Narrative:

Mri departed a VFR aircraft Y on what I can only assume to be a campbell departure. Aircraft Y seemed to shortcut the corner of the departure and was clearly going to clip the 'seward segment' (described in the alaska chart supplement).aircraft X; a known [type] to climb slowly; departed shortly after aircraft Y from anc runway 7L. Aircraft X was assigned an anchorage 8 departure; a departure that the aircraft is unable to comply with due to climb gradient restrictions.both aircraft were on a course and climb gradient to place them in unsafe proximity with one another and mitigating action was required which included both a traffic and low altitude alert.aircraft Y went to the wrong frequency and was talking to north radar (nr) while heading southbound into my airspace; the nr controller did a fine job figuring out the pilots' intentions and then noticing the conflict. I was working south radar (sr) and was talking to aircraft X. Both the nr controller and myself grew very concerned about the conflict as soon as we noticed aircraft X acquire its tag and projected the two aircraft to be in unsafe proximity. We both issued traffic and applied merging target procedures to our respective planes while coordinating with one another for a mitigating action. The nr controller attempted to turn his VFR aircraft to the east in order to provide more space for my aircraft X to climb to the south; however; the VFR aircraft Y was failing to respond and the situation was growing dire.once aircraft Y failed to respond to nr controlling prompts; he instructed me to turn my aircraft X even though we were both fully aware of the MVA (minimum vectoring altitude) factor which complicated vectoring of aircraft X. I issued the traffic alert and an immediate turn to the southwest to aircraft X. Then I issued a low altitude alert and instructed the aircraft to expedite its climb and gave the appropriate MVA information. Aircraft X effected its turn but seemed to struggle to climb; assumedly due to the rate of turn bleeding climb performance from the already underpowered aircraft. Once aircraft X committed to the southwest turn; aircraft Y then came back to the nr controller and complied with the turn to the east which further mitigated the conflict.safe separation was achieved due to the turn of an IFR aircraft below the MVA.closest proximity was 1.22 nm and 500 feet.a) tower needs to be held accountable for issuing traffic to aircraft that will be in unsafe proximity immediately on departure. Aircraft X advised that traffic was not issued by the tower despite both aircraft clearly being in direct conflict with one another.B) aircraft that cannot comply with the SID off runway 7L need to be assigned the climbing gradient for the 7L dva (diverse vector area) procedure. Aircraft X was allowed to be at an egregiously low altitude and allowed to remain on a SID that he was not able to climb in compliance with. The SID's ground track would have been extremely unsafe and I was forced to disregard MVA procedures in order to ensure safe separation of aircraft.C) the 'seward segment' needs to be addressed. Our facility has raised issue with this particular airspace several times to no avail.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Anchorage TRACON controllers reported an unsafe operation which led to turning an aircraft while below the MVA away from a VFR aircraft.

Narrative: MRI departed a VFR Aircraft Y on what I can only assume to be a Campbell departure. Aircraft Y seemed to shortcut the corner of the departure and was clearly going to clip the 'Seward Segment' (described in the Alaska Chart Supplement).Aircraft X; a known [type] to climb slowly; departed shortly after Aircraft Y from ANC RWY 7L. Aircraft X was assigned an Anchorage 8 departure; a departure that the aircraft is unable to comply with due to climb gradient restrictions.Both aircraft were on a course and climb gradient to place them in unsafe proximity with one another and mitigating action was required which included both a traffic and low altitude alert.Aircraft Y went to the wrong frequency and was talking to North RADAR (NR) while heading southbound into my airspace; the NR Controller did a fine job figuring out the pilots' intentions and then noticing the conflict. I was working South RADAR (SR) and was talking to Aircraft X. Both the NR Controller and myself grew very concerned about the conflict as soon as we noticed Aircraft X acquire its tag and projected the two aircraft to be in unsafe proximity. We both issued traffic and applied merging target procedures to our respective planes while coordinating with one another for a mitigating action. The NR Controller attempted to turn his VFR aircraft to the east in order to provide more space for my Aircraft X to climb to the south; however; the VFR Aircraft Y was failing to respond and the situation was growing dire.Once Aircraft Y failed to respond to NR controlling prompts; he instructed me to turn my Aircraft X even though we were both fully aware of the MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude) factor which complicated vectoring of Aircraft X. I issued the traffic alert and an immediate turn to the southwest to Aircraft X. Then I issued a low altitude alert and instructed the aircraft to expedite its climb and gave the appropriate MVA information. Aircraft X effected its turn but seemed to struggle to climb; assumedly due to the rate of turn bleeding climb performance from the already underpowered aircraft. Once Aircraft X committed to the southwest turn; Aircraft Y then came back to the NR Controller and complied with the turn to the east which further mitigated the conflict.Safe separation was achieved due to the turn of an IFR aircraft below the MVA.Closest proximity was 1.22 nm and 500 feet.A) Tower needs to be held accountable for issuing traffic to aircraft that will be in unsafe proximity immediately on departure. Aircraft X advised that traffic was not issued by the Tower despite both aircraft clearly being in direct conflict with one another.B) Aircraft that cannot comply with the SID off RWY 7L need to be assigned the climbing gradient for the 7L DVA (Diverse Vector Area) procedure. Aircraft X was allowed to be at an egregiously low altitude and allowed to remain on a SID that he was not able to climb in compliance with. The SID's ground track would have been extremely unsafe and I was forced to disregard MVA procedures in order to ensure safe separation of aircraft.C) The 'Seward Segment' needs to be addressed. Our facility has raised issue with this particular airspace several times to no avail.

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.