Narrative:

While on final app to runway 17R den, approach slowed us to 170KTS for 'departure traffic.' while still outside the OM, we heard app controller asking another aircraft if they could accept a short approach. Just outside the marker, approach issues a traffic advisory: 'do you have traffic 10 O'clock and 2 1/2 miles?' yes we do! 'Good, he's on a base turn follow him, cleared visual runway 17R.' we had no idea this was about to happen or we would have slowed up, but we were flying the last assigned speed. The spacing was unsafe to say the least and we declared a go around. Previous aircraft was a B757. After calling approach on ground, I was shocked to find the casual attitude of the approach supervisor on duty. He said this was his pet peeve, but go arounds were to be expected to keep the system 'tight' and it was economically good for the airlines. He said that when working st louis, you had to do this (filling holes on the radar with metal). This was my third go around for this reason at den. When I asked him about wake turbulence separation, he said that was a IFR SOP that did not apply to VFR, as long as I stayed above previous B757 wake, I should be fine. Is this a red flag to anyone else? Was runway 17L in use for landing? I fly out of ord and never see separation compromised like this, intentionally.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DEN APCH CTLR INSTRUCTS B767 CREW ON FINAL TO FOLLOW A B757 ON BASE FOR THE SAME RWY 2 1/2 MILES AHEAD CAUSING THE B767 TO GAR.

Narrative: WHILE ON FINAL APP TO RWY 17R DEN, APCH SLOWED US TO 170KTS FOR 'DEP TFC.' WHILE STILL OUTSIDE THE OM, WE HEARD APP CTLR ASKING ANOTHER ACFT IF THEY COULD ACCEPT A SHORT APCH. JUST OUTSIDE THE MARKER, APCH ISSUES A TFC ADVISORY: 'DO YOU HAVE TFC 10 O'CLOCK AND 2 1/2 MILES?' YES WE DO! 'GOOD, HE'S ON A BASE TURN FOLLOW HIM, CLRED VISUAL RWY 17R.' WE HAD NO IDEA THIS WAS ABOUT TO HAPPEN OR WE WOULD HAVE SLOWED UP, BUT WE WERE FLYING THE LAST ASSIGNED SPEED. THE SPACING WAS UNSAFE TO SAY THE LEAST AND WE DECLARED A GAR. PREVIOUS ACFT WAS A B757. AFTER CALLING APCH ON GND, I WAS SHOCKED TO FIND THE CASUAL ATTITUDE OF THE APCH SUPVR ON DUTY. HE SAID THIS WAS HIS PET PEEVE, BUT GO AROUNDS WERE TO BE EXPECTED TO KEEP THE SYSTEM 'TIGHT' AND IT WAS ECONOMICALLY GOOD FOR THE AIRLINES. HE SAID THAT WHEN WORKING ST LOUIS, YOU HAD TO DO THIS (FILLING HOLES ON THE RADAR WITH METAL). THIS WAS MY THIRD GAR FOR THIS REASON AT DEN. WHEN I ASKED HIM ABOUT WAKE TURB SEPARATION, HE SAID THAT WAS A IFR SOP THAT DID NOT APPLY TO VFR, AS LONG AS I STAYED ABOVE PREVIOUS B757 WAKE, I SHOULD BE FINE. IS THIS A RED FLAG TO ANYONE ELSE? WAS RWY 17L IN USE FOR LNDG? I FLY OUT OF ORD AND NEVER SEE SEPARATION COMPROMISED LIKE THIS, INTENTIONALLY.

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.