Narrative:

On this date I ferried a north american T-6 from 3SZ to sus for an upcoming airshow. I contacted the tower well north and was instructed to report on a flight base leg for runway 26L when crossing the missouri river. As I approached the chkpoint, the tower asked my position (their tower radar repeater scope was inoperative). I indicated I was now on right base for runway 26L, just north of the river and I was cleared to land. Moments later I heard the tower begin a discussion with a beech baron. The tower then asked if I saw the baron and I indicated that I saw a twin on a long final over the low lands, northeast of the runway. The tower then directed me to execute a left 360 degree turn into the final and assume a position behind the baron. I declined this and requested right 360 degree so as not to be head to head with the baron. A long pause ensued and again I requested a right 360 degrees and it was granted. The tower then instructed a mooney to make a 360 degree on right downwind and sequence behind me. The mooney declined and requested an opposite direction 360 degrees to avoid a conflict. About this time a north american B-25 on a left downwind was issued a 360 degree for spacing. We all landed with no conflict, however, I discussed the arrival with both the B-25 pilot and mooney pilot after landing. We all 3 agree that the controller was confused and a bit uncertain as to how to sequence aircraft of such a wide speed range. The use of extended downwinds, speed adjustments or flight through initial would have all been preferential to 360 degree turns in the pattern against traffic. In addition, changing landing sequences, close in is dangerous especially when aircraft are already configured for landing.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ATC HANDLING OF TFC PATTERN TFC.

Narrative: ON THIS DATE I FERRIED A NORTH AMERICAN T-6 FROM 3SZ TO SUS FOR AN UPCOMING AIRSHOW. I CONTACTED THE TWR WELL N AND WAS INSTRUCTED TO RPT ON A FLT BASE LEG FOR RWY 26L WHEN XING THE MISSOURI RIVER. AS I APCHED THE CHKPOINT, THE TWR ASKED MY POS (THEIR TWR RADAR REPEATER SCOPE WAS INOP). I INDICATED I WAS NOW ON R BASE FOR RWY 26L, JUST N OF THE RIVER AND I WAS CLRED TO LAND. MOMENTS LATER I HEARD THE TWR BEGIN A DISCUSSION WITH A BEECH BARON. THE TWR THEN ASKED IF I SAW THE BARON AND I INDICATED THAT I SAW A TWIN ON A LONG FINAL OVER THE LOW LANDS, NE OF THE RWY. THE TWR THEN DIRECTED ME TO EXECUTE A L 360 DEG TURN INTO THE FINAL AND ASSUME A POS BEHIND THE BARON. I DECLINED THIS AND REQUESTED R 360 DEG SO AS NOT TO BE HEAD TO HEAD WITH THE BARON. A LONG PAUSE ENSUED AND AGAIN I REQUESTED A R 360 DEGS AND IT WAS GRANTED. THE TWR THEN INSTRUCTED A MOONEY TO MAKE A 360 DEG ON R DOWNWIND AND SEQUENCE BEHIND ME. THE MOONEY DECLINED AND REQUESTED AN OPPOSITE DIRECTION 360 DEGS TO AVOID A CONFLICT. ABOUT THIS TIME A N AMERICAN B-25 ON A L DOWNWIND WAS ISSUED A 360 DEG FOR SPACING. WE ALL LANDED WITH NO CONFLICT, HOWEVER, I DISCUSSED THE ARR WITH BOTH THE B-25 PLT AND MOONEY PLT AFTER LNDG. WE ALL 3 AGREE THAT THE CTLR WAS CONFUSED AND A BIT UNCERTAIN AS TO HOW TO SEQUENCE ACFT OF SUCH A WIDE SPD RANGE. THE USE OF EXTENDED DOWNWINDS, SPD ADJUSTMENTS OR FLT THROUGH INITIAL WOULD HAVE ALL BEEN PREFERENTIAL TO 360 DEG TURNS IN THE PATTERN AGAINST TFC. IN ADDITION, CHANGING LNDG SEQUENCES, CLOSE IN IS DANGEROUS ESPECIALLY WHEN ACFT ARE ALREADY CONFIGURED FOR LNDG.

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.