Narrative:

17 mi southwest of bhm is eky. During the last 90 days bhm's traffic count (IFR) has risen 600 percent. This is due to a part 135 operation that has moved there and the addition of a localizer approach. This has made eky the #1 regional airport in the state of al. We cannot communicate with aircraft on the ground at eky, and do not have a remote transmitter/receiver. This situation causes holding IFR aircraft until we receive confirmation that prior IFR arrs are on the ground, sometimes 3 or 4. If they used the VOR approach it also closes another airport (eet) shelby county until confirmation is received. Another complication is eky: close proximity to bhm. It lies right at the point where controllers turn base to final for the ILS to runway 5. The situation is growing worse with the growth of the airport. Mercedes benz is expected to bring 20 BE20's and a biv, they are also building 60 additional 'T' hangars sure to attract more aircraft. The answer to this problem is a remote transmit/receive at eky. In the last 90 days the traffic at eky has gone from roughly 200 operations a month to over 900 operations and increasing. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated the problem is continuous on a daily basis in all types of WX except for fog conditions. Reporter alleged the FAA is aware of the problem but indicated there was no funding available. Reporter implied that the FAA was leaving it to the city to deal with the problem. Reporter stated that some air taxi flight crew file 2 flight plans, VFR and IFR, which reporter feels is to circumvent the far since, reporter alleges, there is not a licensed dispatcher at the airport. Reporter stated the aircraft on an approach will report down (landing) or cancel IFR and use the VFR flight plan on the remainder of the flight. Reporter alleged this was something the air taxi flight crew started as it helped approach controller and company aircraft waiting to make an approach. Reporter indicated the normal procedure was for the pilot to notify FSS after landing who in turn would notify approach controller of the aircraft landing so that the next approach could be made. Reporter indicated the problem exists with aircraft departing VFR in marginal WX attempting to get an IFR clearance but are forced to hold VFR until a report is received that the IFR aircraft on approach has landed. Reporter indicated the controllers are stressed from the increased workload involving the traffic volume and the proximity of airports and traffic patterns.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RPTR INDICATES THAT APCH CTLR IS UNABLE TO RECEIVE A PLT RPT OF BEING ON THE GND AFTER COMPLETING AN IFR APCH. RPTR CLAIMS THIS CAUSES HOLDING OF OTHER ACFT UNTIL CONFIRMATION IS RECEIVED FROM THE PREVIOUS ACFT. RPTR STATED THERE IS NO REMOTE XMITTER RECEIVER SITE.

Narrative: 17 MI SW OF BHM IS EKY. DURING THE LAST 90 DAYS BHM'S TFC COUNT (IFR) HAS RISEN 600 PERCENT. THIS IS DUE TO A PART 135 OP THAT HAS MOVED THERE AND THE ADDITION OF A LOC APCH. THIS HAS MADE EKY THE #1 REGIONAL ARPT IN THE STATE OF AL. WE CANNOT COMMUNICATE WITH ACFT ON THE GND AT EKY, AND DO NOT HAVE A REMOTE XMITTER/RECEIVER. THIS SIT CAUSES HOLDING IFR ACFT UNTIL WE RECEIVE CONFIRMATION THAT PRIOR IFR ARRS ARE ON THE GND, SOMETIMES 3 OR 4. IF THEY USED THE VOR APCH IT ALSO CLOSES ANOTHER ARPT (EET) SHELBY COUNTY UNTIL CONFIRMATION IS RECEIVED. ANOTHER COMPLICATION IS EKY: CLOSE PROX TO BHM. IT LIES RIGHT AT THE POINT WHERE CTLRS TURN BASE TO FINAL FOR THE ILS TO RWY 5. THE SIT IS GROWING WORSE WITH THE GROWTH OF THE ARPT. MERCEDES BENZ IS EXPECTED TO BRING 20 BE20'S AND A BIV, THEY ARE ALSO BUILDING 60 ADDITIONAL 'T' HANGARS SURE TO ATTRACT MORE ACFT. THE ANSWER TO THIS PROB IS A REMOTE XMIT/RECEIVE AT EKY. IN THE LAST 90 DAYS THE TFC AT EKY HAS GONE FROM ROUGHLY 200 OPS A MONTH TO OVER 900 OPS AND INCREASING. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THE PROB IS CONTINUOUS ON A DAILY BASIS IN ALL TYPES OF WX EXCEPT FOR FOG CONDITIONS. RPTR ALLEGED THE FAA IS AWARE OF THE PROB BUT INDICATED THERE WAS NO FUNDING AVAILABLE. RPTR IMPLIED THAT THE FAA WAS LEAVING IT TO THE CITY TO DEAL WITH THE PROB. RPTR STATED THAT SOME AIR TAXI FLC FILE 2 FLT PLANS, VFR AND IFR, WHICH RPTR FEELS IS TO CIRCUMVENT THE FAR SINCE, RPTR ALLEGES, THERE IS NOT A LICENSED DISPATCHER AT THE ARPT. RPTR STATED THE ACFT ON AN APCH WILL RPT DOWN (LNDG) OR CANCEL IFR AND USE THE VFR FLT PLAN ON THE REMAINDER OF THE FLT. RPTR ALLEGED THIS WAS SOMETHING THE AIR TAXI FLC STARTED AS IT HELPED APCH CTLR AND COMPANY ACFT WAITING TO MAKE AN APCH. RPTR INDICATED THE NORMAL PROC WAS FOR THE PLT TO NOTIFY FSS AFTER LNDG WHO IN TURN WOULD NOTIFY APCH CTLR OF THE ACFT LNDG SO THAT THE NEXT APCH COULD BE MADE. RPTR INDICATED THE PROB EXISTS WITH ACFT DEPARTING VFR IN MARGINAL WX ATTEMPTING TO GET AN IFR CLRNC BUT ARE FORCED TO HOLD VFR UNTIL A RPT IS RECEIVED THAT THE IFR ACFT ON APCH HAS LANDED. RPTR INDICATED THE CTLRS ARE STRESSED FROM THE INCREASED WORKLOAD INVOLVING THE TFC VOLUME AND THE PROX OF ARPTS AND TFC PATTERNS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.