L30 controller described a developing MVA/conflict event between a go around on runway 25 and a depa...

Narrative:

A crj was a go around off of runway 25 and an airbus was a departure off of runway 19. The tower requested the crj to fly runway heading; climbing to 070 which put the aircraft in close proximity of terrain. When the tower called to coordinate a male spoke first and then a female started talking. At that point I just needed to talk to both aircraft. That forced me to turn the crj to avoid the terrain. My plan was to take the airbus off the departure and use altitude with the crj. I had already accomplished all of my point outs to follow through with my plan. A cpc came over to try and help and told me to climb the crj to 080. At that point I climbed the airbus to 070 and kept him on the departure. The airbus had the crj in sight and was instructed to maintain visual separation; once the two were out of conflict I climbed the airbus because he was approaching higher terrain. The crj stayed above the airbus's wake until appropriate separation could be maintained. The tower's idea of a fix for a runway 25 go around and a 19 departure is not helpful to the TRACON because of terrain. Because go arounds are time critical communication needs to happen quickly. We don't have time to explain to the tower why something won't work. In this case; I just needed to talk to both aircraft.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: L30 Controller described a developing MVA/conflict event between a go around on Runway 25 and a departure off Runway 19; the reporter listing the Tower's instructions to the go around aircraft and the late frequency transfer as causal factors.

Narrative: A CRJ was a go around off of Runway 25 and an Airbus was a departure off of Runway 19. The Tower requested the CRJ to fly runway heading; climbing to 070 which put the aircraft in close proximity of terrain. When the Tower called to coordinate a male spoke first and then a female started talking. At that point I just needed to talk to both aircraft. That forced me to turn the CRJ to avoid the terrain. My plan was to take the Airbus off the departure and use altitude with the CRJ. I had already accomplished all of my point outs to follow through with my plan. A CPC came over to try and help and told me to climb the CRJ to 080. At that point I climbed the Airbus to 070 and kept him on the departure. The Airbus had the CRJ in sight and was instructed to maintain visual separation; once the two were out of conflict I climbed the Airbus because he was approaching higher terrain. The CRJ stayed above the Airbus's wake until appropriate separation could be maintained. The Tower's idea of a fix for a Runway 25 go around and a 19 departure is not helpful to the TRACON because of terrain. Because go arounds are time critical communication needs to happen quickly. We don't have time to explain to the Tower why something won't work. In this case; I just needed to talk to both aircraft.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 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.

Attributes
ACN	995494
Time
Date	201202
Local Time Of Day	1201-1800
Place
Locale Reference	LAS.Airport
State Reference	NV
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Initial Climb
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Landing
Route In Use	Vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Approach Departure
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Developmental
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy

L30 controller described a developing MVA/conflict event between a go around on runway 25 and a departure off runway 19; the reporter listing the tower's instructions to the go around aircraft and the late frequency transfer as causal factors.