Narrative:

I am an air traffic controller at an ATCT. Our minimum vectoring altitudes (MVA's) were adjusted several months ago. Two subsequent operational errors resulting from MVA violations led to the most recent directive concerning these new MVA's; which states that IFR aircraft leaving one MVA area must be at or above the next MVA altitude prior to crossing the depicted MVA boundary line. For example; the departure corridor MVA for runway xx is 2;500FT MSL. The next MVA area to the west is 3;600FT MSL; and next MVA area to the east is 3;000FT MSL. If I turn an IFR departure east; that departure must cross the boundary line of the next MVA at 3;000FT MSL. If I turn the departure west; the aircraft must cross the MVA boundary line at 3;600FT MSL. None of our local procedures have been adjusted to accommodate these new MVA rules. The only directive the workforce has been given concerning these rules are the crossing restrictions mentioned above. The 2;500FT MSL departure corridor MVA is very narrow; approximately 2.5NM on each side of the extended runway centerline; so 5NM wide altogether. Because this area is so narrow; you cannot turn anything less than a jet off the departure end of the runway directly eastbound or westbound and ensure that the MVA crossing restriction will be met. As a result; single and twin-engine aircraft must remain in the departure corridor much longer before being able to safely turn eastbound or westbound. This becomes a problem for subsequent departures; as you can imagine. I was working east radar with all the radar positions combined at east. The active runway was xx. Visual approaches were in use. The surface winds were out of the north at less than 10KTS. The supervisor was plugged into the radar data position and monitoring the operation. The following sequence of events; listed in order of occurrence; I believe clearly illustrate numerous safety concerns that warrant immediate attention. Aircraft Y was radar identified as a VFR inbound approximately 20NM northwest. Aircraft Y was told to expect runway xx. Aircraft X IFR arrival from center checks on frequency approximately 30NM west of ZZZ; and is told to expect a visual approach runway xx. Aircraft X inquires about the surface winds; and questions the initial runway assignment. Aircraft X was told that the runway configuration was most likely due to the taxiway construction on the airport. Aircraft X expressed his preference to land into the wind; and was subsequently told to expect a visual approach runway X. Aircraft Y; now approximately 10-15nm northwest of ZZZ also requests runway X. Aircraft Y was told to expect runway X. I advised local control that two aircraft from the west were requesting runway X. Local approves runway X. Aircraft Y is told to enter left traffic runway X and switched to tower frequency. Aircraft X is on an eastbound vector to follow and has reported the airport in sight. I observe the data tag of aircraft Z acquire off the departure end of runway xx in the face of aircraft Y who is still on very short final runway X. Aircraft Z is an IFR departure assigned runway heading climbing to 5;000FT MSL. Aircraft X is on a converging base leg vector east bound towards the runway X outer marker indicating a ground speed of over 200KTS. I immediately issue a southbound vector to the downwind leg to aircraft X to avoid the imminent loss of separation and resolve the obvious conflict with aircraft Z who is runway heading; not on frequency yet; and not high performance enough for me to turn completely away from the departure corridor and safely ensure the MVA compliance. The very next words that were about to come out of my mouth were an approach clearance for aircraft X just before I observed the data tag acquire on aircraft Z. Aircraft Z checks on frequency and is radar identified climbing runway heading to 5;000FT MSL. I assign a climb to 10;000FT MSL; and issue a turn to a heading of 180 on initial contact to aircraft Z; which is about as far as I can safely turn and keep a single engine aircraft within the confines of the departure corridor 2;500FT MSL MVA. Aircraft X is assigned a descent to 3;600FT MSL on the downwind leg in order to expedite vertical separation with aircraft Z; who is climbing. Lateral separation between aircraft X and aircraft Z is ensured at this point. Aircraft Z is assigned an eastbound heading away from the departure corridor once the MVA crossing restriction of 3000FT MSL can be ensured. Aircraft X; now approximately 10-12NM southwest of ZZZ is assigned a northeast vector towards the runway X final approach course. When I observe aircraft Z to be 3 miles or greater from the departure corridor; I clear aircraft X for a visual approach runway X; and switch the aircraft to tower frequency. I asked the supervisor; who observed and monitored the whole scenario from the radar data position; if he was going to say anything to the local controller. The watch supervisor replied; 'I don't care about the VFR guy'; and made no further comment to me regarding the incident.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Approach Controller described event involving an IFR departure; MVA restrictions and two arrival aircraft during an opposite direction landing/takeoff event.

