Narrative:

Lga was landing/departing runway 4. Aircraft x was sent around by lga tower due to a 'slow roller' departing same runway. Tower coordinator called radar coordinator (myself) informing us of the go-around and the callsign. I asked tower what climb out the next departure was doing and he stated he was on a 360 heading (standard climb out for a west/south gate departures); and the go-around was 'going by the sheet.' 'by the sheet' means the standard go-around/missed approach procedures document which states what the tower will instruct a go-around on various runway configurations *only if the tower coordinator cannot get in contact with the radar coordinator*. In this case; the go-around was assigned left turn heading of 340 and a climb to 2;000 ft. I told tower coordinator to give the go-around a runway heading to 3;000 ft and to stop departures behind; but tower advised that he was already in the left turn. So I then stated to head 340 and climb to 3;000 ft and stop departures behind. Tower coordinator acknowledged. I called tower coordinator a second later to give them the correct frequency to give the go-around. When I went to instruct departure of what was being coordinated; separation was already lost between the go-around and the departure. I had zero time to inform the departure controller of the instructions the go-around was given. Aircraft x was switched to departure; he checked in out of 1;000 ft climbing to 2;000 (did not state a heading); and a vector was given to the go-around well prior to my coordination being completed with the tower. The departure controller was under the assumption that the go-around was runway heading due to the radar track appearing to remain runway heading and gave a right turn to a 090 heading; not knowing that the go-around was beginning the left turn to a 340. The departure aircraft Y was airborne (climbing to 5;000 ft; left turn to a 360) around the same time the go-around began his right turn to the 090 heading. Aircraft Y checked in with departure about 4 DME north of lga climbing out of 3;500 (est.). Fortunately; the go-around saw the departure off his right side; but well after separation was lost and the departure aircraft also had the go-around aircraft visually as well on initial contact. The fact that the tower switched the go-around to departure well before the aircraft was established on a 340 heading; in my opinion; is not ensuring separation with a departure also making a left turn northbound. Aircraft X was given go-around instructions and switched to departure almost instantaneously. When the tower called me about the go-around; I never had the notion that the aircraft was already switched to departure. Like other go-around traffic; my belief is that the tower still has the go-around on their frequency ensuring that the go-around will be properly separated by the departure. For this specific configuration (land/depart runway 4) a standard go-around is to be issued a left turn to a 340 and a climb to 2;000. Departures are assigned either a left turn to 360; or runway heading; dependent on their initial fix on their flight plan. I believe this is a hazard due to the high possibility that a departure can go airborne on a left turn 360. Having a go-around also executing a left turn 20 degrees more to the left is not the safest operation since the go-around is cleaning up the aircraft. The go-around turn could be wider than that of the departures turn. The departure plans on the turn as soon as their airborne; the go-around does not plan for a turn as fast and could take that extra second or two to begin the turn. On an IFR day; two aircraft turning in the same direction in the same vicinity could be trouble. There are other configurations with go-around/missed approach procedures on the sheet that need to be considered for review/revision in my opinion if it were to be followed on *every go-around*. For the configuration mentioned in thisincident; the go-around should do opposite of what the departure aircraft is assigned. For example; an aircraft on final is issued a go-around due to a slow roller and the departure will be turning to a 360 heading. Assign the go-around runway heading. If the departure was assigned runway heading; then give the go-around the left 360. If divergence is still a question; amend the departures altitude to a lower altitude than the go-around since the go-around is already airborne.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: N90 Controller describes situation where a go-around and a departure have a loss of separation. Lack of good communication in a timely manner helped cause this situation.

Narrative: LGA was landing/departing RWY 4. Aircraft x was sent around by LGA Tower due to a 'slow roller' departing same runway. Tower Coordinator called Radar Coordinator (myself) informing us of the go-around and the callsign. I asked Tower what climb out the next departure was doing and he stated he was on a 360 heading (standard climb out for a west/south gate departures); and the go-around was 'going by the sheet.' 'By the sheet' means the standard go-around/missed approach procedures document which states what the Tower will instruct a go-around on various runway configurations *only if the Tower Coordinator cannot get in contact with the Radar Coordinator*. In this case; the go-around was assigned left turn heading of 340 and a climb to 2;000 FT. I told tower Coordinator to give the go-around a runway heading to 3;000 FT and to stop departures behind; but Tower advised that he was already in the left turn. So I then stated to head 340 and climb to 3;000 FT and stop departures behind. Tower Coordinator acknowledged. I called Tower Coordinator a second later to give them the correct frequency to give the go-around. When I went to instruct Departure of what was being coordinated; separation was already lost between the go-around and the departure. I had zero time to inform the Departure Controller of the instructions the go-around was given. Aircraft x was switched to Departure; he checked in out of 1;000 FT climbing to 2;000 (did not state a heading); and a vector was given to the go-around well prior to my coordination being completed with the Tower. The Departure Controller was under the assumption that the go-around was runway heading due to the radar track appearing to remain runway heading and gave a right turn to a 090 heading; not knowing that the go-around was beginning the left turn to a 340. The departure Aircraft Y was airborne (climbing to 5;000 FT; left turn to a 360) around the same time the go-around began his right turn to the 090 heading. Aircraft Y checked in with Departure about 4 DME north of LGA climbing out of 3;500 (est.). Fortunately; the go-around saw the departure off his right side; but well after separation was lost and the departure aircraft also had the go-around aircraft visually as well on initial contact. The fact that the Tower switched the go-around to Departure well before the aircraft was established on a 340 heading; in my opinion; is not ensuring separation with a departure also making a left turn northbound. Aircraft X was given go-around instructions and switched to Departure almost instantaneously. When the Tower called me about the go-around; I never had the notion that the aircraft was already switched to Departure. Like other go-around traffic; my belief is that the Tower still has the go-around on their frequency ensuring that the go-around will be properly separated by the departure. For this specific configuration (land/depart Runway 4) a standard go-around is to be issued a left turn to a 340 and a climb to 2;000. Departures are assigned either a left turn to 360; or runway heading; dependent on their initial fix on their flight plan. I believe this is a hazard due to the high possibility that a departure can go airborne on a left turn 360. Having a go-around also executing a left turn 20 degrees more to the left is not the safest operation since the go-around is cleaning up the aircraft. The go-around turn could be wider than that of the departures turn. The departure plans on the turn as soon as their airborne; the go-around does not plan for a turn as fast and could take that extra second or two to begin the turn. On an IFR day; two aircraft turning in the same direction in the same vicinity could be trouble. There are other configurations with go-around/missed approach procedures on the sheet that need to be considered for review/revision in my opinion if it were to be followed on *every go-around*. For the configuration mentioned in thisincident; the go-around should do opposite of what the departure aircraft is assigned. For example; an aircraft on final is issued a go-around due to a slow roller and the departure will be turning to a 360 heading. Assign the go-around runway heading. If the departure was assigned runway heading; then give the go-around the left 360. If divergence is still a question; amend the departures altitude to a lower altitude than the go-around since the go-around is already airborne.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.