Oak tower controller described a developing conflict between air carrier arrival traffic assigned ru...

Narrative:

A flight check VFR LR60 executing a ILS runway 11 recorded approach at approximately 8 mile final was talking with richmond sector (norcal TRACON). At the same time; grove sector (norcal TRACON) was feeding oak tower runway 29 arrivals and had a B737 on the visual approach to runway 29 at approximately 8 mile final. I and a cpc-it were working the local control 1 position at oak tower and were coordinating with the grove sector that there was a flight check in progress to runway 11 and asked why they were bringing in opposite direction arrivals to the same runway as the flight check. I advised the grove controller to breakout the B737 on the approach; seeing that this was not going to work with two aircraft approaching the same runway from opposite directions at the same time. The grove controller proceeded to tell me that; 'I should provide visual separation between the LR60 and the B737 and just break out the LR60 at the numbers.' there was a flight check recording in progress to runway 11 and the LR60 needed to fly the length of the runway (low approach) and needed a sterile environment ahead of him to accomplish the recording. The incident happened again; the flight check was on a recorded approach to runway 11 and more jets arriving opposite direction runway 29 less than 10 minutes later. I do not know if the two sectors at norcal TRACON (grove and richmond) and the coordinator (CI1) were even communicating with each other on this very complex and unsafe scenario that had developed twice. Also; the grove controller feeding us runway 29 IFR jet arrivals with a flight check in progress on the other opposite direction approach seemed ok with the fact that 2 jets landing the same runway opposite direction at the same time is very disconcerting and dangerous. [I] recommend a review of flight check operations and priorities at norcal TRACON. Better communication and coordination between the two sectors involved (grove and richmond); the coordinator CI1 at norcal TRACON; and oak tower local control 1. The grove controller [should] be reminded that 2 aircraft cannot be landing the same runway at the same time no matter if they are VFR or IFR. It does not matter; they are still both aircraft trying to occupy the same runway at the same time!

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: OAK Tower Controller described a developing conflict between air carrier arrival traffic assigned Runway 29 and an FAA flight check operation to Runway 11; noting lack of internal coordination between positions at NCT.

Narrative: A flight check VFR LR60 executing a ILS Runway 11 recorded approach at approximately 8 mile final was talking with Richmond Sector (NorCal TRACON). At the same time; Grove Sector (NorCal TRACON) was feeding OAK Tower Runway 29 arrivals and had a B737 on the visual approach to Runway 29 at approximately 8 mile final. I and a CPC-IT were working the Local Control 1 position at OAK Tower and were coordinating with the Grove Sector that there was a flight check in progress to Runway 11 and asked why they were bringing in opposite direction arrivals to the same runway as the flight check. I advised the Grove Controller to breakout the B737 on the approach; seeing that this was not going to work with two aircraft approaching the same runway from opposite directions at the same time. The Grove Controller proceeded to tell me that; 'I should provide visual separation between the LR60 and the B737 and just break out the LR60 at the numbers.' There was a flight check recording in progress to Runway 11 and the LR60 needed to fly the length of the runway (low approach) and needed a sterile environment ahead of him to accomplish the recording. The incident happened again; the flight check was on a recorded approach to Runway 11 and more jets arriving opposite direction Runway 29 less than 10 minutes later. I do not know if the two sectors at NorCal TRACON (Grove and Richmond) and the Coordinator (CI1) were even communicating with each other on this very complex and unsafe scenario that had developed twice. Also; the Grove Controller feeding us Runway 29 IFR jet arrivals with a flight check in progress on the other opposite direction approach seemed ok with the fact that 2 jets landing the same runway opposite direction at the same time is very disconcerting and dangerous. [I] recommend a review of flight check operations and priorities at NorCal TRACON. Better communication and coordination between the two sectors involved (Grove and Richmond); the Coordinator CI1 at NorCal TRACON; and OAK Tower Local Control 1. The Grove Controller [should] be reminded that 2 aircraft cannot be landing the same runway at the same time no matter if they are VFR or IFR. It does not matter; they are still both aircraft trying to occupy the same runway at the same time!

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.

Attributes
ACN	968676
Time
Date	201109
Local Time Of Day	1801-2400
Place
Locale Reference	OAK.Airport
State Reference	CA
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Final Approach
Route In Use	Visual Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Learjet 60
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	Final Approach
Flight Plan	VFR
Person 1
Function	Local
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Conflict Airborne Conflict

Oak tower controller described a developing conflict between air carrier arrival traffic assigned runway 29 and an FAA flight check operation to runway 11; noting lack of internal coordination between positions at nct.