Narrative:

Las tower; LC2 training in progress. We had a go around; due to traffic departing the intersecting runway; that would not clear the intersection prior to the arrival coming across the threshold. It seemed to be a normal go around. While working LC2; I was training in light traffic conditions. We were on configuration 1; which is runway 25/runway 19 note: runway 25L arrivals; non intersecting runways; runway 25R departures..runway 1 left/right landing and departing; intersecting runways. The rid (red/green light) was being used to indicate who had control of the intersection. We had traffic on base to final for runway 19R. The LC1 controller coordinated the intersection to us behind a B737 departing Runway25R. The B737 needed to be through the 25/19 intersection prior to the FA20 on runway 19 final coming across the threshold. This was not going to happen; the B737 jet was only midfield when we had to issue go around instructions to the FA20. If we had allowed the FA20 land; it would have been a deal; with a runway incursion. Note: even though LC1 departed runway 25 without enough time to clear the intersection; at las; it is the LC2's responsibility to send the aircraft around to avoid the error. When this took place; I considered it a fairly normal go around. When the pilot landed he informed ground control that by going around; it put him in a more unsafe position; than letting him land. The flm; and I were both aware that the spacing was insufficient; but with training taking place; I was waiting to take action; hoping the trainee would see the spacing; and then initiate the go around on his own. When the aircraft was on about a 3/4 mile final; estimated 500 AGL; I stepped in and sent the FA20 around; I immediately called traffic; B737 departing runway 25 and asked if he had them in sight. The reply was affirmative; he was then instructed to maintain visual separation; fly runway heading; and to stay low. The B737 was through the intersection; and the FA20 was about midfield runway 19 at the time. This is pretty typical for a go around at las. I agree that many times; it is safer to let the aircraft land; than to put them in conflict with departing traffic. However; we have go around procedures; and I followed them. I do not have a choice to allow the aircraft to land. Suggestions; we had a go around spacing (gas tool) procedure when runway 25L was under construction. It allowed aircraft to land on runway 19R when aircraft were departing or landing runway 25R. They ran scenarios on a computer; perhaps a million operations; and proved that it would work. In reality; it worked fantastically. However; when runway 25L reopened; they took away the gas tool. Now we are back to go arounds and very unsafe situations for the pilots and aircraft that are forced to go around. Could something have been done differently? Probably. The aircraft could have been informed earlier; maybe turned a little to a different course; that is all hindsight. It is because training was being performed; that I waited until I did. I am comfortable with my abilities; and I know when I have to take over. I do try to give the developmental every chance to show he is qualified to do the job. If I step in early; how do I know where the trainee is; what he is thinking; or what he sees?

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LAS Controller providing OJT described a go around event involving traffic landing Runway 19R and traffic departing Runway 25R; the landing traffic indicating completing the landing was more safe than the go around procedure.

Narrative: LAS Tower; LC2 Training in progress. We had a go around; due to traffic departing the intersecting runway; that would not clear the intersection prior to the arrival coming across the threshold. It seemed to be a normal go around. While working LC2; I was training in light traffic conditions. We were on Configuration 1; which is Runway 25/Runway 19 Note: Runway 25L arrivals; non intersecting runways; Runway 25R departures..Runway 1 L/R landing and departing; intersecting runways. The RID (red/green light) was being used to indicate who had control of the intersection. We had traffic on base to final for Runway 19R. The LC1 Controller coordinated the intersection to us behind a B737 departing Runway25R. The B737 needed to be through the 25/19 Intersection prior to the FA20 on Runway 19 final coming across the threshold. This was not going to happen; the B737 jet was only midfield when we had to issue go around instructions to the FA20. If we had allowed the FA20 land; it would have been a deal; with a runway incursion. Note: Even though LC1 departed Runway 25 without enough time to clear the intersection; at LAS; it is the LC2's responsibility to send the aircraft around to avoid the error. When this took place; I considered it a fairly normal go around. When the pilot landed he informed Ground Control that by going around; it put him in a more unsafe position; than letting him land. The FLM; and I were both aware that the spacing was insufficient; but with training taking place; I was waiting to take action; hoping the trainee would see the spacing; and then initiate the go around on his own. When the aircraft was on about a 3/4 mile final; estimated 500 AGL; I stepped in and sent the FA20 around; I immediately called traffic; B737 departing Runway 25 and asked if he had them in sight. The reply was affirmative; he was then instructed to maintain visual separation; fly runway heading; and to stay low. The B737 was through the intersection; and the FA20 was about midfield Runway 19 at the time. This is pretty typical for a go around at LAS. I agree that many times; it is safer to let the aircraft land; than to put them in conflict with departing traffic. However; we have go around procedures; and I followed them. I do not have a choice to allow the aircraft to land. Suggestions; we had a go around spacing (GAS tool) procedure when Runway 25L was under construction. It allowed aircraft to land on Runway 19R when aircraft were departing or landing Runway 25R. They ran scenarios on a computer; perhaps a million operations; and proved that it would work. In reality; it worked fantastically. However; when Runway 25L reopened; they took away the GAS Tool. Now we are back to go arounds and very unsafe situations for the pilots and aircraft that are forced to go around. Could something have been done differently? Probably. The aircraft could have been informed earlier; maybe turned a little to a different course; that is all hindsight. It is because training was being performed; that I waited until I did. I am comfortable with my abilities; and I know when I have to take over. I do try to give the developmental every chance to show he is qualified to do the job. If I step in early; how do I know where the trainee is; what he is thinking; or what he sees?

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.