Narrative:

Tpa ATCT has developed RNAV standard terminal arrival procedures (RNAV stars). Procedures such as this are/should be designed to reduce controller workload. The procedures developed for tpa do just the opposite. On every runway confign; the procedures have the aircraft turn downwind and ride the sector boundary line with adjoining sectors. This will require the aircraft to be pointed to at least 1 or 2 (depending on runway) sectors before the aircraft can be descended. This has been brought to the procedures department's attention; but yet they are planning on implementing the procedures as designed within the next month. When tpa is in a northerly confign; the procedure will have aircraft inbound from the southeast turn north into the face of downwind traffic; unless the controller issues a vector off of the STAR prior to this point. There is the potential to have opposite direction traffic at the same altitude. This is unacceptable! Additionally; the downwind sector for runway 36L is 4.73 mi. Aircraft must stay 3 mi away from the traffic on final; and 1.5 mi away from the adjacent sector's airspace. This only leaves 1/4 mi for the downwind track. If there is any wind factor at all; this is all but impossible to do. I would guess that 95% of the aircraft on the runway 36L downwind are too close to the adjacent airspace to be legal. This has been brought to management's attention numerous times. There are ucr's to prove it. Ironically; the RNAV STAR procedure could fix this problem for all aircraft that are equipped with RNAV. I feel the RNAV STAR procedures implementation should be delayed until the problems have been alleviated.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TPA CTLR EXPRESSED CONCERN REGARDING NEWLY DESIGNED RNAV ARR'S THAT ARE ROUTED CLOSE TO SECTOR BOUNDARIES.

Narrative: TPA ATCT HAS DEVELOPED RNAV STANDARD TERMINAL ARR PROCS (RNAV STARS). PROCS SUCH AS THIS ARE/SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO REDUCE CTLR WORKLOAD. THE PROCS DEVELOPED FOR TPA DO JUST THE OPPOSITE. ON EVERY RWY CONFIGN; THE PROCS HAVE THE ACFT TURN DOWNWIND AND RIDE THE SECTOR BOUNDARY LINE WITH ADJOINING SECTORS. THIS WILL REQUIRE THE ACFT TO BE POINTED TO AT LEAST 1 OR 2 (DEPENDING ON RWY) SECTORS BEFORE THE ACFT CAN BE DSNDED. THIS HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO THE PROCS DEPT'S ATTN; BUT YET THEY ARE PLANNING ON IMPLEMENTING THE PROCS AS DESIGNED WITHIN THE NEXT MONTH. WHEN TPA IS IN A NORTHERLY CONFIGN; THE PROC WILL HAVE ACFT INBOUND FROM THE SE TURN N INTO THE FACE OF DOWNWIND TFC; UNLESS THE CTLR ISSUES A VECTOR OFF OF THE STAR PRIOR TO THIS POINT. THERE IS THE POTENTIAL TO HAVE OPPOSITE DIRECTION TFC AT THE SAME ALT. THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE! ADDITIONALLY; THE DOWNWIND SECTOR FOR RWY 36L IS 4.73 MI. ACFT MUST STAY 3 MI AWAY FROM THE TFC ON FINAL; AND 1.5 MI AWAY FROM THE ADJACENT SECTOR'S AIRSPACE. THIS ONLY LEAVES 1/4 MI FOR THE DOWNWIND TRACK. IF THERE IS ANY WIND FACTOR AT ALL; THIS IS ALL BUT IMPOSSIBLE TO DO. I WOULD GUESS THAT 95% OF THE ACFT ON THE RWY 36L DOWNWIND ARE TOO CLOSE TO THE ADJACENT AIRSPACE TO BE LEGAL. THIS HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO MGMNT'S ATTN NUMEROUS TIMES. THERE ARE UCR'S TO PROVE IT. IRONICALLY; THE RNAV STAR PROC COULD FIX THIS PROB FOR ALL ACFT THAT ARE EQUIPPED WITH RNAV. I FEEL THE RNAV STAR PROCS IMPLEMENTATION SHOULD BE DELAYED UNTIL THE PROBS HAVE BEEN ALLEVIATED.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.