MULTIPLE RWY OP INTERSECTING RWYS SMT X HAD LTSS FROM SMT Y. SYS ERROR.

Date: 1992-10 · Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Recip Eng

Anomalies: atc-issue-all-types|conflict-ground-conflict|less-severe|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-clearance

Synopsis

MULTIPLE RWY OP INTERSECTING RWYS SMT X HAD LTSS FROM SMT Y. SYS ERROR.

Narrative

THE ERROR TOOK PLACE ABOUT 1 HR 40 MINS INTO THE WORK SESSION AND I WAS PROBABLY GETTING TIRED. SMT X REQUESTED AN OVERHEAD APCH TO RWY 35; WHICH I APPROVED. I SHOULD HAVE RESTR SMT X'S ALT AND LANDED SMT Y; WHO HAD CALLED 5 W OF THE FIELD FOR RWY 9. INSTEAD; I GAVE SMT Y A 360 TURN THEN CLRED HIM TO LAND RWY 9. SMT X HAD BEEN INSTRUCTED TO BREAK R MIDFIELD; LATER I CHANGED THIS TO HAVE HIM LAND AFTER SMT Y. SMT X DIDN'T SLOW AS EXPECTED ON THE DOWNWIND; SO I CLRED SMT X TO LAND RWY 35 HOLD SHORT OF RWY 9 FOR TFC. ON THE READBACK; THE PLT SAID HOLD SHORT OF RWY 5 PATTERN. I MISSED THE DIFFERENT RWY; THEN I WENT BACK TO SMT Y AND TOLD HIM SMT X LNDG RWY 35 WILL HOLD SHORT OF RWY 9. WHEN SMT X LANDED; A LARGE AMOUNT OF SMOKE CAME FROM THE WHEEL AREA; AND I THOUGHT BOTH REAR TIRES HAD BLOWN. THE PLT KEPT THE PLANE UNDER CTL AND CONTINUED TO SLOW; BUT WAS OBVIOUSLY NOT GOING TO HOLD SHORT OF RWY 9. I THEN INSTRUCTED SMT X TO PASS THROUGH THE INTXN; WHICH HE DID SUCCESSFULLY AND EXITED THE RWY AT THE NEXT TXWY WITH NO DIFFICULTY. IMMEDIATELY AFTER SEEING THE SMOKE; I TURNED TO SEND SMT Y AROUND. SMT Y WAS PAST THE LNDG THRESHOLD ABOUT TO TOUCH DOWN. HE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GAR. SMT Y PASSED THROUGH THE INTXN BEHIND SMT X WITH ABOUT 1000 FT TO SPARE.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.