Narrative:

PA28 small aircraft X was conducting VOR runway 11R approach, circle to runway 4, followed by PA44 small transport Y, doing the same. ZMA provides approach control services to vrb and has on numerous occasions verbally rendered the opinion that it is permissible to conduct timed approachs between aircraft conducting circling approachs and/or disparate types of approachs including visual approachs, an opinion which seems to contradict FAA order 7110.65J paragraph 6-7-1 ('timed approachs') note-a, which says in part: '... For a straight-in approach...' in regard to the intended application of the paragraph. I have, on numerous occasions, attempted to challenge the validity of this opinion to my supervisors, manager(south), and through the qtp (quality through partnership) process, without success. Today's occurrence, I was working local control ('tower') and while X was on the left downwind to runway 4 in his circling maneuver, I had to instruct Y to turn to the right to avoid X. Had the sun been lower, I would not have seen Y in time to turn him, and I believe that a timed approach should not place aircraft in such a predicament that reliance on anticipated visual separation becomes SOP. This procedural application is unsafe.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA X HAD CONFLICT WITH SMT Y ON CIRCLING TIMED STRAIGHT IN APCH. SEE AND AVOID CONCEPT.

Narrative: PA28 SMA X WAS CONDUCTING VOR RWY 11R APCH, CIRCLE TO RWY 4, FOLLOWED BY PA44 SMT Y, DOING THE SAME. ZMA PROVIDES APCH CTL SVCS TO VRB AND HAS ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS VERBALLY RENDERED THE OPINION THAT IT IS PERMISSIBLE TO CONDUCT TIMED APCHS BTWN ACFT CONDUCTING CIRCLING APCHS AND/OR DISPARATE TYPES OF APCHS INCLUDING VISUAL APCHS, AN OPINION WHICH SEEMS TO CONTRADICT FAA ORDER 7110.65J PARAGRAPH 6-7-1 ('TIMED APCHS') NOTE-A, WHICH SAYS IN PART: '... FOR A STRAIGHT-IN APCH...' IN REGARD TO THE INTENDED APPLICATION OF THE PARAGRAPH. I HAVE, ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS, ATTEMPTED TO CHALLENGE THE VALIDITY OF THIS OPINION TO MY SUPVRS, MGR(S), AND THROUGH THE QTP (QUALITY THROUGH PARTNERSHIP) PROCESS, WITHOUT SUCCESS. TODAY'S OCCURRENCE, I WAS WORKING LCL CTL ('TWR') AND WHILE X WAS ON THE L DOWNWIND TO RWY 4 IN HIS CIRCLING MANEUVER, I HAD TO INSTRUCT Y TO TURN TO THE R TO AVOID X. HAD THE SUN BEEN LOWER, I WOULD NOT HAVE SEEN Y IN TIME TO TURN HIM, AND I BELIEVE THAT A TIMED APCH SHOULD NOT PLACE ACFT IN SUCH A PREDICAMENT THAT RELIANCE ON ANTICIPATED VISUAL SEPARATION BECOMES SOP. THIS PROCEDURAL APPLICATION IS UNSAFE.

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.