ATC issues confusing landing instructions at fty causing go around.

Attributes
ACN	570739
Time
Date	200301
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : fty.airport
State Reference	GA
Altitude	agl single value : 500
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : fty.tower tower : oak.tower
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	approach : traffic pattern
Flight Plan	None
Aircraft 2
Controlling Facilities	tower : fty.tower
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	approach : traffic pattern
Person 1
Affiliation	other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : student
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 20 flight time total : 30 flight time type : 30
ASRS Report	570739
Person 2
Affiliation	other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Events
Anomaly	conflict : nmac non adherence : clearance non adherence : far non adherence : required legal separation other anomaly other other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	other flight crewa other flight crewb
Resolutory Action	flight crew : executed go around
Miss Distance	horizontal : 500 vertical : 0
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Flight Crew Human Performance ATC Human Performance
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

Aircraft #1 cleared by tower for right traffic landing on runway 26. Aircraft #2 cleared for landing outside of right traffic for runway 27. Aircraft #2 had negative visual contact on aircraft #1. Aircraft #1 did not have traffic in sight. Tower lost visual and radar contact of both aircraft. Aircraft #2 nearly crossed flight path of aircraft #1, which was on final. Aircraft #2 executed go around. Aircraft #1 landed without incident. Basic cause: intersecting clrncs with inadequate separation. Contributing factors: inadequate visual scanning. Sun low in horizon may have obscured vision of pilot in aircraft #2. Human performance considerations: new controller took over in tower moments prior to event. Recommendation: if both runway 27 and runway 26 are in use, runway 26 should have left traffic pattern and runway 27 should have right traffic pattern, rather than intersecting patterns.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ATC ISSUES CONFUSING LNDG INSTRUCTIONS AT FTY CAUSING GAR.

Narrative: ACFT #1 CLRED BY TWR FOR R TFC LNDG ON RWY 26. ACFT #2 CLRED FOR LNDG OUTSIDE OF R TFC FOR RWY 27. ACFT #2 HAD NEGATIVE VISUAL CONTACT ON ACFT #1. ACFT #1 DID NOT HAVE TFC IN SIGHT. TWR LOST VISUAL AND RADAR CONTACT OF BOTH ACFT. ACFT #2 NEARLY CROSSED FLT PATH OF ACFT #1, WHICH WAS ON FINAL. ACFT #2 EXECUTED GAR. ACFT #1 LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT. BASIC CAUSE: INTERSECTING CLRNCS WITH INADEQUATE SEPARATION. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: INADEQUATE VISUAL SCANNING. SUN LOW IN HORIZON MAY HAVE OBSCURED VISION OF PLT IN ACFT #2. HUMAN PERFORMANCE CONSIDERATIONS: NEW CTLR TOOK OVER IN TWR MOMENTS PRIOR TO EVENT. RECOMMENDATION: IF BOTH RWY 27 AND RWY 26 ARE IN USE, RWY 26 SHOULD HAVE L TFC PATTERN AND RWY 27 SHOULD HAVE R TFC PATTERN, RATHER THAN INTERSECTING PATTERNS.

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.