MLG ON SHORT FINAL OBSERVED A VFR TURBOPROP ON FINAL FOR A CROSS RWY WHICH WAS NOT GIVING WAY TO THE MLG EVEN THOUGH IT APPEARED ON A COLLISION COURSE. TWR LCL CTLR HAD ISSUED ADVISORY FOR THE XING TFC.

Date: 2001-06 · Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng · Phase: approach

Anomalies: conflict-airborne-conflict|other-visual-seperation

Synopsis

MLG ON SHORT FINAL OBSERVED A VFR TURBOPROP ON FINAL FOR A CROSS RWY WHICH WAS NOT GIVING WAY TO THE MLG EVEN THOUGH IT APPEARED ON A COLLISION COURSE. TWR LCL CTLR HAD ISSUED ADVISORY FOR THE XING TFC.

Narrative

ON FINAL APCH FOR RWY 8L AT CYVR; WE EXPERIENCED AN NMAC WITH ANOTHER ACFT ON APCH FOR RWY 12. WE HAD BEEN CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 8L AND WERE PROCEEDING AT APCH SPD IN THE LNDG CONFIGN. AT APPROX 1000 FT AGL; TWR ISSUED A TFC CALL FOR VFR TFC LNDG RWY 12 INDICATING THAT THE OTHER ACFT 'WILL MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION.' THE CAPT; ACTING AS THE PNF FROM THE L SEAT; IMMEDIATELY SAW THE TFC AND POINTED IT OUT TO ME. WE AGREED THAT THE OTHER ACFT; A 2 ENG; HIGH WING TURBOPROP (APPROX 12 PAX) COULD BECOME A CONFLICT. WE ELECTED TO CONTINUE BASED ON THE TWR CTLR'S ASSURANCE THAT THE OTHER PLT WOULD MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION. THE OTHER ACFT WAS APPARENTLY ON ANOTHER TWR FREQ. WE DID NOT HEAR ANY XMISSIONS BTWN THAT ACFT AND THE TWR. BY THE TIME WE REALIZED THAT THE OTHER PLT WOULD TAKE NO FURTHER ACTION TO ENSURE ADEQUATE SEPARATION; A GAR WOULD HAVE REDUCED SEPARATION. THE OTHER ACFT PASSED 200-300 FT ABOVE US AND LESS THAN 1/2 NM BEHIND US. WE LANDED WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. UPON LNDG; THE CAPT PHONED THE TWR CTLR TO DISCUSS THE INCIDENT.

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