37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 604045 |
Time | |
Date | 200312 |
Day | Sun |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | navaid : jac.vor |
State Reference | WY |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 6800 msl bound upper : 12000 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | Marginal |
Weather Elements | Snow |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | artcc : zlc.artcc tower : jac.tower |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | EMB ERJ 135 ER&LR |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | climbout : intermediate altitude landing : missed approach |
Route In Use | arrival : on vectors |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Controlling Facilities | artcc : zlc.artcc tower : jac.tower |
Operator | general aviation : corporate |
Make Model Name | Citation V |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | climbout : intermediate altitude |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | government : faa |
Function | controller : radar |
Qualification | controller : radar |
Experience | controller military : 19 controller radar : 22 controller time certified in position1 : 5 controller time certified in position2 : 3 |
ASRS Report | 604045 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | other |
Function | controller : local |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : required legal separation |
Independent Detector | other controllera |
Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance |
Consequence | faa : investigated |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | ATC Human Performance |
Primary Problem | ATC Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Operational Error |
Narrative:
Aircraft #1 missed approach runway 36. Jac tower had visual separation approved between aircraft #1 and aircraft #2, 'syd' (subject your discretion). Jac tower released aircraft #2 after seeing aircraft #1 fly over runway 36. Aircraft #2 departed runway 36 on a course that was the same as the missed approach for aircraft #1. When aircraft #1 called on frequency, I climbed aircraft #1 to 15000 ft via the runway 36 missed approach procedure, maa was 12000 ft. I radar idented aircraft #1 10 NM north of jac leaving 12500 ft. Aircraft #1 was now above my mia and I vectored aircraft #1 to the localizer for another approach. Aircraft #2 checked on frequency climbing to 16000 ft. I amended aircraft #2 altitude to 14000 ft. Aircraft #1 was instructed to expedite through 15000 ft and maintain 16000 ft. Aircraft #2 was idented 10 NM south of aircraft #1 and 2000 ft below aircraft #1. No loss of separation occurred on the radar display. I turned this in to my supervisor. I continued to work the rest of my shift. About 3 hours later, the operational manager told me that the tower may have had a system error. I was also told the tower controller was new. I do not think the tower controller will make the same mistake, but the next time they get a new controller, I hope this procedure is trained on when an aircraft makes a missed approach.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ZLC CTLR QUESTIONED JAC TWR APPLIED VISUAL SEPARATION AND DEP RELEASE REGARDING MISSED APCH ACFT AND IFR DEP.
Narrative: ACFT #1 MISSED APCH RWY 36. JAC TWR HAD VISUAL SEPARATION APPROVED BTWN ACFT #1 AND ACFT #2, 'SYD' (SUBJECT YOUR DISCRETION). JAC TWR RELEASED ACFT #2 AFTER SEEING ACFT #1 FLY OVER RWY 36. ACFT #2 DEPARTED RWY 36 ON A COURSE THAT WAS THE SAME AS THE MISSED APCH FOR ACFT #1. WHEN ACFT #1 CALLED ON FREQ, I CLBED ACFT #1 TO 15000 FT VIA THE RWY 36 MISSED APCH PROC, MAA WAS 12000 FT. I RADAR IDENTED ACFT #1 10 NM N OF JAC LEAVING 12500 FT. ACFT #1 WAS NOW ABOVE MY MIA AND I VECTORED ACFT #1 TO THE LOC FOR ANOTHER APCH. ACFT #2 CHKED ON FREQ CLBING TO 16000 FT. I AMENDED ACFT #2 ALT TO 14000 FT. ACFT #1 WAS INSTRUCTED TO EXPEDITE THROUGH 15000 FT AND MAINTAIN 16000 FT. ACFT #2 WAS IDENTED 10 NM S OF ACFT #1 AND 2000 FT BELOW ACFT #1. NO LOSS OF SEPARATION OCCURRED ON THE RADAR DISPLAY. I TURNED THIS IN TO MY SUPVR. I CONTINUED TO WORK THE REST OF MY SHIFT. ABOUT 3 HRS LATER, THE OPERATIONAL MGR TOLD ME THAT THE TWR MAY HAVE HAD A SYS ERROR. I WAS ALSO TOLD THE TWR CTLR WAS NEW. I DO NOT THINK THE TWR CTLR WILL MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE, BUT THE NEXT TIME THEY GET A NEW CTLR, I HOPE THIS PROC IS TRAINED ON WHEN AN ACFT MAKES A MISSED APCH.
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.