Narrative:

We were cleared for a night visual approach from base leg to runway 25L after identing a company B757 ahead of us. The first officer was flying the aircraft with the autoplt disengaged. As we turned final we were told by ATC that an air carrier Y B737 would be landing on runway 25R and that he had us in sight. I recall hearing ATC instruct air carrier Y to keep us in sight. Moments later after correcting a slight overshoot to final I was distraction by a TA on our TCASII. I noticed a target very close above and slightly behind and to the right of us. My first concern was his close proximity to our heavy aircraft and his very fast closure rate. Next we got an RA and the first officer said he was going to descend to follow the TCASII fly away. This would cause us to deviate below a normal glide path to the runway. I instructed him to follow the glide path while I looked for the overtaking aircraft on the radar scope with a smaller scale. At that time the traffic appeared to be on top of us with the smallest scale available. Seconds later, the B737 passed our aircraft with less than 1000 ft lateral separation. A normal landing was made. My inquiry to the tower about his passing us was answered by, 'that's his prerogative.' I strongly disagree. I believe that this is a very dangerous situation which must be addressed. Sfo has a procedure which clearly spells out minimum safety procedures for this type of visual approach. 1) daytime only. 2) no passing. 3) heavy separation. 4) stagger aircraft. Recommendation: las tower/approach control should adopt policy with same requirements as sfo procedure.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR B767 ON VISUAL APCH TO RWY 25L. ACR B737 ON VISUAL APCH TO RWY 25R IS INSTRUCTED TO MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION WITH THE B767. THE B737 PASSES THE B767 ON FINAL APCH. THE B767 FLC WERE INFORMED OF THE TFC AND HAD RECEIVED A TCASII RA AS THE B737 APCHED BEHIND AND TO THE R. FLC OF THE B767 ALLEGES THE LCL CTLR SAID IT WAS THE PREROGATIVE OF THE B737 FLC TO PASS THE RPTR'S ACFT. RPTR STATED THE B737 CANNOT MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION AFTER IT PASSES THE ACFT.

Narrative: WE WERE CLRED FOR A NIGHT VISUAL APCH FROM BASE LEG TO RWY 25L AFTER IDENTING A COMPANY B757 AHEAD OF US. THE FO WAS FLYING THE ACFT WITH THE AUTOPLT DISENGAGED. AS WE TURNED FINAL WE WERE TOLD BY ATC THAT AN ACR Y B737 WOULD BE LNDG ON RWY 25R AND THAT HE HAD US IN SIGHT. I RECALL HEARING ATC INSTRUCT ACR Y TO KEEP US IN SIGHT. MOMENTS LATER AFTER CORRECTING A SLIGHT OVERSHOOT TO FINAL I WAS DISTR BY A TA ON OUR TCASII. I NOTICED A TARGET VERY CLOSE ABOVE AND SLIGHTLY BEHIND AND TO THE R OF US. MY FIRST CONCERN WAS HIS CLOSE PROX TO OUR HVY ACFT AND HIS VERY FAST CLOSURE RATE. NEXT WE GOT AN RA AND THE FO SAID HE WAS GOING TO DSND TO FOLLOW THE TCASII FLY AWAY. THIS WOULD CAUSE US TO DEVIATE BELOW A NORMAL GLIDE PATH TO THE RWY. I INSTRUCTED HIM TO FOLLOW THE GLIDE PATH WHILE I LOOKED FOR THE OVERTAKING ACFT ON THE RADAR SCOPE WITH A SMALLER SCALE. AT THAT TIME THE TFC APPEARED TO BE ON TOP OF US WITH THE SMALLEST SCALE AVAILABLE. SECONDS LATER, THE B737 PASSED OUR ACFT WITH LESS THAN 1000 FT LATERAL SEPARATION. A NORMAL LNDG WAS MADE. MY INQUIRY TO THE TWR ABOUT HIS PASSING US WAS ANSWERED BY, 'THAT'S HIS PREROGATIVE.' I STRONGLY DISAGREE. I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS SIT WHICH MUST BE ADDRESSED. SFO HAS A PROC WHICH CLRLY SPELLS OUT MINIMUM SAFETY PROCS FOR THIS TYPE OF VISUAL APCH. 1) DAYTIME ONLY. 2) NO PASSING. 3) HVY SEPARATION. 4) STAGGER ACFT. RECOMMENDATION: LAS TWR/APCH CTL SHOULD ADOPT POLICY WITH SAME REQUIREMENTS AS SFO PROC.

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.