Narrative: I am an air traffic controller at an ATCT. Our minimum vectoring altitudes (MVA's) were adjusted several months ago. Two subsequent operational errors resulting from MVA violations led to the most recent directive concerning these new MVA's; which states that IFR aircraft leaving one MVA area must be at or above the next MVA altitude prior to crossing the depicted MVA boundary line. For example; the departure corridor MVA for Runway XX is 2;500FT MSL. The next MVA area to the west is 3;600FT MSL; and next MVA area to the East is 3;000FT MSL. If I turn an IFR departure East; that departure must cross the boundary line of the next MVA at 3;000FT MSL. If I turn the departure West; the aircraft must cross the MVA boundary line at 3;600FT MSL. None of our local procedures have been adjusted to accommodate these new MVA rules. The only directive the workforce has been given concerning these rules are the crossing restrictions mentioned above. The 2;500FT MSL departure corridor MVA is very narrow; approximately 2.5NM on each side of the extended runway centerline; so 5NM wide altogether. Because this area is so narrow; you cannot turn anything less than a jet off the departure end of the runway directly eastbound or westbound and ensure that the MVA crossing restriction will be met. As a result; single and twin-engine aircraft must remain in the departure corridor much longer before being able to safely turn eastbound or westbound. This becomes a problem for subsequent departures; as you can imagine. I was working East Radar with all the radar positions combined at East. The active Runway was XX. Visual approaches were in use. The surface winds were out of the North at less than 10KTS. The Supervisor was plugged into the radar data position and monitoring the operation. The following sequence of events; listed in order of occurrence; I believe clearly illustrate numerous safety concerns that warrant immediate attention. Aircraft Y was RADAR identified as a VFR inbound approximately 20NM northwest. Aircraft Y was told to expect Runway XX. Aircraft X IFR arrival from Center checks on frequency approximately 30NM west of ZZZ; and is told to expect a Visual Approach Runway XX. Aircraft X inquires about the surface winds; and questions the initial runway assignment. Aircraft X was told that the runway configuration was most likely due to the taxiway construction on the airport. Aircraft X expressed his preference to land into the wind; and was subsequently told to expect a Visual Approach Runway X. Aircraft Y; now approximately 10-15nm NW of ZZZ also requests Runway X. Aircraft Y was told to expect Runway X. I advised Local Control that two aircraft from the West were requesting Runway X. Local approves Runway X. Aircraft Y is told to enter left traffic Runway X and switched to Tower frequency. Aircraft X is on an eastbound vector to follow and has reported the airport in sight. I observe the data tag of Aircraft Z acquire off the departure end of Runway XX in the face of Aircraft Y who is still on very short final Runway X. Aircraft Z is an IFR departure assigned runway heading climbing to 5;000FT MSL. Aircraft X is on a converging base leg vector east bound towards the Runway X outer marker indicating a ground speed of over 200KTS. I immediately issue a Southbound vector to the downwind leg to Aircraft X to avoid the imminent loss of separation and resolve the obvious conflict with Aircraft Z who is runway heading; not on frequency yet; and not high performance enough for me to turn completely away from the departure corridor and safely ensure the MVA compliance. The very next words that were about to come out of my mouth were an Approach Clearance for Aircraft X just before I observed the data tag acquire on Aircraft Z. Aircraft Z checks on frequency and is radar identified climbing runway heading to 5;000FT MSL. I assign a climb to 10;000FT MSL; and issue a turn to a heading of 180 on initial contact to Aircraft Z; which is about as far as I can safely turn and keep a single engine aircraft within the confines of the departure corridor 2;500FT MSL MVA. Aircraft X is assigned a descent to 3;600FT MSL on the downwind leg in order to expedite vertical separation with Aircraft Z; who is climbing. Lateral separation between Aircraft X and Aircraft Z is ensured at this point. Aircraft Z is assigned an eastbound heading away from the departure corridor once the MVA crossing restriction of 3000FT MSL can be ensured. Aircraft X; now approximately 10-12NM southwest of ZZZ is assigned a northeast vector towards the Runway X final approach course. When I observe Aircraft Z to be 3 miles or greater from the departure corridor; I clear Aircraft X for a Visual Approach Runway X; and switch the aircraft to Tower frequency. I asked the Supervisor; who observed and monitored the whole scenario from the radar data position; if he was going to say anything to the Local Controller. The Watch Supervisor replied; 'I don't care about the VFR guy'; and made no further comment to me regarding the incident.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.