37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 863467 |
Time | |
Date | 200911 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | DFW.Airport |
State Reference | TX |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Medium Transport Low Wing 2 Turbojet Eng |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Final Approach |
Route In Use | Other Instrument Approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Approach |
Qualification | Air Traffic Control Fully Certified |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types |
Narrative:
A medium transport aircraft was on final behind another aircraft. The aircraft had an overtake and I slowed him. As he crossed bobin (FAF); the tower asked him his speed; told him it wasn't going to work; and instructed him to go around. We had room to put him right back in the sequence; so I then broke him out and gave him back to the final controller. Later; upon reviewing the go around; someone in the tower stated that they noticed that I hadn't called the local controller to tell him what I was doing and therefore it should be a operational deviation. Upon checking the manuals; this becomes questionable. The local 7110.65 says that the final monitor (FM) is responsible for lateral separation down to 1 NM from the runway. This would mean that the FM would have to be able to pull out an aircraft if necessary. However; the local 7110.65 while giving this responsibility to the FM; doesn't give them the authority to do so (i.e. They're saying it's the tower's airspace). An item has been added stating that when the FM sends an aircraft around or pulls them out; that they are to advise the local controller. At the briefing for this when it was added; the reason stated for adding it was that even though the local controller can hear the FM over the frequency; apparently one had missed a go around being issued and got surprised when the aircraft approached the threshold and asked for further instructions. It also turned out that they had a departure rolling on the parallel runway. This was added to prevent that surprise. It is not a requirement to ask permission first; it's an advise them after the fact. In fact; if a go around or pull out is necessary; there usually isn't time to ask first. The FM has to have the authority to do this. While it wasn't a critical situation in this case that the aircraft be pulled out; if the FM has the authority to pull the aircraft out; then it shouldn't matter why the aircraft was pulled out; the FM has the authority. However; as stated above; apparently the local 7110.65 needs to be modified to give the FM the authority; not just the responsibility. Part of the reason for pulling the aircraft out when I did was because it was still far enough out that pulling it out would not and did not interfere with departures. In fact; it reduced interference by the aircraft not overflying the airport. Part of the problem we are having at the facility is the way things are worded in the local orders. It is briefed as meaning one thing and everyone there at the time gets that briefing. However; later when something happens and someone else looks at it they say the order says this; and may not be the way it was briefed. Their interpretation now becomes the law and the controller is then charged with an oe or od ex post facto. Recommendation; the local 7110.65 needs to be clarified to give the FM the authority to do what is required to meet their responsibilities.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: D10 controller expressed concern regarding the Final Monitor responsibilities as described in local orders and the operational briefings and interpretations of same that differ depending upon interpretations.
Narrative: A Medium Transport aircraft was on final behind another aircraft. The aircraft had an overtake and I slowed him. As he crossed BOBIN (FAF); the Tower asked him his speed; told him it wasn't going to work; and instructed him to go around. We had room to put him right back in the sequence; so I then broke him out and gave him back to the Final Controller. Later; upon reviewing the go around; someone in the Tower stated that they noticed that I hadn't called the Local Controller to tell him what I was doing and therefore it should be a operational deviation. Upon checking the manuals; this becomes questionable. The local 7110.65 says that the Final Monitor (FM) is responsible for lateral separation down to 1 NM from the runway. This would mean that the FM would have to be able to pull out an aircraft if necessary. However; the local 7110.65 while giving this responsibility to the FM; doesn't give them the authority to do so (i.e. They're saying it's the Tower's airspace). An item has been added stating that when the FM sends an aircraft around or pulls them out; that they are to advise the Local Controller. At the briefing for this when it was added; the reason stated for adding it was that even though the Local Controller can hear the FM over the frequency; apparently one had missed a go around being issued and got surprised when the aircraft approached the threshold and asked for further instructions. It also turned out that they had a departure rolling on the parallel runway. This was added to prevent that surprise. It is not a requirement to ask permission first; it's an advise them after the fact. In fact; if a go around or pull out is necessary; there usually isn't time to ask first. The FM has to have the authority to do this. While it wasn't a critical situation in this case that the aircraft be pulled out; if the FM has the authority to pull the aircraft out; then it shouldn't matter why the aircraft was pulled out; the FM has the authority. However; as stated above; apparently the local 7110.65 needs to be modified to give the FM the authority; not just the responsibility. Part of the reason for pulling the aircraft out when I did was because it was still far enough out that pulling it out would not and did not interfere with departures. In fact; it reduced interference by the aircraft not overflying the airport. Part of the problem we are having at the facility is the way things are worded in the local orders. It is briefed as meaning one thing and everyone there at the time gets that briefing. However; later when something happens and someone else looks at it they say the order says this; and may not be the way it was briefed. Their interpretation now becomes the law and the Controller is then charged with an OE or OD Ex Post Facto. Recommendation; the local 7110.65 needs to be clarified to give the FM the authority to do what is required to meet their responsibilities.
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.