Narrative:

This sequence occurred during one of the busiest arrival rushes of the day, during low ceilings, and a thunderstorm starting to infringe onto the final approach course. Dual simultaneous approachs were in use, with the capability of triple simultaneous approachs, which, the supervisors chose not to use. I was working one of the final position (fn -- final north controller), when a supervisor decided to change runways, but stay in dual simulators, with only 2 monitors. I expressed my concern to him about the legality of this, nonetheless, I was instructed to do it. The other final controller (fc -- final center controller) started transitioning to the most south final, runway 27. I was told, by the supervisor, which aircraft would be the first on to put on the center final (runway 26L), now being vacated by fc. This is not legal due to the fact there wasn't a third final monitor during the transition. It now turns out that the override capability of one of the monitors wasn't working, so we were running simultaneous arrs, without monitors. In addition, numerous aircraft on my final were deviating off the final approach course, to the right, and returning without being separated from other aircraft already established on the other final approach course, ie, loss of separation. This information was given to the supervisors on duty, as well as their supervisor, who is covering this up.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: HOU APCH CTLR WORKING A VERY BUSY SESSION DURING A CONFIGN CHANGE DUE TO LOW CEILINGS AND TSTM WX WAS CONCERNED THE SUPVR WAS NOT RUNNING 3 FINALS INSTEAD OF 2.

Narrative: THIS SEQUENCE OCCURRED DURING ONE OF THE BUSIEST ARR RUSHES OF THE DAY, DURING LOW CEILINGS, AND A TSTM STARTING TO INFRINGE ONTO THE FINAL APCH COURSE. DUAL SIMULTANEOUS APCHS WERE IN USE, WITH THE CAPABILITY OF TRIPLE SIMULTANEOUS APCHS, WHICH, THE SUPVRS CHOSE NOT TO USE. I WAS WORKING ONE OF THE FINAL POS (FN -- FINAL N CTLR), WHEN A SUPVR DECIDED TO CHANGE RWYS, BUT STAY IN DUAL SIMULATORS, WITH ONLY 2 MONITORS. I EXPRESSED MY CONCERN TO HIM ABOUT THE LEGALITY OF THIS, NONETHELESS, I WAS INSTRUCTED TO DO IT. THE OTHER FINAL CTLR (FC -- FINAL CTR CTLR) STARTED TRANSITIONING TO THE MOST S FINAL, RWY 27. I WAS TOLD, BY THE SUPVR, WHICH ACFT WOULD BE THE FIRST ON TO PUT ON THE CTR FINAL (RWY 26L), NOW BEING VACATED BY FC. THIS IS NOT LEGAL DUE TO THE FACT THERE WASN'T A THIRD FINAL MONITOR DURING THE TRANSITION. IT NOW TURNS OUT THAT THE OVERRIDE CAPABILITY OF ONE OF THE MONITORS WASN'T WORKING, SO WE WERE RUNNING SIMULTANEOUS ARRS, WITHOUT MONITORS. IN ADDITION, NUMEROUS ACFT ON MY FINAL WERE DEVIATING OFF THE FINAL APCH COURSE, TO THE R, AND RETURNING WITHOUT BEING SEPARATED FROM OTHER ACFT ALREADY ESTABLISHED ON THE OTHER FINAL APCH COURSE, IE, LOSS OF SEPARATION. THIS INFO WAS GIVEN TO THE SUPVRS ON DUTY, AS WELL AS THEIR SUPVR, WHO IS COVERING THIS UP.

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.