cleared for the approach. Controller then cleared us for approach to runway 11R. New voice on radio. Controller change. Totally forgot to switch us to msp tower for landing clearance. Had we not been able to see the conflicting traffic during the approach, this situation could have become very confusing and unsafe. As it was, the approach vectoring and performance of the entire approach by approach control was marginal.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: POTENTIAL CONFLICT AFTER RADAR VECTORING PLACES ACFT X IN PROX OF MULTIPLE ACFT.

Narrative: ON DOWNWIND FOR LNDG RWY 11R ILS MSP, HDG 310 DEGS, APCH REQUESTED A TURN TO 070 DEGS FOR BASE LEG. AT ABOUT 030 DEGS, TCASII SHOWED TFC CONFLICT AND WE SAW A 757 AT 12 O'CLOCK. APCH IMMEDIATELY SAID TURN L 360 DEGS VECTORING US BEHIND THE 757. WE TOLD APCH WE HAD 757 IN SIGHT. WE WERE NOW PASSING THROUGH RWY 11R ILS LOC AND WERE WORRIED ABOUT TFC ON ILS RWY 11L. SECONDS LATER WE SPOTTED A 727 TURNING FINAL FOR RWY 11L APPROX 1000 FT ABOVE US. CTLR REQUESTED AN IMMEDIATE TURN TO 140 DEGS. TCASII WAS SHOWING CONFLICT WITH 727. WE PASSED THROUGH ILS RWY 11R AGAIN AND CTLR ASKED IF WE WERE INTERCEPTING ILS TO RWY 11R. WE STATED WE HAD NOT BEEN CLRED FOR THE APCH. CTLR THEN CLRED US FOR APCH TO RWY 11R. NEW VOICE ON RADIO. CTLR CHANGE. TOTALLY FORGOT TO SWITCH US TO MSP TWR FOR LNDG CLRNC. HAD WE NOT BEEN ABLE TO SEE THE CONFLICTING TFC DURING THE APCH, THIS SIT COULD HAVE BECOME VERY CONFUSING AND UNSAFE. AS IT WAS, THE APCH VECTORING AND PERFORMANCE OF THE ENTIRE APCH BY APCH CTL WAS MARGINAL.

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.