Narrative:

We had been cleared for the ILS runway 8 circle-to-land on runway 26. Upon contacting the tower at the OM, the first officer requested a straight-in landing to runway 8 as per our pre-approach discussion. The tower controller instructed the first officer to report at 3 mi for a possible straight-in landing clearance. At 3 mi out, with the runway in sight, the first officer attempted to make the 3 mi report, but was unable to get through due to frequency congestion. At that moment, I noticed traffic 400 ft below, and 2 mi ahead on the TCASII. I was unable to make visual contact with the traffic in spite of clear visual contact with the runway. I decided to break off the approach with a right turn to enter a left downwind leg for runway 26. As I began the right turn, the TCASII commanded a 'climb' RA. I immediately applied power and initiated a steep climb. Neither of us visually saw the aircraft, however, the first officer observed on TCASII that we passed over the traffic by 100 ft. I had previously briefed the first officer on the descent to make our request for a 'straight-in approach to runway 8, traffic permitting' with approach control so things could be coordination in advance. He instead stated he would rather do so with the tower controller, to which I agreed to do. This conflict began when our 'straight-in' request was made at the last min to a very busy tower controller with little time to sort things out. Our request should have been immediately denied. I should have insisted on coordinating the request, 'straight-in, traffic permitting' with approach control.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT ON FA20 ON ILS INTO LRP WAS UNABLE TO OBTAIN A STRAIGHT-IN ON RWY 8 AND ENTERED PATTERN FOR LNDG ON RWY 26. WHILE MANEUVERING, THE CREW RECEIVED A TCASII RA.

Narrative: WE HAD BEEN CLRED FOR THE ILS RWY 8 CIRCLE-TO-LAND ON RWY 26. UPON CONTACTING THE TWR AT THE OM, THE FO REQUESTED A STRAIGHT-IN LNDG TO RWY 8 AS PER OUR PRE-APCH DISCUSSION. THE TWR CTLR INSTRUCTED THE FO TO RPT AT 3 MI FOR A POSSIBLE STRAIGHT-IN LNDG CLRNC. AT 3 MI OUT, WITH THE RWY IN SIGHT, THE FO ATTEMPTED TO MAKE THE 3 MI RPT, BUT WAS UNABLE TO GET THROUGH DUE TO FREQ CONGESTION. AT THAT MOMENT, I NOTICED TFC 400 FT BELOW, AND 2 MI AHEAD ON THE TCASII. I WAS UNABLE TO MAKE VISUAL CONTACT WITH THE TFC IN SPITE OF CLR VISUAL CONTACT WITH THE RWY. I DECIDED TO BREAK OFF THE APCH WITH A R TURN TO ENTER A L DOWNWIND LEG FOR RWY 26. AS I BEGAN THE R TURN, THE TCASII COMMANDED A 'CLB' RA. I IMMEDIATELY APPLIED PWR AND INITIATED A STEEP CLB. NEITHER OF US VISUALLY SAW THE ACFT, HOWEVER, THE FO OBSERVED ON TCASII THAT WE PASSED OVER THE TFC BY 100 FT. I HAD PREVIOUSLY BRIEFED THE FO ON THE DSCNT TO MAKE OUR REQUEST FOR A 'STRAIGHT-IN APCH TO RWY 8, TFC PERMITTING' WITH APCH CTL SO THINGS COULD BE COORD IN ADVANCE. HE INSTEAD STATED HE WOULD RATHER DO SO WITH THE TWR CTLR, TO WHICH I AGREED TO DO. THIS CONFLICT BEGAN WHEN OUR 'STRAIGHT-IN' REQUEST WAS MADE AT THE LAST MIN TO A VERY BUSY TWR CTLR WITH LITTLE TIME TO SORT THINGS OUT. OUR REQUEST SHOULD HAVE BEEN IMMEDIATELY DENIED. I SHOULD HAVE INSISTED ON COORDINATING THE REQUEST, 'STRAIGHT-IN, TFC PERMITTING' WITH APCH CTL.

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.