Narrative:

The PA44 was established in the pattern on a left base runway 29L and sequenced #2 to follow traffic. ZMA reported that the pase was 9 mi southeast on the VOR/DME runway 29L approach. I did not consider the pase to be a factor, since the PA44 was less than 3 mi from the airport and turning final. However, the pase checked in and reported on 2 mi final. I saw that the pase was ahead of the PA44 and in such a position that the pase must have crossed the flight path of the PA44 while the PA44 was on base. I asked the pase if traffic had been issued by ZMA. The pase replied in the negative, apologized for not checking in sooner and explained that they had been 'begging' ZMA for a frequency change. I recognized the pase pilot's voice and am inclined to trust the accuracy of their report. I have advised ZMA 4 times in the past week that their position reports do not match the actual locations of aircraft and that I believe that either their radar alignment is incorrect or that their radar map overlay is out of alignment by about 3 mi. Aside from possible equipment malfunction, I believe that the level of traffic at this airport has far outstripped the capacity of the VFR tower/overlying center/non radar procedures type of operation that persists here. This place needs a radar sited near enough to be usable down to the surface, and a dedicated approach control or center sector with a permanently assigned staff who can become truly proficient at this operation without being rotated out to other non terminal sectors. I'm afraid to fly here.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RPTR CLAIMS A POSSIBLE NMAC BTWN 2 ARR ACFT, A PASE AND PA44, ALTHOUGH NEITHER PLT RPTED SAME. RPTR ALLEGES CTR CTLR WAS LATE SENDING THE PASE TO THE TWR FREQ.

Narrative: THE PA44 WAS ESTABLISHED IN THE PATTERN ON A L BASE RWY 29L AND SEQUENCED #2 TO FOLLOW TFC. ZMA RPTED THAT THE PASE WAS 9 MI SE ON THE VOR/DME RWY 29L APCH. I DID NOT CONSIDER THE PASE TO BE A FACTOR, SINCE THE PA44 WAS LESS THAN 3 MI FROM THE ARPT AND TURNING FINAL. HOWEVER, THE PASE CHKED IN AND RPTED ON 2 MI FINAL. I SAW THAT THE PASE WAS AHEAD OF THE PA44 AND IN SUCH A POS THAT THE PASE MUST HAVE CROSSED THE FLT PATH OF THE PA44 WHILE THE PA44 WAS ON BASE. I ASKED THE PASE IF TFC HAD BEEN ISSUED BY ZMA. THE PASE REPLIED IN THE NEGATIVE, APOLOGIZED FOR NOT CHKING IN SOONER AND EXPLAINED THAT THEY HAD BEEN 'BEGGING' ZMA FOR A FREQ CHANGE. I RECOGNIZED THE PASE PLT'S VOICE AND AM INCLINED TO TRUST THE ACCURACY OF THEIR RPT. I HAVE ADVISED ZMA 4 TIMES IN THE PAST WK THAT THEIR POS RPTS DO NOT MATCH THE ACTUAL LOCATIONS OF ACFT AND THAT I BELIEVE THAT EITHER THEIR RADAR ALIGNMENT IS INCORRECT OR THAT THEIR RADAR MAP OVERLAY IS OUT OF ALIGNMENT BY ABOUT 3 MI. ASIDE FROM POSSIBLE EQUIP MALFUNCTION, I BELIEVE THAT THE LEVEL OF TFC AT THIS ARPT HAS FAR OUTSTRIPPED THE CAPACITY OF THE VFR TWR/OVERLYING CTR/NON RADAR PROCS TYPE OF OP THAT PERSISTS HERE. THIS PLACE NEEDS A RADAR SITED NEAR ENOUGH TO BE USABLE DOWN TO THE SURFACE, AND A DEDICATED APCH CTL OR CTR SECTOR WITH A PERMANENTLY ASSIGNED STAFF WHO CAN BECOME TRULY PROFICIENT AT THIS OP WITHOUT BEING ROTATED OUT TO OTHER NON TERMINAL SECTORS. I'M AFRAID TO FLY HERE.

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.