Narrative:

This occurred during a busy morning arrival push. The airport was IFR and the winds were 340 at 40-50 knots at altitude. Due to the configuration of the phl bravo airspace; all arrivals on any kind of downwind from the south are required to exit the bravo. I had to turn the arrivals from the south early due to the strong north winds; and as such I had turned air carrier Y north earlier than I would in calm winds to compensate. I turned air carrier X; who was currently on the base turn from the north; to a 230 degree heading and descended the aircraft to 4000 feet. At that point I had to scan for any bravo exit or re-entry; again every aircraft from the south downwind exit the bravo. I gave a number of bravo advisories as I have been required to give. When I looked back at air carrier X I realized he never took the heading and hadn't even left 5000 feet yet. These aircraft were essentially head on at the same altitude so I called air carrier X to expedite the turn and expedite the descent. The ca alert went off and I turned air carrier Y east. I believe I might have had less than standard separation but I can't be sure. I believe the main cause of this issue stems from a heightened requirement on issuing all bravo exit and re-entry advisories. This facility has gone so far as to threaten disciplinary action for any individuals that are perceived to be ignoring this antiquated advisory. For years the controllers working the traffic have asked for a suitable class bravo but we are constantly met with the same weak excuses; the bravo airspace problem can't be fixed at this date so we must issue the advisories. I spend more time scanning for bravo exits and re-entries than I do scanning for turns; issuing approach clearances or switching aircraft to the tower. I'm not well versed in the ways of the FAA beyond my experience as an air traffic controller; but I can't believe that the best the FAA can provide is a threat of discipline if we don't give the advisories to every aircraft that may stray outside the bravo. I recommend that the bravo airspace redesign at the philadelphia airport area be place on the highest priority possible. Furthermore; I recommend that the procedure of advising when an aircraft either leaves or re-enters the bravo airspace be removed from the 7110.65 immediately. Virtually every aircraft I work at philadelphia TRACON has 21st century equipment and capabilities; and many times as I am giving a bravo advisory I am met with the same sort of response from the pilot; which is usually some smart wise crack reply. Waiver this ridiculous requirement until the air traffic handbook can be updated to reflect the current century we are living in.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A PHL TRACON Controller failed to note a developing conflict between aircraft on opposite base tracks. He claimed the Class B exit/entry notification requirements introduced an unnecessary distraction.

Narrative: This occurred during a busy morning arrival push. The airport was IFR and the winds were 340 at 40-50 knots at altitude. Due to the configuration of the PHL BRAVO airspace; all arrivals on any kind of downwind from the south are required to exit the BRAVO. I had to turn the arrivals from the south early due to the strong north winds; and as such I had turned Air Carrier Y north earlier than I would in calm winds to compensate. I turned Air Carrier X; who was currently on the base turn from the north; to a 230 degree heading and descended the aircraft to 4000 feet. At that point I had to scan for any BRAVO exit or re-entry; again every aircraft from the south downwind exit the BRAVO. I gave a number of BRAVO advisories as I have been required to give. When I looked back at Air Carrier X I realized he never took the heading and hadn't even left 5000 feet yet. These aircraft were essentially head on at the same altitude so I called Air Carrier X to expedite the turn and expedite the descent. The CA alert went off and I turned Air Carrier Y east. I believe I might have had less than standard separation but I can't be sure. I believe the main cause of this issue stems from a heightened requirement on issuing all BRAVO exit and re-entry advisories. This facility has gone so far as to threaten disciplinary action for any individuals that are perceived to be ignoring this antiquated advisory. For years the controllers working the traffic have asked for a suitable Class BRAVO but we are constantly met with the same weak excuses; the BRAVO airspace problem can't be fixed at this date so we must issue the advisories. I spend more time scanning for BRAVO exits and re-entries than I do scanning for turns; issuing approach clearances or switching aircraft to the Tower. I'm not well versed in the ways of the FAA beyond my experience as an air traffic controller; but I can't believe that the best the FAA can provide is a threat of discipline if we don't give the advisories to every aircraft that may stray outside the BRAVO. I recommend that the BRAVO airspace redesign at the Philadelphia airport area be place on the highest priority possible. Furthermore; I recommend that the procedure of advising when an aircraft either leaves or re-enters the BRAVO airspace be removed from the 7110.65 immediately. Virtually every aircraft I work at Philadelphia TRACON has 21st Century equipment and capabilities; and many times as I am giving a BRAVO advisory I am met with the same sort of response from the pilot; which is usually some smart wise crack reply. Waiver this ridiculous requirement until the air traffic handbook can be updated to reflect the current century we are living in.

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.