Narrative:

I had received several vectors due to the amount of traffic at sna. Once established on downwind. Just prior to turning base the tower gave me a 'left 360 degree turn and report re-establish on downwind.' after acknowledging and completing that direction I was given: 'follow the 757. Clear to land runway 19R.' I refused to follow the 757 as he was above my altitude and this would mean crossing and possibly following in his wave turbulence. I then request runway 19L and was cleared. I immediately climbed to an altitude I believed to be well above GS and entered the final for runway 19L. On final again, a 757 was taxiing for takeoff across the approach of runway 19L. I was cautioned wake turbulence from the taxiing 757. I landed long. I will make an effort to discuss this with the sna tower supervisor on jul/xx/94. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states he had his meeting with the tower supervisor and received very gracious treatment. The problem however, continues to occur due to the rules that require pilot responsibility to see and avoid the traffic and its wake turbulence. Reporter had the feeling that the controllers are frustrated by the situation as much as pilots but are bound by the need to keep the traffic flow at the highest rate possible. Local pilots have received numerous letters from the FAA and pilot groups regarding the need for caution behind the 757 aircraft. Indeed the flight pattern is within a 1/4 mi radius of the accident that occurred with 757 wake turbulence, so pilots are very aware of the problem. No doubt the controllers are as well. Reporter distressed because the practice of clearing aircraft behind the 757 at such close range continues -- at this very moment as reporter explained that activity is going on. It is a no win situation. Reporter assured that he does not think in a 'liability' sense, but with a concern for safety. Primarily for the new pilots who would not have the knowledge to refuse a clearance which might put them in jeopardy. Supplemental call back indicated reporter was approximately 1 mi away but opposite direction from 757 traffic. He had approach plate on lap as always and noted approach altitude of incoming traffic so he climbed to 1800 ft. Reporter indicated willingness to participate in structured call back study.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA IS CLRED BEHIND A 757 BUT REFUSES CLRNC DUE TO POS BELOW THE ACFT. ASSIGNED PARALLEL RWY.

Narrative: I HAD RECEIVED SEVERAL VECTORS DUE TO THE AMOUNT OF TFC AT SNA. ONCE ESTABLISHED ON DOWNWIND. JUST PRIOR TO TURNING BASE THE TWR GAVE ME A 'L 360 DEG TURN AND RPT RE-ESTABLISH ON DOWNWIND.' AFTER ACKNOWLEDGING AND COMPLETING THAT DIRECTION I WAS GIVEN: 'FOLLOW THE 757. CLR TO LAND RWY 19R.' I REFUSED TO FOLLOW THE 757 AS HE WAS ABOVE MY ALT AND THIS WOULD MEAN XING AND POSSIBLY FOLLOWING IN HIS WAVE TURB. I THEN REQUEST RWY 19L AND WAS CLRED. I IMMEDIATELY CLBED TO AN ALT I BELIEVED TO BE WELL ABOVE GS AND ENTERED THE FINAL FOR RWY 19L. ON FINAL AGAIN, A 757 WAS TAXIING FOR TKOF ACROSS THE APCH OF RWY 19L. I WAS CAUTIONED WAKE TURB FROM THE TAXIING 757. I LANDED LONG. I WILL MAKE AN EFFORT TO DISCUSS THIS WITH THE SNA TWR SUPVR ON JUL/XX/94. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES HE HAD HIS MEETING WITH THE TWR SUPVR AND RECEIVED VERY GRACIOUS TREATMENT. THE PROB HOWEVER, CONTINUES TO OCCUR DUE TO THE RULES THAT REQUIRE PLT RESPONSIBILITY TO SEE AND AVOID THE TFC AND ITS WAKE TURB. RPTR HAD THE FEELING THAT THE CTLRS ARE FRUSTRATED BY THE SIT AS MUCH AS PLTS BUT ARE BOUND BY THE NEED TO KEEP THE TFC FLOW AT THE HIGHEST RATE POSSIBLE. LCL PLTS HAVE RECEIVED NUMEROUS LETTERS FROM THE FAA AND PLT GROUPS REGARDING THE NEED FOR CAUTION BEHIND THE 757 ACFT. INDEED THE FLT PATTERN IS WITHIN A 1/4 MI RADIUS OF THE ACCIDENT THAT OCCURRED WITH 757 WAKE TURB, SO PLTS ARE VERY AWARE OF THE PROB. NO DOUBT THE CTLRS ARE AS WELL. RPTR DISTRESSED BECAUSE THE PRACTICE OF CLRING ACFT BEHIND THE 757 AT SUCH CLOSE RANGE CONTINUES -- AT THIS VERY MOMENT AS RPTR EXPLAINED THAT ACTIVITY IS GOING ON. IT IS A NO WIN SIT. RPTR ASSURED THAT HE DOES NOT THINK IN A 'LIABILITY' SENSE, BUT WITH A CONCERN FOR SAFETY. PRIMARILY FOR THE NEW PLTS WHO WOULD NOT HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE TO REFUSE A CLRNC WHICH MIGHT PUT THEM IN JEOPARDY. SUPPLEMENTAL CALL BACK INDICATED RPTR WAS APPROX 1 MI AWAY BUT OPPOSITE DIRECTION FROM 757 TFC. HE HAD APCH PLATE ON LAP AS ALWAYS AND NOTED APCH ALT OF INCOMING TFC SO HE CLBED TO 1800 FT. RPTR INDICATED WILLINGNESS TO PARTICIPATE IN STRUCTURED CALL BACK STUDY.

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.