Narrative:

I was conducting ojti. The developmental is on his last sector; at 75% of allotted hours and very nearly ready. In fact; the developmental; his supervisor and I all expected that I would recommend a certification skill check on that day or the next. Hayward tower called for release of an excel. The departure procedure for a hayward (hwd) conflicts with the runway 29 final to oakland airport (oak). The next arrival to oak was far enough away in my opinion to release the excel. There was OJT being conducted at the hand-off position; with a very low hour developmental. He didn't know what to do; so he asked his ojti; who directed him to talk to the radar controller; my developmental. They decided to hold the excel. There were two more oak arrivals that we knew of behind the first; eight miles in trail and the ten miles in trail of that. They decided to release the excel between the second and third arrivals. This plan wasn't the most efficient; but they made it work. Hwd airport is one mile north of the runway 29 final to oak. The hwd runway 28 departure procedure is to turn left heading 160 and climb to 2;000 ft. Once the hwd departure crosses the oak runway 29 localizer; we consider them to be laterally separated as long as they stay on the 160 heading. In this case; the weather was suitable for visual approaches; the arrival to oak reported the excel in sight; was instructed to maintain visual separation and cleared for a visual approach; so far so good. The final approach course to san francisco (sfo) runway 28R is about six miles south of; and nearly parallel to; the oak runway 29 final. The hwd departure heading conflicts with the sfo final at the point where the sfo traffic is normally between 3;200 ft and 3;700 ft; depending on the type of approach. It is therefore of utmost importance to vector hwd departures prior to climbing them. In this case; my developmental climbed the excel to 3;000 ft but didn't vector him. The correct technique in this case would have been to vector the excel to a heading reciprocal to the oak arrival (since the arrival was maintaining visual separation from the excel); ensuring target resolution and climbing the excel. When I observed the excel climbing through 2;300 ft on the 160 heading; I prompted my developmental to address the issue. He issued a northerly turn to the excel; but the excel was slow to execute the turn. By now; the excel was within three and one half miles of the sfo final; and I observed conflicting traffic on final to sfo descending through 3;700 ft; as did the developmental. The developmental issued the traffic and told the excel to expedite his turn; but by now the conflict alert was in alarm; separation was lost; and the excel was saying something about TCAS traffic. The excel never reported the traffic in sight; and didn't seem to expedite his turn until after separation was lost. He did stop his climb at 2;700FT; which mitigated the loss of separation somewhat. The developmental didn't properly take into account aircraft performance. He has been climbing lower performance aircraft prior to vectoring them away from the sfo final; and it hasn't been an issue because they turn quickly due to their low speeds. The high performance aircraft move and climb faster; yet turn slower. My mistakes were expecting that the developmental would not make such a boneheaded blunder; and not correcting it immediately. The hwd departure procedure should be changed. Not only does it conflict with the finals at oak and sfo; it conflicts with departure procedures at san carlos (sql); palo alto (pao); and sometimes san jose (sjc). It puts them into a north and eastbound flow in an area where the vast majority of the traffic is flowing west and southwest. Furthermore; there is rapidly rising terrain to the east; which is the only place to take them because of the design of the surrounding airspace. Departing west or northwest makes much more sense from a safety standpoint. It puts them into asame direction flow with the oak arrivals; takes them out the sfo arrival flow completely and takes them over lower terrain. The negative impact would be an increase in coordination between nct and oak tower; as it would put them through oak C airspace and could possibly affect oak departure traffic.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An NCT Controller; providing OJT; described a loss of separation between a high performance Hayward departure issued a climb that conflicted with SFO arrival traffic.

Narrative: I was conducting OJTI. The Developmental is on his last sector; at 75% of allotted hours and very nearly ready. In fact; the developmental; his supervisor and I all expected that I would recommend a certification skill check on that day or the next. Hayward Tower called for release of an Excel. The departure procedure for a Hayward (HWD) conflicts with the Runway 29 final to Oakland Airport (OAK). The next arrival to OAK was far enough away in my opinion to release the Excel. There was OJT being conducted at the hand-off position; with a very low hour developmental. He didn't know what to do; so he asked his OJTI; who directed him to talk to the RADAR Controller; my developmental. They decided to hold the Excel. There were two more OAK arrivals that we knew of behind the first; eight miles in trail and the ten miles in trail of that. They decided to release the Excel between the second and third arrivals. This plan wasn't the most efficient; but they made it work. HWD airport is one mile north of the Runway 29 final to OAK. The HWD Runway 28 departure procedure is to turn left heading 160 and climb to 2;000 FT. Once the HWD departure crosses the OAK Runway 29 localizer; we consider them to be laterally separated as long as they stay on the 160 heading. In this case; the weather was suitable for visual approaches; the arrival to OAK reported the Excel in sight; was instructed to maintain visual separation and cleared for a visual approach; so far so good. The final approach course to San Francisco (SFO) Runway 28R is about six miles south of; and nearly parallel to; the OAK Runway 29 final. The HWD departure heading conflicts with the SFO final at the point where the SFO traffic is normally between 3;200 FT and 3;700 FT; depending on the type of approach. It is therefore of utmost importance to vector HWD departures prior to climbing them. In this case; my developmental climbed the Excel to 3;000 FT but didn't vector him. The correct technique in this case would have been to vector the Excel to a heading reciprocal to the OAK arrival (since the arrival was maintaining visual separation from the Excel); ensuring target resolution and climbing the Excel. When I observed the Excel climbing through 2;300 FT on the 160 heading; I prompted my developmental to address the issue. He issued a northerly turn to the Excel; but the Excel was slow to execute the turn. By now; the Excel was within three and one half miles of the SFO final; and I observed conflicting traffic on final to SFO descending through 3;700 FT; as did the developmental. The developmental issued the traffic and told the Excel to expedite his turn; but by now the Conflict Alert was in alarm; separation was lost; and the Excel was saying something about TCAS traffic. The Excel never reported the traffic in sight; and didn't seem to expedite his turn until after separation was lost. He did stop his climb at 2;700FT; which mitigated the loss of separation somewhat. The developmental didn't properly take into account aircraft performance. He has been climbing lower performance aircraft prior to vectoring them away from the SFO final; and it hasn't been an issue because they turn quickly due to their low speeds. The high performance aircraft move and climb faster; yet turn slower. My mistakes were expecting that the developmental would not make such a boneheaded blunder; and not correcting it immediately. The HWD departure procedure should be changed. Not only does it conflict with the finals at OAK and SFO; it conflicts with departure procedures at San Carlos (SQL); Palo Alto (PAO); and sometimes San Jose (SJC). It puts them into a north and eastbound flow in an area where the vast majority of the traffic is flowing west and southwest. Furthermore; there is rapidly rising terrain to the east; which is the only place to take them because of the design of the surrounding airspace. Departing west or northwest makes much more sense from a safety standpoint. It puts them into asame direction flow with the OAK arrivals; takes them out the SFO arrival flow completely and takes them over lower terrain. The negative impact would be an increase in coordination between NCT and OAK Tower; as it would put them through OAK C airspace and could possibly affect OAK departure traffic.

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.