B190 ON BASE LEG; VISUAL APCH TO CMH RWY 28L; CROSSES IN FRONT OF C500 ON FINAL FOR RWY 28R; CAUSING CONCERN FOR B190 FLC.

Date: 2001-02 · Aircraft: Beech 1900 · Phase: approach

Anomalies: atc-issue-all-types|conflict-airborne-conflict|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy

Synopsis

B190 ON BASE LEG; VISUAL APCH TO CMH RWY 28L; CROSSES IN FRONT OF C500 ON FINAL FOR RWY 28R; CAUSING CONCERN FOR B190 FLC.

Narrative

FO WAS PF INTO CMH. APCH PUT US ON R DOWNWIND FOR RWY 28L. THEY CLRED US FOR THE VISUAL AND SWITCHED US TO TWR. TWR TOLD US TO LOOK FOR TFC AT 2 O'CLOCK POS TO FOLLOW. I RESPONDED; 'WE HAVE MULTIPLE TARGETS IN SIGHT; I DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE TO FOLLOW.' HE SAID TO 'FOLLOW THE ONE AT 2 O'CLOCK POS AND START THE BASE TURN.' ON THE R BASE; I ASKED ABOUT TFC ON OUR L THAT LOOKED CLOSE. CTLR SAID; 'THAT'S A CITATION ON THE R RWY (RWY 28R).' I SAID; 'HE LOOKS CLOSE --WHAT'S HIS DISTANCE?' CTLR SAID; 'HE'S 13 MI FROM THE ARPT.' OUR TCASII WAS NOT PICKING UP THE CITATION ON THE 5; 10; OR 20 MI RANGES. AS WE CONTINUED ON THE BASE LEG; I REALIZED THE CITATION WAS ABOUT 2 MI FROM US; CONVERGING. WE ALMOST HAD TO TAKE EVASIVE ACTION. I LANDED AND CALLED THE TWR SUPVR. HE SAID HE KNOWS THAT WAS TOO CLOSE AND IS LOOKING INTO IT. DURING OUR APCH ON THE BASE LEG; THE CTLR DID TELL US TO FOLLOW TFC ON RWY 28L FINAL; BUT NEVER TOLD US TO MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION WITH THE CITATION ON RWY 28R FINAL. SINCE HE WAS HAVING US 'CUT IN LINE;' I FIGURED WE HAD SUFFICIENT SPACING FROM THE CITATION. AGAIN; OUR TCASII NEVER DISPLAYED THE CITATION. THE TWR SHOULD HAVE PLAYED IT SAFE AND SHOULD HAVE SEQUENCED US BEHIND THE CITATION.

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