 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Unv tower released a departing aircraft into a conflicting route with an aircraft conducting a missed approach. The tower controller put the aircraft on the ZNY controller's frequency without taking any action to separate the aircraft.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1387840 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201609 |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZNY.ARTCC |
| State Reference | NY |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | IMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Helicopter |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 135 |
| Flight Phase | Climb |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Make Model Name | Small Aircraft High Wing 1 Eng Fixed Gear |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Flight Phase | Climb |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Enroute |
| Qualification | Air Traffic Control Fully Certified |
| Experience | Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 30 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Conflict Airborne Conflict Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
Aircraft X was on a GPS runway 6 approach when unv tower called and asked for a departure runway 6 for aircraft Y. The tower said they would provide visual separation between the 2 aircraft and I approved it. A few minutes later aircraft X called me on a missed approach requesting an ILS rwy 24 approach. A minute later aircraft Y calls climbing to 5000 feet. Now I'm talking to both planes out of 4000 feet for 5000 feet about a mile or two apart. I asked aircraft X if he had aircraft Y in sight and he told me he was in IFR conditions. I believe this was a gross misapplication of visual separation as it reads in the faah 7110.65 para. 7.2.1. I'm not going to get into the whole para 7.2.1 here but I would like an outside party to look at this and let me know where the error lies.after investigating this incident; a detailed briefing about what happened and what should have or should not have happened should be given to both the center and tower for review. If these aircraft were of more high performance this could have turned into a very bad situation.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: UNV Tower released a departing aircraft into a conflicting route with an aircraft conducting a missed approach. The Tower Controller put the aircraft on the ZNY Controller's frequency without taking any action to separate the aircraft.
Narrative: Aircraft X was on a GPS Runway 6 approach when UNV tower called and asked for a departure Runway 6 for Aircraft Y. The Tower said they would provide Visual Separation between the 2 aircraft and I approved it. A few minutes later Aircraft X called me on a missed approach requesting an ILS Rwy 24 approach. A minute later Aircraft Y calls climbing to 5000 feet. Now I'm talking to both planes out of 4000 feet for 5000 feet about a mile or two apart. I asked Aircraft X if he had Aircraft Y in sight and he told me he was in IFR conditions. I believe this was a gross misapplication of visual separation as it reads in the FAAH 7110.65 PARA. 7.2.1. I'm not going to get into the whole PARA 7.2.1 here but I would like an outside party to look at this and let me know where the error lies.After investigating this incident; a detailed briefing about what happened and what should have or should not have happened should be given to both the center and tower for review. If these aircraft were of more high performance this could have turned into a very bad situation.
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.