Narrative:

There was apparently a loss of radar separation requirements by ATC during 2 IFR training flights at mgj on this day. Both aircraft were training flights with instrument students on IFR flight plans. Initially; my student asked the controller for the ILS 3 into mgj shortly after crossing sax VOR on V213. Prior to the handoff to CTAF at mgj; I told the controller we were doing the circle-to-land procedure for this ILS 3 approach. That was the procedure that my student and I discussed during our briefing. Now it is possible I may not have specified the actual 'circle-to-land' option with missed to the controller due to the demands at the time with my student prior to switching to CTAF at mgj. However; I am certain we were cleared for the ILS 3 into mgj; which according to my understanding; delays another aircraft on an IFR flight plan from being released into mgj on an approach until 1 of 2 things happen on my account: either a closing of my flight plan; or reporting missed. Well; while I was on the right downwind at mgj doing the circle-to-land procedure to runway 21; I heard the other aircraft report 2 mile final on ILS 3 into mgj. I immediately spoke with him and asked him if he was doing the whole approach to the missed; and he responded 'yes' we are going to the missed approach. So; I informed him that I would do a 360 degree left turn while on downwind to provide spacing so he could continue with his approach to the missed approach and have safe space to execute the procedure; which occurred. After confirmation; both verbally and visually; because conditions were VMC with ceilings 3;500 ft MSL; I then continued on downwind to base to final for runway 21 with intentions for a low approach to missed approach. Strong crosswinds prevailed (250 degrees at 12 KTS gusting to 20 KTS) so I thought it would be good practice for low approach with sideslip technique. Well; the student inadvertently touched down. Since it was gusting; I played it safe by doing a stop-and-go prior to getting back in the air. After reporting back on the missed; the controller was confused by location (I presume) due to the time that had elapsed during my missed approach procedure (circle-to-land). I was informed to take down a number to call newark liberty TRACON upon landing; which I did. However; first we continued with another approach; the GPS 21 into mgj; and then after landing; closed our flight plan prior to calling TRACON. Apparently; it appears to me as though another aircraft was released into mgj prior to me reporting the missed approach. The controller must have been under the impression that I was going to go missed at the map for s-ils 3 instead of circling; and proceed directly to helon (map holding fix). Like I said; it is possible I may not have conveyed the actual circling procedures to him after switching over to CTAF; and if that was the case; I apologize for that misunderstanding. However; I was still 'cleared' for the ILS 3 into mgj and still on an IFR flight plan. Since I had not canceled it; I was surprised to hear of another aircraft arriving on ILS 3 into mgj because I had not yet reported back to the controller on the missed approach. I was still on CTAF at mgj when the other aircraft reported 2 mile final ILS 3. That did surprise me. In addition to this story; it is important to stipulate that myself and the other aircraft were both VFR while at mgj and speaking to each other on the CTAF. Even though ATC apparently had loss of radar separation requirements; our 2 aircraft were both very safe and abiding to all VFR procedures while in the pattern at mgj. We confirmed our intentions verbally; and then visually as well. The ceilings were approximately 3;500 ft MSL. I am always vigilant about collision avoidance while flying; especially in patterns at non-towered fields.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C172 inbound to MGJ on ILS 3 approach completed circling maneuver which resulted in loss of separation.

Narrative: There was apparently a loss of radar separation requirements by ATC during 2 IFR training flights at MGJ on this day. Both aircraft were training flights with instrument students on IFR flight plans. Initially; my student asked the Controller for the ILS 3 into MGJ shortly after crossing SAX VOR on V213. Prior to the handoff to CTAF at MGJ; I told the Controller we were doing the circle-to-land procedure for this ILS 3 approach. That was the procedure that my student and I discussed during our briefing. Now it is possible I may not have specified the actual 'circle-to-land' option with missed to the Controller due to the demands at the time with my student prior to switching to CTAF at MGJ. However; I am certain we were cleared for the ILS 3 into MGJ; which according to my understanding; delays another aircraft on an IFR flight plan from being released into MGJ on an approach until 1 of 2 things happen on my account: either a closing of my flight plan; or reporting missed. Well; while I was on the right downwind at MGJ doing the circle-to-land procedure to Runway 21; I heard the other aircraft report 2 mile final on ILS 3 into MGJ. I immediately spoke with him and asked him if he was doing the whole approach to the missed; and he responded 'yes' we are going to the missed approach. So; I informed him that I would do a 360 degree left turn while on downwind to provide spacing so he could continue with his approach to the missed approach and have safe space to execute the procedure; which occurred. After confirmation; both verbally and visually; because conditions were VMC with ceilings 3;500 FT MSL; I then continued on downwind to base to final for Runway 21 with intentions for a low approach to missed approach. Strong crosswinds prevailed (250 degrees at 12 KTS gusting to 20 KTS) so I thought it would be good practice for low approach with sideslip technique. Well; the student inadvertently touched down. Since it was gusting; I played it safe by doing a stop-and-go prior to getting back in the air. After reporting back on the missed; the Controller was confused by location (I presume) due to the time that had elapsed during my missed approach procedure (circle-to-land). I was informed to take down a number to call Newark Liberty TRACON upon landing; which I did. However; first we continued with another approach; the GPS 21 into MGJ; and then after landing; closed our flight plan prior to calling TRACON. Apparently; it appears to me as though another aircraft was released into MGJ prior to me reporting the missed approach. The Controller must have been under the impression that I was going to go missed at the MAP for S-ILS 3 instead of circling; and proceed directly to HELON (MAP holding fix). Like I said; it is possible I may not have conveyed the actual circling procedures to him after switching over to CTAF; and if that was the case; I apologize for that misunderstanding. However; I was still 'cleared' for the ILS 3 into MGJ and still on an IFR flight plan. Since I had not canceled it; I was surprised to hear of another aircraft arriving on ILS 3 into MGJ because I had not yet reported back to the Controller on the missed approach. I was still on CTAF at MGJ when the other aircraft reported 2 mile final ILS 3. That did surprise me. In addition to this story; it is important to stipulate that myself and the other aircraft were both VFR while at MGJ and speaking to each other on the CTAF. Even though ATC apparently had loss of radar separation requirements; our 2 aircraft were both very safe and abiding to all VFR procedures while in the pattern at MGJ. We confirmed our intentions verbally; and then visually as well. The ceilings were approximately 3;500 FT MSL. I am always vigilant about collision avoidance while flying; especially in patterns at non-Towered fields.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.