ATCO
Not sure what prompted the start of this thread but I am somewhat puzzled by some of the underlying assumptions with regard to statements implying the role of ATC.
It seems to me that the first job of ATC is to provide separation between aircraft. Once that has been accomplished, it is to provide for the efficient use of the airspace (spacing,sequencing, flow, etc). When vectoring aircraft(off published routes/procedures) to achieve these goals, it must do so in a manner which provides appropriate terrain/obstruction clearances. If it observes an aircraft departing (course or altitude) from published or cleared/assigned parameters it must advise/question immediately particularly if separation or terrain clearances may be compromised with continued deviation.
Statements like "should have denied request for an orbit" and "instructed him to execute a missed approach" and "to take the initiatve to reposition(because current rate of descent appears to indicate that aircraft will intercept glidepath from above)" indicate to me a crossing of the line by ATC.
In these instances should it not be " sir, it appears to me that your requested orbit will place you in an area of high terrain to the west of the localizer(or whatever)..please advise of intentions" (denial of a request for orbit beacause of the proximity of following traffic in-trail would of course be legitimate followed by " if unable to continue published approach execute missed approach procedure ....or.......")? It seems that instructing a missed approach should only be done when aircraft is no longer clear(ed) to land( such as preceding aircraft not clearing runway or separation lost. Likewise, in the second case. "sir, you appear to be high at your present position ..confirm you will be able to cross (final approach fix) X miles ahead at (GSIA) if not, I can vector you for re-sequencing". These decisions belong in the cockpit.