Narrative:

At the facility where I am currently employed; we operate 3 runways two of the runways are parallel runways where centerlines are separated by 700 ft (runway 7L/25R and runway 7R/25L) the third runway (32/14) is just north of runway 7L/25R with a displaced threshold approximately 1;000 ft north of runway 7L/25R centerline. With our most recent procedures; we treat runway 7L/25R as an intersecting runway with all 14 operations. Intersecting runway separation is not required for 32 operations. Runway 7R/25L is not provided intersecting runway separation with runway 32 or runway 14 operations at all. Anc management has deemed it unnecessary in procedures. I have attached an airfield diagram to illustrate the concerns with this operation. With our runway configuration; we frequently operate ILS approaches to runway 14 and visual approaches to the parallel runways to allow for the maximum arrival rate at an airport where most arrival and departure aircraft are classified as 'heavy' aircraft; i.e.; B747; B767; B777; md-11; and B757. Wake turbulence is almost always a factor with every situation. Additionally; it is not uncommon for aircraft to arrive and depart runway 32 while ILS approaches are being conducted to the parallel runways. There are jet blast procedures for both parallel runways reference departures on runway 32 to illustrate how close all 3 runways are to each other. My concern stems from the fact that there has been more than one occasion where an aircraft conducting an ILS approach executes missed approach on runway 14 and aircraft are on departure roll or on short final for runway 7R. This would create a 'tie' over the airfield with wake turbulence as a factor and could possible result in a midair collision due to intersecting runway separation not being applied. This would be the same for aircraft arriving runway 32 and runway 7R or runway 7L. Anc management does not feel it necessary to protect for both aircraft to go around as one is conducting a visual approach. There are no problems in place to keep aircraft's flight path from crossing off any of the runways; yet this is a common operation for the airport. All requests and explanations by controllers reference this issue to management; to the best of my knowledge; have been ignored. Safety for the aircraft is jeopardized by running this operation and without intersecting runway separation being applied the possibility of a midair collision increases. Instead of treating all runways concerned as intersecting runways; anc management is in the process of trying to find ways to remove the requirement of intersecting runway separation on runway 7L/25R and runway 14 due to this reducing the arrival rate.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ANC Controller expressed concern regarding current runway OP procedures; alleging runway configurations do not protect missed approach maneuvers or potential wake turbulence encounters.

Narrative: At the facility where I am currently employed; we operate 3 runways two of the runways are parallel runways where centerlines are separated by 700 FT (Runway 7L/25R and Runway 7R/25L) The third runway (32/14) is just north of Runway 7L/25R with a displaced threshold approximately 1;000 FT north of Runway 7L/25R centerline. With our most recent procedures; we treat Runway 7L/25R as an intersecting runway with all 14 operations. Intersecting runway separation is not required for 32 operations. Runway 7R/25L is not provided intersecting runway separation with Runway 32 or Runway 14 operations at all. ANC management has deemed it unnecessary in procedures. I have attached an airfield diagram to illustrate the concerns with this operation. With our runway configuration; we frequently operate ILS approaches to Runway 14 and visual approaches to the parallel runways to allow for the maximum arrival rate at an airport where most arrival and departure aircraft are classified as 'Heavy' aircraft; i.e.; B747; B767; B777; MD-11; and B757. Wake turbulence is almost always a factor with every situation. Additionally; it is not uncommon for aircraft to arrive and depart Runway 32 while ILS approaches are being conducted to the parallel runways. There are jet blast procedures for both parallel runways reference departures on Runway 32 to illustrate how close all 3 runways are to each other. My concern stems from the fact that there has been more than one occasion where an aircraft conducting an ILS approach executes missed approach on Runway 14 and aircraft are on departure roll or on short final for Runway 7R. This would create a 'tie' over the airfield with wake turbulence as a factor and could possible result in a midair collision due to intersecting runway separation not being applied. This would be the same for aircraft arriving Runway 32 and Runway 7R or Runway 7L. ANC management does not feel it necessary to protect for both aircraft to go around as one is conducting a visual approach. There are no problems in place to keep aircraft's flight path from crossing off any of the runways; yet this is a common operation for the airport. All requests and explanations by Controllers reference this issue to management; to the best of my knowledge; have been ignored. Safety for the aircraft is jeopardized by running this operation and without intersecting runway separation being applied the possibility of a midair collision increases. Instead of treating all runways concerned as intersecting runways; ANC management is in the process of trying to find ways to remove the requirement of intersecting runway separation on Runway 7L/25R and Runway 14 due to this reducing the arrival rate.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.