Narrative:

I was working local control 2 and 3 (LC1/LC2) combined at the end of a busy arrival push. A H/DC10 was cleared to land on runway 27. There was no other traffic. The H/DC10 was over the numbers of runway 27 when the amass alert went off: 'warning/runway 27 go around.' everyone looked towards landing aircraft. As I started to key-up and issue the 'go around' command; the supervisor ordered me to allow the aircraft to land. Our amass is not certified for use on runway 27; but it gives alerts on unknown events. This is very troublesome because we are trained to issue the go around command without question; but we receive alerts on non-certified runways; and now our mgrs are telling us to ignore certain alerts. Not a good practice in my opinion; and we should not be using equipment that gives false alerts.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MEM CTLR RPTS AMASS GIVES FALSE ALARMS ON RWY 27 AND IS NOT CERTIFIED FOR USE ON RWY 27 CREATING CONFUSION WHEN THERE IS A RWY 27 ALARM.

Narrative: I WAS WORKING LCL CTL 2 AND 3 (LC1/LC2) COMBINED AT THE END OF A BUSY ARR PUSH. A H/DC10 WAS CLRED TO LAND ON RWY 27. THERE WAS NO OTHER TFC. THE H/DC10 WAS OVER THE NUMBERS OF RWY 27 WHEN THE AMASS ALERT WENT OFF: 'WARNING/RWY 27 GO AROUND.' EVERYONE LOOKED TOWARDS LNDG ACFT. AS I STARTED TO KEY-UP AND ISSUE THE 'GAR' COMMAND; THE SUPVR ORDERED ME TO ALLOW THE ACFT TO LAND. OUR AMASS IS NOT CERTIFIED FOR USE ON RWY 27; BUT IT GIVES ALERTS ON UNKNOWN EVENTS. THIS IS VERY TROUBLESOME BECAUSE WE ARE TRAINED TO ISSUE THE GAR COMMAND WITHOUT QUESTION; BUT WE RECEIVE ALERTS ON NON-CERTIFIED RWYS; AND NOW OUR MGRS ARE TELLING US TO IGNORE CERTAIN ALERTS. NOT A GOOD PRACTICE IN MY OPINION; AND WE SHOULD NOT BE USING EQUIP THAT GIVES FALSE ALERTS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.