Narrative:

Aircraft X was operating about 5 miles south of the airport. Aircraft Y; called ready for departure. The pilot of aircraft Y requested southbound to the plaza and then east for sightseeing. I cleared aircraft Y for takeoff and on course. I issued traffic to the aircraft Y about the helicopter and the helicopter about the aircraft Y. Helicopter volunteered to descend a bit.as the aircraft Y approached the plaza I saw aircraft Z approaching from the southeast and direct to the field. The twin antennas; helicopter; aircraft Y; and the downtown buildings were all directly between the field and aircraft Z. I passed traffic to both the aircraft Y and helicopter about aircraft Z; which was about five or six miles southeast of them and level at 3;000 feet. Aircraft Z was about 1 1/2 to 2 miles south of the helicopter and aircraft Y when the aircraft Z checked onto the local control frequency on a visual approach and descending. I immediately instructed the aircraft Z to turn and maintain altitude to avoid collision with the VFR aircraft. Once aircraft Z was clear of conflict; I cleared the pilot to land. My relief arrived as aircraft Z was rolling out; so I gave the brief to a trainee and his instructor. I went to the break room for lunch as the aircraft Z taxied to park.the scenario remained troubling with unresolved questions; so I drove over and met with the aircraft Z pilot. During our conversation; the pilot relayed that he had an ipad app on which he received an ads-B hit. He asked the approach controller about it and was told there was no traffic in the area. When the ads-B target turned yellow; he asked again; receiving he same response. The pilot also stated he would file a report about the event. Both VFR targets were displayed continuously on the tower radar display. Our feed is derived the same radar antenna.one of my initial questions was answered by the aircraft Z pilot. Why did he start descending into VFR traffic? He was told there wasn't any by the approach controller. Why would the approach controller say that? Either the filter limits were set in such a way to exclude the VFR traffic; or the controller; for whatever reason; didn't see either target. Or perhaps; and most disturbingly; the 'we don't separate vfrs' thing continues.we've had issues with kansas city approach switching aircraft on visual approaches with pertinent and unresolved VFR conflicts. The first time; the pilot on a visual approach is even aware of the vfrs existence is; all too often; after they've checked on with tower. When they give us sufficient time to fix it; it isn't a problem. So; either resolve the conflict; or ship the inbound sooner.aircraft approaching direct from the southeast on visual approaches have presented their own problems over the years. If an inbound is at or near the MVA (minimum vectoring altitude) they often have difficulty getting the field in sight because of the downtown buildings; regularly resulting in additional vectors and a late frequency change inside of the transfer control point. The two tall and obstructing radio antennas are an additional hazard. If the inbound is high enough to see the field they sometimes require additional maneuvering to lose the excess altitude; and again have to deal with the twin antennas. A straight in of; say; 7 to 10 miles fixes it. Inbound aircraft won't have to contend with finding the field through the downtown buildings or the twin antennas. The VFR reporting point attracts VFR aircraft; occasionally in large numbers. A straight in from 7 or more miles keeps inbound aircraft geographically separated from that traffic.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MKC Tower Controller reported receiving an aircraft on a Visual Approach descending into a conflict with VFR traffic.

Narrative: Aircraft X was operating about 5 miles south of the airport. Aircraft Y; called ready for departure. The pilot of Aircraft Y requested southbound to the Plaza and then east for sightseeing. I cleared Aircraft Y for takeoff and on course. I issued traffic to the Aircraft Y about the helicopter and the helicopter about the Aircraft Y. Helicopter volunteered to descend a bit.As the Aircraft Y approached the Plaza I saw Aircraft Z approaching from the southeast and direct to the field. The twin antennas; helicopter; Aircraft Y; and the downtown buildings were all directly between the field and Aircraft Z. I passed traffic to both the Aircraft Y and helicopter about Aircraft Z; which was about five or six miles southeast of them and level at 3;000 feet. Aircraft Z was about 1 1/2 to 2 miles south of the helicopter and Aircraft Y when the Aircraft Z checked onto the Local Control frequency on a Visual Approach and descending. I immediately instructed the Aircraft Z to turn and maintain altitude to avoid collision with the VFR aircraft. Once Aircraft Z was clear of conflict; I cleared the pilot to land. My relief arrived as Aircraft Z was rolling out; so I gave the brief to a trainee and his instructor. I went to the break room for lunch as the Aircraft Z taxied to park.The scenario remained troubling with unresolved questions; so I drove over and met with the Aircraft Z pilot. During our conversation; the pilot relayed that he had an iPad app on which he received an ADS-B hit. He asked the Approach Controller about it and was told there was no traffic in the area. When the ADS-B target turned yellow; he asked again; receiving he same response. The pilot also stated he would file a report about the event. Both VFR targets were displayed continuously on the Tower radar display. Our feed is derived the same radar antenna.One of my initial questions was answered by the Aircraft Z pilot. Why did he start descending into VFR traffic? He was told there wasn't any by the approach controller. Why would the Approach Controller say that? Either the filter limits were set in such a way to exclude the VFR traffic; or the controller; for whatever reason; didn't see either target. Or perhaps; and most disturbingly; the 'we don't separate VFRs' thing continues.We've had issues with Kansas City Approach switching aircraft on Visual Approaches with pertinent and unresolved VFR conflicts. The first time; the pilot on a Visual Approach is even aware of the VFRs existence is; all too often; after they've checked on with Tower. When they give us sufficient time to fix it; it isn't a problem. So; either resolve the conflict; or ship the inbound sooner.Aircraft approaching direct from the southeast on Visual Approaches have presented their own problems over the years. If an inbound is at or near the MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude) they often have difficulty getting the field in sight because of the downtown buildings; regularly resulting in additional vectors and a late frequency change inside of the Transfer Control Point. The two tall and obstructing radio antennas are an additional hazard. If the inbound is high enough to see the field they sometimes require additional maneuvering to lose the excess altitude; and again have to deal with the twin antennas. A straight in of; say; 7 to 10 miles fixes it. Inbound aircraft won't have to contend with finding the field through the downtown buildings or the twin antennas. The VFR reporting point attracts VFR aircraft; occasionally in large numbers. A straight in from 7 or more miles keeps inbound aircraft geographically separated from that traffic.

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.