Narrative:

I was winding down an arrival push while working final and had a nice stagger going to runway 17L/right. A CRJ9 was the last aircraft in my sequence and I was about to switch this aircraft to the tower frequency when I noticed a 'T' tag northwest of the airport in my airspace. I slewed the tag to display the full data block. A shorts SD360 was on a 'T' tag (tower); VFR; in the traffic pattern; headed north-northeast-bound and tagged for runway 17R. It appeared that the shorts was about to turn base in front of the CRJ9; so I called the tower and asked what the shorts was doing. Training was in progress and that ojti informed me that the shorts was going to runway 17L. I issued traffic to the CRJ9; applied visual separation; and then switched the CRJ9 to the tower frequency. The shorts turned base in front of the CRJ9. We have procedures established at aus where aus tower does not own any airspace along the final approach path. The tower owns airspace that is essentially a pie-shaped wedge south of the airport when we are landing north and a pie-shaped wedge north of the airport when we are landing north. The pie only exists on the departure side of the airport and not along the final approach path. Even though the tower does not own airspace along the final approach path; our local procedures allow for the tower to conduct touch-and-go operations (look and go?) in the final airspace without coordination. Our feeder controllers are not allowed to 'share' airspace; but the tower is allowed to share airspace due to the procedures that are in place. Today's example was the shorts at least 7 miles north of aus in final airspace without verbal coordination; and me with no idea what or where the shorts was going to go. The data tag reflected 17R; but in actuality the shorts was turned base in front of the CRJ9. Even after I inquired about the shorts; the data tag was never changed to reflect the correct landing runway. Recommendation; this entire procedure needs to be scrapped and re-evaluated. Tower and final airspace need to be redesigned.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AUS TRACON Controller described a confused coordination/sequence event when the Tower attempted to sequenced their traffic with aircraft being handled by the TRACON. The reporter suggested revisions to existing airspace and procedures.

Narrative: I was winding down an arrival push while working Final and had a nice stagger going to Runway 17L/R. A CRJ9 was the last aircraft in my sequence and I was about to switch this aircraft to the Tower frequency when I noticed a 'T' tag northwest of the airport in my airspace. I slewed the tag to display the full data block. A Shorts SD360 was on a 'T' tag (Tower); VFR; in the traffic pattern; headed north-northeast-bound and tagged for Runway 17R. It appeared that the Shorts was about to turn base in front of the CRJ9; so I called the Tower and asked what the Shorts was doing. Training was in progress and that OJTI informed me that the Shorts was going to Runway 17L. I issued traffic to the CRJ9; applied visual separation; and then switched the CRJ9 to the Tower frequency. The Shorts turned base in front of the CRJ9. We have procedures established at AUS where AUS Tower does not own any airspace along the final approach path. The Tower owns airspace that is essentially a pie-shaped wedge south of the airport when we are landing north and a pie-shaped wedge north of the airport when we are landing north. The pie only exists on the departure side of the airport and not along the final approach path. Even though the Tower does not own airspace along the final approach path; our local procedures allow for the Tower to conduct touch-and-go operations (look and go?) in the Final airspace without coordination. Our Feeder controllers are not allowed to 'share' airspace; but the Tower is allowed to share airspace due to the procedures that are in place. Today's example was the Shorts at least 7 miles north of AUS in Final airspace without verbal coordination; and me with no idea what or where the Shorts was going to go. The data tag reflected 17R; but in actuality the Shorts was turned base in front of the CRJ9. Even after I inquired about the Shorts; the data tag was never changed to reflect the correct landing runway. Recommendation; this entire procedure needs to be scrapped and re-evaluated. Tower and Final airspace need to be redesigned.

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.