This situation is somewhat confusing regarding ATC and pilot responsibilities. Presuming the Metroliner was flying IFR and was given a visual approach clearance without cancelling his IFR, his visual approach continued to be an IFR procedure. The Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) states in Section 5-4-23 Visual Approach paragraph c “When operating to airports with parallel runways separated by less than 2,500 feet, the succeeding aircraft must report sighting the preceding aircraft unless standard separation is being provided by ATC.” And in paragraph d it says “Separation Responsibilities. If the pilot has the airport in sight but cannot see the aircraft to be followed, ATC may clear the aircraft for a visual approach; however, ATC retains both separation and wake vortex separation responsibility.” I cannot find in any of the ATC clips the pilot of the Metroliner reporting any traffic in sight. He only said “we’re looking.” And he was not following any traffic for 17L, only warned of traffic for the closely spaced parallels. Does this change ATC responsibilities for providing traffic separation when he did not see the traffic?
The Cirrus pilot will get the blame, but these Centennial Airport operations have no allowance for any errors such as overshooting the turn to final which may happen a lot more often than anyone would admit.