Narrative:

Aircraft Y was instructed to taxi into position and hold. Aircraft X had been cleared to land and was on a 2 and one half mile final. Traffic was exchanged. A traffic situation involving two airborne aircraft distracted me since the proximity of the aircraft caused their radar targets to cancel, and the one pilot was unable to follow traffic and was apparently vision-challenged. Once I had established that the two airplanes were not going to collide, I visually scanned my final and noticed aircraft Y appeared to be on the runway while aircraft X was about one half mile final. I sent aircraft X around and once any other conflicts had been averted, I cleared aircraft Y for takeoff. Later, aircraft X queried as to why he had been issued a go around. I told him to avoid an aircraft on the runway. He told me that he had observed the other aircraft in the run-up area, not on the runway. Given the rapid sequence of events, plus the amount of pilot training at our airport, aircraft Y may not have taken his instruction to taxi into position and hold, and held short instead. It is very common with our student pilots. I always instruct my students that no other call takes priority when an airplane is in position, and I violated this rule myself. Based on the time of day, and the situation, I should have watched aircraft Y to ensure his position and compliance. In addition, I should not have dealt with the traffic situation without ensuring my runway was clear, regardless of their proximity. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter said he had talked to the pilot of the aircraft that was sent around and explained to him that the other aircraft had been given a clearance into position and hold. The go around was just a precaution to avoid a problem since there is a lot of student pilots and training at the airport. The reporter also said myf in the year 1999-2000, was number two in the nation for runway incursions. He said with the help of the airport, controllers often go out onto the field and suggest new and improved signage at various hot spots. In addition, cautionary messages are broadcast on the ATIS. Also, the airport constantly brightens up the painted hold lines and other markings to ensure they are readily seen by the pilots. Pilot meetings are held about every 90 days for more input. Reporter said as a result, runway incursions at myf are way down.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MYF LCL CTLR ISSUES GAR INSTRUCTION TO TFC ON A HALF MILE FINAL BECAUSE TFC HAD BEEN INSTRUCTED TO TAXI INTO POSITION AND HOLD.

Narrative: ACFT Y WAS INSTRUCTED TO TAXI INTO POSITION AND HOLD. ACFT X HAD BEEN CLRED TO LAND AND WAS ON A 2 AND ONE HALF MILE FINAL. TFC WAS EXCHANGED. A TFC SITUATION INVOLVING TWO AIRBORNE ACFT DISTRACTED ME SINCE THE PROXIMITY OF THE ACFT CAUSED THEIR RADAR TARGETS TO CANCEL, AND THE ONE PLT WAS UNABLE TO FOLLOW TFC AND WAS APPARENTLY VISION-CHALLENGED. ONCE I HAD ESTABLISHED THAT THE TWO AIRPLANES WERE NOT GOING TO COLLIDE, I VISUALLY SCANNED MY FINAL AND NOTICED ACFT Y APPEARED TO BE ON THE RWY WHILE ACFT X WAS ABOUT ONE HALF MILE FINAL. I SENT ACFT X AROUND AND ONCE ANY OTHER CONFLICTS HAD BEEN AVERTED, I CLRED ACFT Y FOR TKOF. LATER, ACFT X QUERIED AS TO WHY HE HAD BEEN ISSUED A GAR. I TOLD HIM TO AVOID AN ACFT ON THE RWY. HE TOLD ME THAT HE HAD OBSERVED THE OTHER ACFT IN THE RUN-UP AREA, NOT ON THE RWY. GIVEN THE RAPID SEQUENCE OF EVENTS, PLUS THE AMOUNT OF PLT TRAINING AT OUR ARPT, ACFT Y MAY NOT HAVE TAKEN HIS INSTRUCTION TO TAXI INTO POS AND HOLD, AND HELD SHORT INSTEAD. IT IS VERY COMMON WITH OUR STUDENT PLTS. I ALWAYS INSTRUCT MY STUDENTS THAT NO OTHER CALL TAKES PRIORITY WHEN AN AIRPLANE IS IN POSITION, AND I VIOLATED THIS RULE MYSELF. BASED ON THE TIME OF DAY, AND THE SIT, I SHOULD HAVE WATCHED ACFT Y TO ENSURE HIS POSITION AND COMPLIANCE. IN ADDITION, I SHOULD NOT HAVE DEALT WITH THE TFC SITUATION WITHOUT ENSURING MY RWY WAS CLR, REGARDLESS OF THEIR PROXIMITY. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR SAID HE HAD TALKED TO THE PLT OF THE ACFT THAT WAS SENT AROUND AND EXPLAINED TO HIM THAT THE OTHER ACFT HAD BEEN GIVEN A CLRNC INTO POSITION AND HOLD. THE GAR WAS JUST A PRECAUTION TO AVOID A PROB SINCE THERE IS A LOT OF STUDENT PLTS AND TRAINING AT THE ARPT. THE RPTR ALSO SAID MYF IN THE YEAR 1999-2000, WAS NUMBER TWO IN THE NATION FOR RWY INCURSIONS. HE SAID WITH THE HELP OF THE ARPT, CTLRS OFTEN GO OUT ONTO THE FIELD AND SUGGEST NEW AND IMPROVED SIGNAGE AT VARIOUS HOT SPOTS. IN ADDITION, CAUTIONARY MESSAGES ARE BROADCAST ON THE ATIS. ALSO, THE ARPT CONSTANTLY BRIGHTENS UP THE PAINTED HOLD LINES AND OTHER MARKINGS TO ENSURE THEY ARE READILY SEEN BY THE PLTS. PLT MEETINGS ARE HELD ABOUT EVERY 90 DAYS FOR MORE INPUT. RPTR SAID AS A RESULT, RWY INCURSIONS AT MYF ARE WAY DOWN.

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.