Narrative:

We had received our clearance for the ILS 19 approach into teterboro airport (teb); with the added statement: 'glideslope inoperative'. The approach was briefed to be flown as a localizer only; with the appropriate minimums and missed approach procedure. The ceiling was 2;000 broken with better than 5 miles visibility.what occurred was a distraction resulting in a situational awareness issue during the initial vectoring for the approach. It began as a clearance direct to the initial approach fix (IAF); in flying to the fix we were at a 90 degree angle to the inbound approach course. The airspeed was manually selected at 240 KTS; while flying at an assigned altitude of 3;000 ft. At approximately one mile from the IAF we were assigned a vector to intercept the localizer and were cleared for the approach. The approach controller later admitted that he gave us a rather shallow vector for the intercept; which put us past the localizer course. We rejoined the course very close to the FAF and 1;000 ft higher than we should have been for that segment of the approach. Upon descending through 2;000 ft we encountered visual conditions with the runway in sight; but were too high and fast and hadn't enough distance from the runway in order to properly configure for a safe landing. We relayed our situation to the tower and requested a vector in order to descend and to provide additional spacing to the runway. We were told that was not possible and had to perform the published missed approach procedure. We were still a few miles from the actual missed approach point and at an altitude of approximately 1;800 ft. The procedure called for an immediate right turn and a climb to 1;500 to intercept the teb VOR radial outbound. While executing the missed approach the aircraft drifted left of course. The pilot not flying advised the pilot flying and a right turn was completed however we were at too high of an altitude for that segment of the procedure. The tower then assigned us a 290 degree heading and a clearance down to 1;500 ft. We were handed off to TRACON (approach control); where we were vectored for a second approach and landed without incident. Upon landing we were given a telephone number and instructed to call the tower. The PIC explained to the tower supervisor what our situation was and the reason for requesting a vector. He was told that it was impossible given the complexity of the surrounding airspace. He was also told that our deviation actually had no effect on their operation; but our heading and altitude; during the beginning of the procedure put us in close proximity to a descending aircraft performing an arrival into jfk (we had that traffic displayed on our TCAS as TA but no RA). The situation was detected early enough and the descending aircraft was instructed to level off; whereupon no incident occurred. It was also at that moment we received the vector and instructed to descend to 1;500 ft. In retrospect; the proper course of action in complying with this would have been to continue on the localizer while descending and then commencing the right turn at the map.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A GLF-4 flight crew lost situational awareness and their approach became unstabilized on a Glide Slope Out ILS approach to TEB Runway 19. When instructed to fly the published missed approach procedure; uncertainty as to the appropriate altitude while doing so lead to a traffic conflict and the need for intervention by ATC.

Narrative: We had received our clearance for the ILS 19 approach into Teterboro airport (TEB); with the added statement: 'Glideslope inoperative'. The approach was briefed to be flown as a Localizer only; with the appropriate minimums and missed approach procedure. The ceiling was 2;000 broken with better than 5 miles visibility.What occurred was a distraction resulting in a situational awareness issue during the initial vectoring for the approach. It began as a clearance direct to the initial approach fix (IAF); in flying to the fix we were at a 90 degree angle to the inbound approach course. The airspeed was manually selected at 240 KTS; while flying at an assigned altitude of 3;000 FT. At approximately one mile from the IAF we were assigned a vector to intercept the localizer and were cleared for the approach. The Approach Controller later admitted that he gave us a rather shallow vector for the intercept; which put us past the localizer course. We rejoined the course very close to the FAF and 1;000 FT higher than we should have been for that segment of the approach. Upon descending through 2;000 FT we encountered visual conditions with the runway in sight; but were too high and fast and hadn't enough distance from the runway in order to properly configure for a safe landing. We relayed our situation to the Tower and requested a vector in order to descend and to provide additional spacing to the runway. We were told that was not possible and had to perform the published missed approach procedure. We were still a few miles from the actual missed approach point and at an altitude of approximately 1;800 FT. The procedure called for an immediate right turn and a climb to 1;500 to intercept the TEB VOR radial outbound. While executing the missed approach the aircraft drifted left of course. The pilot not flying advised the pilot flying and a right turn was completed however we were at too high of an altitude for that segment of the procedure. The Tower then assigned us a 290 degree heading and a clearance down to 1;500 FT. We were handed off to TRACON (Approach Control); where we were vectored for a second approach and landed without incident. Upon landing we were given a telephone number and instructed to call the Tower. The PIC explained to the Tower supervisor what our situation was and the reason for requesting a vector. He was told that it was impossible given the complexity of the surrounding airspace. He was also told that our deviation actually had no effect on their operation; but our heading and altitude; during the beginning of the procedure put us in close proximity to a descending aircraft performing an arrival into JFK (we had that traffic displayed on our TCAS as TA but no RA). The situation was detected early enough and the descending aircraft was instructed to level off; whereupon no incident occurred. It was also at that moment we received the vector and instructed to descend to 1;500 FT. In retrospect; the proper course of action in complying with this would have been to continue on the localizer while descending and then commencing the right turn at the MAP.

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.