Tul radar controller failed to protect for a missed approach resulting in an operational error.

Attributes
ACN	536392
Time
Date	200201
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	navaid : gnp.vortac
State Reference	OK
Altitude	msl single value : 2500
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : tul.tracon
Operator	general aviation : instructional
Make Model Name	Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Navigation In Use	other
Flight Phase	landing : missed approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Controlling Facilities	tracon : tul.tracon
Operator	general aviation : instructional
Make Model Name	Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	cruise : level
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : approach
Qualification	pilot : private
ASRS Report	536392
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : approach
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : published procedure non adherence : required legal separation
Independent Detector	atc equipment other atc equipment : radar other controllera other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : executed missed approach flight crew : took evasive action
Consequence	faa : investigated
Miss Distance	horizontal : 9000 vertical : 0
Supplementary
Problem Areas	ATC Human Performance
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Operational Error

Narrative:

A C172 was on an instrument flight plan, on the gnp VOR approach to runway 1L at riverside airport. Through coordination with tulsa approach control, the inbound cessna was known to be going missed off of the approach. The controller at tul issued the missed instruction to the inbound before switching him to rvs tower. The inbound aircraft was told to execute missed instructions at 2 1/2 mi inside the FAF (gnp). At that time, the inbound aircraft turned wbound, straight at another IFR aircraft that was being vectored by tul approach control. The approach controller failed to properly protect for the missed approach, knowing full well that was what the pilot was going to do. Both controller and supervisor at tul responded that, had the inbound aircraft flown the full approach, there would not have been any conflicts. Regardless, you have to protect for missed approach. To my knowledge, the supervisor did not report an operational error nor did he decertify the controller.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TUL RADAR CTLR FAILED TO PROTECT FOR A MISSED APCH RESULTING IN AN OPERROR.

Narrative: A C172 WAS ON AN INST FLT PLAN, ON THE GNP VOR APCH TO RWY 1L AT RIVERSIDE ARPT. THROUGH COORD WITH TULSA APCH CTL, THE INBOUND CESSNA WAS KNOWN TO BE GOING MISSED OFF OF THE APCH. THE CTLR AT TUL ISSUED THE MISSED INSTRUCTION TO THE INBOUND BEFORE SWITCHING HIM TO RVS TWR. THE INBOUND ACFT WAS TOLD TO EXECUTE MISSED INSTRUCTIONS AT 2 1/2 MI INSIDE THE FAF (GNP). AT THAT TIME, THE INBOUND ACFT TURNED WBOUND, STRAIGHT AT ANOTHER IFR ACFT THAT WAS BEING VECTORED BY TUL APCH CTL. THE APCH CTLR FAILED TO PROPERLY PROTECT FOR THE MISSED APCH, KNOWING FULL WELL THAT WAS WHAT THE PLT WAS GOING TO DO. BOTH CTLR AND SUPVR AT TUL RESPONDED THAT, HAD THE INBOUND ACFT FLOWN THE FULL APCH, THERE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ANY CONFLICTS. REGARDLESS, YOU HAVE TO PROTECT FOR MISSED APCH. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE SUPVR DID NOT RPT AN OPERROR NOR DID HE DECERTIFY THE CTLR.

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.