Narrative:

I was providing training on arrival radar in the tower. Arrival radar provides all radar functions at lan. Aircraft X was the first ASR approach aircraft in a sequence of four. We took the position when aircraft X was on about a six mile final. The arrival sequence was not clear cut and took some time to work out the possibilities; so this occurred during a relatively complex time. Aircraft X had completed his ASR approach to runway 28L and was in the process of departing for mkg. The final controller assigned a heading 280 and a climb to 30 and gave arrival radar the frequency that aircraft X was on. Arrival radar had the aircraft X strip in front of them at the time of the briefing. No strip from local to arrival radar was provided as necessary because we were working side by side and the information was passed verbally. Aircraft X called and the trainee was unsure what to do with the aircraft and left him on runway heading (280) to 40. The trainee had a number of other things to do at the time this was happening but was not overly burdened. Shortly thereafter aircraft Y called departure and the trainee radar identified him. At this point; the data blocks were overlapping and I was not aware of the departure until he made his initial call up. At this point; I told the trainee to un-overlap the data blocks; as soon as this was done; the trainee turned aircraft Y to a 260 heading. At this point; I realized that we probably had an issue as the flm (front line manager) made comments about the situation and the trainee expedited the climb of aircraft X and stopped aircraft Y at 30. Then the trainee turned aircraft X to a 320 heading to join V2. Considering we were basically handed an unsafe situation; the trainee did well with the information available and only made clearances that increased safety. Both aircraft were traveling in the same direction and climbing. There was minimal altitude separation (800 or so ft) and it appeared to be decreasing. The aircraft had about two miles between them at the time; however the rate of closure was very slow perhaps fifteen to twenty knot overtake. The situation was not such that immediate action was required. Once the trainee turned aircraft Y to a 260 heading; as I was checking the headings on the strip and evaluating the situation; I realized that a collision had been averted and thus allowed the trainee to continue operation of the position. Information was learned after the fact indicating the local controller advised that he was unaware that the ASR aircraft was IFR and instead thought he was VFR. The local controller also indicated that he/she initially turned aircraft Y to a 300 heading and only turned him back to a 280 once we turned toward mkg; which we had not yet done. With the amount of experience I have; and in talking with some of the involved participants; I wonder about some of the following things. 1) the position situation was somewhat unusual in that an ASR was being conducted in the TRACON while the radar was in the tower. The local did not have access to the tower's d-brite because it was turned toward the radar controller. Normally; we do not pass the information of IFR or VFR status while conducting one of our 'extremely rare' ASR approaches because local has the information passed via automation; specially the data block on the tower's d-brite. The ASR controller; who is a relatively new cpc (certified professional controller); may have been unaware that the IFR status of the aircraft needed to be passed. 2) the initial inbound status of the ASR was passed to the previous local controller; and not the one involved. It is possible that the IFR status of ASR was not coordinated during the briefing. Launching a faster aircraft immediately after an ASR has passed perhaps should require some communication between local and arrival radar; especially when the ASR departs on a 280 heading; a heading; which via local order; allows radarto turn the aircraft either left or right. All personal should be made aware that the aircraft's status (IFR or VFR) needs to be passed from the final controller to the local controller when radar is in the tower. And due to this being an extremely rare situation; I'm at a loss as to how to remind people to remember this odd situation.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A LAN controller; who was providing OJT; described a loss of separation event resulting from less than clear local procedures; a rarely used approach; lack of experience and the tower's spacing of an IFR departure.

Narrative: I was providing training on Arrival RADAR in the Tower. Arrival RADAR provides all RADAR functions at LAN. Aircraft X was the first ASR Approach aircraft in a sequence of four. We took the position when Aircraft X was on about a six mile final. The arrival sequence was not clear cut and took some time to work out the possibilities; so this occurred during a relatively complex time. Aircraft X had completed his ASR Approach to Runway 28L and was in the process of departing for MKG. The Final Controller assigned a heading 280 and a climb to 30 and gave Arrival RADAR the frequency that Aircraft X was on. Arrival RADAR had the Aircraft X strip in front of them at the time of the briefing. No strip from Local to Arrival RADAR was provided as necessary because we were working side by side and the information was passed verbally. Aircraft X called and the trainee was unsure what to do with the aircraft and left him on runway heading (280) to 40. The trainee had a number of other things to do at the time this was happening but was not overly burdened. Shortly thereafter Aircraft Y called departure and the trainee RADAR identified him. At this point; the data blocks were overlapping and I was not aware of the departure until he made his initial call up. At this point; I told the trainee to un-overlap the data blocks; as soon as this was done; the Trainee turned Aircraft Y to a 260 heading. At this point; I realized that we probably had an issue as the FLM (Front Line Manager) made comments about the situation and the trainee expedited the climb of Aircraft X and stopped Aircraft Y at 30. Then the trainee turned Aircraft X to a 320 heading to join V2. Considering we were basically handed an unsafe situation; the trainee did well with the information available and only made clearances that increased safety. Both aircraft were traveling in the same direction and climbing. There was minimal altitude separation (800 or so ft) and it appeared to be decreasing. The aircraft had about two miles between them at the time; however the rate of closure was very slow perhaps fifteen to twenty knot overtake. The situation was not such that immediate action was required. Once the trainee turned Aircraft Y to a 260 heading; as I was checking the headings on the strip and evaluating the situation; I realized that a collision had been averted and thus allowed the trainee to continue operation of the position. Information was learned after the fact indicating the Local Controller advised that he was unaware that the ASR aircraft was IFR and instead thought he was VFR. The Local Controller also indicated that he/she initially turned Aircraft Y to a 300 heading and only turned him back to a 280 once we turned toward MKG; which we had not yet done. With the amount of experience I have; and in talking with some of the involved participants; I wonder about some of the following things. 1) The position situation was somewhat unusual in that an ASR was being conducted in the TRACON while the RADAR was in the Tower. The Local did not have access to the Tower's D-Brite because it was turned toward the RADAR Controller. Normally; we do not pass the information of IFR or VFR status while conducting one of our 'extremely rare' ASR approaches because Local has the information passed via automation; specially the Data Block on the Tower's D-Brite. The ASR Controller; who is a relatively new CPC (Certified Professional Controller); may have been unaware that the IFR status of the aircraft needed to be passed. 2) The initial inbound status of the ASR was passed to the previous Local Controller; and not the one involved. It is possible that the IFR status of ASR was not coordinated during the briefing. Launching a faster aircraft immediately after an ASR has passed perhaps should require some communication between Local and Arrival RADAR; especially when the ASR departs on a 280 heading; a heading; which via local order; allows RADARto turn the aircraft either left or right. All personal should be made aware that the aircraft's status (IFR or VFR) needs to be passed from the Final Controller to the Local Controller when RADAR is in the Tower. And due to this being an extremely rare situation; I'm at a loss as to how to remind people to remember this odd situation.

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.