Narrative:

A C172 departed traverse city airport (tvc) VFR to practice an NDB approach to runway 28 at tvc under his own navigation. The C172 was talking to tvc tower; a non-radar VFR tower which has a radar display certified for traffic alerts and safety advisories. A CRJ2 operating for an air carrier was being controlled by ZMP and being vectored for the ILS runway 28 approach at tvc. I; as the tower controller; advised the C172 about the CRJ2 traffic when C172 was approximately 2 miles south of gwenn (the OM) and the CRJ2 was joining final 7 miles east of gwenn. The C172 proceeded northeastbound into the final approach course; during which a couple of traffic calls were made; the last of which was a traffic alert and directions for the cessna to turn southbound. Luckily; the ZMP controller turned the CRJ2 northbound simultaneously and 1 mile was the closest the two aircraft passed. 2 factors were major in causing this tight situation to occur when it otherwise could be avoided. 1) very common practice is for the VFR practice approaches to navigate on their own and talk to traverse city tower. IFR aircraft being vectored to the same approach and runway are being worked by ZMP. Quite often conflicts occur; and the controllers at the two facilities are scrambling on the landline to figure out what each other and the respective aircraft are doing. 2) at traverse city; it is procedure for the flight data position to coordinate on the landline with ZMP instead of the local controller who is actually working the traffic. This 'middleman' position adds an extra time delay to critical coordination between local and the radar controller. What should be done to prevent this type of event and what could potentially lead to a midair collision is: 1) make it procedurally required for all practice approach aircraft who are using the approach in use to contact ZMP for advisories or vectors to the approach. 2) change the procedure at traverse city tower to have the local controller coordinate with the radar controller at ZMP; not the flight data position.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TVC Local Controller described conflict event when VFR traffic; with the Tower on practice approach; conflicted with IFR arrival CRJ being handled by ZMP.

Narrative: A C172 departed Traverse City Airport (TVC) VFR to practice an NDB approach to Runway 28 at TVC under his own navigation. The C172 was talking to TVC Tower; a non-radar VFR tower which has a radar display certified for Traffic Alerts and Safety Advisories. A CRJ2 operating for an air carrier was being controlled by ZMP and being vectored for the ILS Runway 28 approach at TVC. I; as the Tower Controller; advised the C172 about the CRJ2 traffic when C172 was approximately 2 miles south of GWENN (the OM) and the CRJ2 was joining final 7 miles east of GWENN. The C172 proceeded northeastbound into the final approach course; during which a couple of traffic calls were made; the last of which was a traffic alert and directions for the Cessna to turn southbound. Luckily; the ZMP Controller turned the CRJ2 northbound simultaneously and 1 mile was the closest the two aircraft passed. 2 factors were major in causing this tight situation to occur when it otherwise could be avoided. 1) Very common practice is for the VFR practice approaches to navigate on their own and talk to Traverse City Tower. IFR aircraft being vectored to the same approach and runway are being worked by ZMP. Quite often conflicts occur; and the Controllers at the two facilities are scrambling on the landline to figure out what each other and the respective aircraft are doing. 2) At Traverse City; it is procedure for the Flight Data position to coordinate on the landline with ZMP instead of the Local Controller who is actually working the traffic. This 'middleman' position adds an extra time delay to critical coordination between Local and the Radar Controller. What should be done to prevent this type of event and what could potentially lead to a midair collision is: 1) Make it procedurally required for all practice approach aircraft who are using the approach in use to contact ZMP for advisories or vectors to the approach. 2) Change the procedure at Traverse City Tower to have the Local Controller coordinate with the Radar Controller at ZMP; not the Flight Data position.

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.