Narrative:

Problem: vegas approach's attempts at putting too many aircraft in same piece of airspace. By keeping aircraft high and fast on approach we are prevented from making a normal approach and landing or we can't comply with 'maintain spacing' directions from ATC. Giving aircraft 2 runway changes inside 10 mi to land on 3 different runways at night creates an unsafe situation. Chain of events: we were cleared for visual runway 25L las. We had computer set up for ILS runway 25L for guidance. At 10 mi, we were directed to maintain 170 KTS, 7000 ft, setting us up for a very high approach. They then gave an aircraft on a left downwind a left turn to intercept final. This put that aircraft approximately 1/2 mi in front of us, but somewhat below us. To prevent a traffic conflict, they kept us up high. All this was happening inside 10 mi. When we said we were unable the approach due to the traffic in front of us, approach cleared us for the visual to runway 25R (a sidestep) but to remain behind the aircraft on the visual to runway 25L (the aircraft 1/2 mi in front of us). We quickly set up computer/aircraft for approach to runway 25R and notified approach we could make the approach or stay behind aircraft, but not both. Approach broke us out, leveled us off, and cleared us for visual to runway 19L. We declined this approach because it would have been a slam-dunk approach to a runway with no approach aids at night after a 12 hour day. They vectored us back around for an approach to runway 25L. Once again, we set up aircraft for approach to runway 25L. Once again they changed the approach to runway 25R inside of 10 mi! Once again we set aircraft up for approach to runway 25R and we made a normal landing. Conclusion: we were given approach clrncs to runway 25L then runway 25R then runway 19L then runway 25L then runway 25R -- all inside of 10 mi from field. They jammed another aircraft in front of us creating 1/2 - 1 mi spacing. They kept us high and fast on approach. All this after a long 12 hour day preventing the autoland we wanted to do. I have had this happen before and each time they jam an air carrier Y aircraft in front, air carrier Y does their best to make it work by maintaining 190 KTS to touchdown! Most times amazingly it does work -- this time air carrier Y slowed down for a normal approach. Recommendation: ATC in las should not use air carrier Y unusual approach techniques to jam more aircraft into vegas. ATC should not give runway changes in rapid fire succession to highly automated aircraft. ATC should not give runway changes inside 10 mi to aircraft late at night. ATC should not keep modern aircraft high and fast on approach, these aircraft don't come down like DC9/B727's. This was a nightmare and an unsafe situation all created by ATC. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter does not think that because he happens to be flying a less flexible aircraft he should be the one penalized. Assigning multiple close-in runway changes affects flight safety. Reprogramming can't be accomplished without excessive pilot workload and pilot heads down time.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B757 CREW WAS GIVEN EXCESSIVE RWY CHANGES INSIDE 10 MI AT NIGHT AT LAS.

Narrative: PROB: VEGAS APCH'S ATTEMPTS AT PUTTING TOO MANY ACFT IN SAME PIECE OF AIRSPACE. BY KEEPING ACFT HIGH AND FAST ON APCH WE ARE PREVENTED FROM MAKING A NORMAL APCH AND LNDG OR WE CAN'T COMPLY WITH 'MAINTAIN SPACING' DIRECTIONS FROM ATC. GIVING ACFT 2 RWY CHANGES INSIDE 10 MI TO LAND ON 3 DIFFERENT RWYS AT NIGHT CREATES AN UNSAFE SIT. CHAIN OF EVENTS: WE WERE CLRED FOR VISUAL RWY 25L LAS. WE HAD COMPUTER SET UP FOR ILS RWY 25L FOR GUIDANCE. AT 10 MI, WE WERE DIRECTED TO MAINTAIN 170 KTS, 7000 FT, SETTING US UP FOR A VERY HIGH APCH. THEY THEN GAVE AN ACFT ON A L DOWNWIND A L TURN TO INTERCEPT FINAL. THIS PUT THAT ACFT APPROX 1/2 MI IN FRONT OF US, BUT SOMEWHAT BELOW US. TO PREVENT A TFC CONFLICT, THEY KEPT US UP HIGH. ALL THIS WAS HAPPENING INSIDE 10 MI. WHEN WE SAID WE WERE UNABLE THE APCH DUE TO THE TFC IN FRONT OF US, APCH CLRED US FOR THE VISUAL TO RWY 25R (A SIDESTEP) BUT TO REMAIN BEHIND THE ACFT ON THE VISUAL TO RWY 25L (THE ACFT 1/2 MI IN FRONT OF US). WE QUICKLY SET UP COMPUTER/ACFT FOR APCH TO RWY 25R AND NOTIFIED APCH WE COULD MAKE THE APCH OR STAY BEHIND ACFT, BUT NOT BOTH. APCH BROKE US OUT, LEVELED US OFF, AND CLRED US FOR VISUAL TO RWY 19L. WE DECLINED THIS APCH BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A SLAM-DUNK APCH TO A RWY WITH NO APCH AIDS AT NIGHT AFTER A 12 HR DAY. THEY VECTORED US BACK AROUND FOR AN APCH TO RWY 25L. ONCE AGAIN, WE SET UP ACFT FOR APCH TO RWY 25L. ONCE AGAIN THEY CHANGED THE APCH TO RWY 25R INSIDE OF 10 MI! ONCE AGAIN WE SET ACFT UP FOR APCH TO RWY 25R AND WE MADE A NORMAL LNDG. CONCLUSION: WE WERE GIVEN APCH CLRNCS TO RWY 25L THEN RWY 25R THEN RWY 19L THEN RWY 25L THEN RWY 25R -- ALL INSIDE OF 10 MI FROM FIELD. THEY JAMMED ANOTHER ACFT IN FRONT OF US CREATING 1/2 - 1 MI SPACING. THEY KEPT US HIGH AND FAST ON APCH. ALL THIS AFTER A LONG 12 HR DAY PREVENTING THE AUTOLAND WE WANTED TO DO. I HAVE HAD THIS HAPPEN BEFORE AND EACH TIME THEY JAM AN ACR Y ACFT IN FRONT, ACR Y DOES THEIR BEST TO MAKE IT WORK BY MAINTAINING 190 KTS TO TOUCHDOWN! MOST TIMES AMAZINGLY IT DOES WORK -- THIS TIME ACR Y SLOWED DOWN FOR A NORMAL APCH. RECOMMENDATION: ATC IN LAS SHOULD NOT USE ACR Y UNUSUAL APCH TECHNIQUES TO JAM MORE ACFT INTO VEGAS. ATC SHOULD NOT GIVE RWY CHANGES IN RAPID FIRE SUCCESSION TO HIGHLY AUTOMATED ACFT. ATC SHOULD NOT GIVE RWY CHANGES INSIDE 10 MI TO ACFT LATE AT NIGHT. ATC SHOULD NOT KEEP MODERN ACFT HIGH AND FAST ON APCH, THESE ACFT DON'T COME DOWN LIKE DC9/B727'S. THIS WAS A NIGHTMARE AND AN UNSAFE SIT ALL CREATED BY ATC. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR DOES NOT THINK THAT BECAUSE HE HAPPENS TO BE FLYING A LESS FLEXIBLE ACFT HE SHOULD BE THE ONE PENALIZED. ASSIGNING MULTIPLE CLOSE-IN RWY CHANGES AFFECTS FLT SAFETY. REPROGRAMMING CAN'T BE ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT EXCESSIVE PLT WORKLOAD AND PLT HEADS DOWN TIME.

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.