 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Tower controller operating on intersecting runways with traffic on both elected to issue a go around to traffic landing runway xx but not to traffic landing runway yy; ignoring the asde-X alert requiring a go around.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 945427 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201104 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172 |
| Flight Phase | Landing |
| Flight Plan | VFR |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Make Model Name | Citation V/Ultra/Encore (C560) |
| Flight Phase | Landing |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Local |
| Qualification | Air Traffic Control Developmental |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
I was working local control. Runway xx/yy in use; all runways and taxiways open and available. Local control had possession of all runways. A C172; was in the VFR traffic pattern; left turns; for runway xx. A C560 was on final for runway yy. Both were cleared to land on their respective runways. With winds of about 160 at 15 KTS; the speed difference between the C172 and C560 was greater than initially anticipated; and seeing that I would not have runway separation; I sent the C172 around. The C172 flew runway heading; and was still displayed on the asde-X when the C560 crossed the landing threshold for runway yy. The asde-X issued a go-around for the C560; but due to converging courses with the C172; I did not issue the go-around. A greater awareness on my part of the speed difference and effect of the wind on the performance of the two aircraft may have prevented the situation which led to the go-around. An earlier go-around instruction may have allowed the go-around aircraft to gain more altitude before crossing runway yy.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Tower Controller operating on intersecting runways with traffic on both elected to issue a go around to traffic landing Runway XX but not to traffic landing Runway YY; ignoring the ASDE-X alert requiring a go around.
Narrative: I was working Local Control. Runway XX/YY in use; all runways and taxiways open and available. Local Control had possession of all runways. A C172; was in the VFR traffic pattern; left turns; for Runway XX. A C560 was on final for Runway YY. Both were cleared to land on their respective runways. With winds of about 160 at 15 KTS; the speed difference between the C172 and C560 was greater than initially anticipated; and seeing that I would not have runway separation; I sent the C172 around. The C172 flew runway heading; and was still displayed on the ASDE-X when the C560 crossed the landing threshold for Runway YY. The ASDE-X issued a go-around for the C560; but due to converging courses with the C172; I did not issue the go-around. A greater awareness on my part of the speed difference and effect of the wind on the performance of the two aircraft may have prevented the situation which led to the go-around. An earlier go-around instruction may have allowed the go-around aircraft to gain more altitude before crossing Runway YY.
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.