Narrative:

This is now two days in a row that I have walked up to the tower and there is less than standard staffing in the tower. The weather was hazy. The iad flm advised me that pct has been calling to do simul approaches 19L/19C. The flm advises me to open LC1 just like the previous day. This time the flm is working clearance delivery and GC1 at the same time. Although I would not be surprised if the position logs don't show the flm working those two positions combined. The flm was very busy. I was working LC1. Pct was conducting simultaneous arrivals 19L/19C. The visibility was very bad. I could only see arrivals on a quarter mile final do to the haze. LC3 advise me they may have a go around on 19C. I said ok. I looked out the window at the 19C final and could not see any aircraft on final. I looked at the radar and I could see two arrival aircraft; aircraft X and aircraft Y. I don't remember what aircraft was first and [which] one was second. The first aircraft was one mile final 19C the second aircraft was two mile final 19C. I said 'that first guy is not even going to exit the runway before the second aircraft crosses the threshold.' so LC3 sends the second aircraft around because the first arrival is still on the runway. The flm called pct and advised the second aircraft was going around because the first aircraft was on the runway. The flm said something to the effect of 'there was less than standard separation' to the pct flm. I just don't get it. Why did the pct monitor controller not send the second aircraft around? Pct monitor controllers either don't understand or just don't care about the requirements during simultaneous operations. You have to know there is something wrong if the first aircraft can't even exit the runway before the second aircraft crosses the threshold during simultaneous procedures. If that happens there is no way you had legal separation on final. The problem is pct called later and said it was not a deal because there was a stuck microphone on the LC3 frequency and monitor could not break off the second aircraft's approach. LC3 and monitor share the same radio transmitter. That is why monitor does the radio check on the frequency; so that we know that the monitor controller can override LC3. If LC3 can send the aircraft around; why is it that the monitor controller can't? Because the monitor controller does not do its job. If monitor can't transmit on the frequency to send the second aircraft around why can't monitor call the LC3 and advise them to brake the second aircraft out? Monitor has a direct line to LC3. Monitor called to do the checks; so the line worked. Monitor calls the local controller some times to talk to local. How does monitor just sit there and do nothing? Because that is how pct work the monitor position. I think once pct started the investigation and asked the monitor controller why did you not break that second aircraft out. The monitor controller quickly thought 'there was a stuck microphone.' it is no wonder pct is having all of these operational errors. I recommend skill enhancement training for all pct controllers on the monitor position requirements. Pct flms need to start monitoring the final during these procedures.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A IAD Controller described a mandated go around event during simultaneous procedures for Runway 19L/19C claiming PCT Monitor Controllers are not completing their assigned responsibilities regarding separation.

Narrative: This is now two days in a row that I have walked up to the Tower and there is less than standard staffing in the Tower. The weather was hazy. The IAD FLM advised me that PCT has been calling to do SIMUL approaches 19L/19C. The FLM advises me to open LC1 just like the previous day. This time the FLM is working CD and GC1 at the same time. Although I would not be surprised if the position logs don't show the FLM working those two positions combined. The FLM was very busy. I was working LC1. PCT was conducting simultaneous arrivals 19L/19C. The visibility was very bad. I could only see arrivals on a quarter mile final do to the haze. LC3 advise me they may have a go around on 19C. I said OK. I looked out the window at the 19C final and could not see any aircraft on final. I looked at the RADAR and I could see two arrival aircraft; Aircraft X and Aircraft Y. I don't remember what aircraft was first and [which] one was second. The first aircraft was one mile final 19C the second aircraft was two mile final 19C. I said 'that first guy is not even going to exit the runway before the second aircraft crosses the threshold.' So LC3 sends the second aircraft around because the first arrival is still on the runway. The FLM called PCT and advised the second aircraft was going around because the first aircraft was on the runway. The FLM said something to the effect of 'there was less than standard separation' to the PCT FLM. I just don't get it. Why did the PCT Monitor Controller not send the second aircraft around? PCT monitor controllers either don't understand or just don't care about the requirements during simultaneous operations. You have to know there is something wrong if the first aircraft can't even exit the runway before the second aircraft crosses the threshold during simultaneous procedures. If that happens there is no way you had legal separation on final. The problem is PCT called later and said it was not a deal because there was a stuck microphone on the LC3 frequency and monitor could not break off the second aircraft's approach. LC3 and monitor share the same radio transmitter. That is why monitor does the radio check on the frequency; so that we know that the Monitor Controller can override LC3. If LC3 can send the aircraft around; why is it that the Monitor Controller can't? Because the Monitor Controller does not do its job. If Monitor can't transmit on the frequency to send the second aircraft around why can't Monitor call the LC3 and advise them to brake the second aircraft out? Monitor has a direct line to LC3. Monitor called to do the checks; so the line worked. Monitor calls the Local Controller some times to talk to local. How does Monitor just sit there and do nothing? Because that is how PCT work the monitor position. I think once PCT started the investigation and asked the Monitor Controller why did you not break that second aircraft out. The Monitor Controller quickly thought 'there was a stuck microphone.' It is no wonder PCT is having all of these operational errors. I recommend skill enhancement training for all PCT controllers on the monitor position requirements. PCT FLMs need to start monitoring the final during these procedures.

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.