Narrative:

I was training on south departure radar. I radar idented a rdu departure, Y, and told him to contact rdu approach on 134.3, rdu's south departure satellite position (sds). I had already been working commute X as a departure from rdu. He was level at 3000 and on an assigned heading of 190 degree, and direct fay when able. Aircraft Y was handed off to me from sds. I did not hear Y check in but I issued a 210 degree heading to him which was not acknowledged. I don't believe he was yet on my frequency. The 210 degree heading would have averted the conflict, however as he was on a tower assigned heading of 115 degree, it created a conflict with aircraft X. As soon as conflict was observed from the conflict alert, actions were taken to resolve it. In my opinion, several events contributed to this incident. They are: in general, at tdu, satellite airspace is very poorly designed (high climbing aircraft must level at 2000 3000 and possibly 4000 MSL until they are handed off to the next sector unless point-outs are initiated). No map changes were ever made depicting satellite airspace. To my knowledge, sds has never been staffed, except for training, within the last 4 months. New sds airspace and procedures were approved approximately 1 month ago and have yet to be implemented. Specifically, while I was being trained, the adjacent position (south departure satellite) was also training. This should not occur (side-by-side). My handoff position could not be staffed because the south departure satellite (sds) was open. (They occupy the same area). Automation was not working properly. All aircraft departing rdu that should have acquired on the sds position instead acquired on mine (sdr), thus placing on me the extra duty of handing off those aircraft to sds. Most if not all of the aircraft that should have initially contacted sds came up on my frequency. I therefore had to take the time to transfer communications. Traffic was heavy. Before he incident occurred I issued aircraft Y a 210 degree heading which would have averted conflict. But since he was in the midst of several frequency changes and 2 handoffs he never heard the 210 degree heading. Solution: abolish rdu sds position in its present form. Supplemental information from acn 188402. As things increased, my trainee became busier in several sections of the scope at once requiring point outs to adjacent facility etc. He turned but failed to climb commuter X from 3000 ft and took the handoff on another at 3000 ft. By the time I saw it, the aircraft were converging. I broke in, issued traffic and a climb to X. Simultaneously issuing traffic to the other aircraft Y. Aircraft Y said 'traffic in sight, he'll pass behind us.' the targets continued to merge with each having the other in sight. To summarize: training on these 2 sectors simultaneously should not have been done. The computer ARTS problem was not new and should have been corrected. There are no map markings depicting the satellite airspace.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LTSS BTWN COMMUTER AND A LIFEGUARD SMT. OPERATIONAL ERROR.

Narrative: I WAS TRAINING ON S DEP RADAR. I RADAR IDENTED A RDU DEP, Y, AND TOLD HIM TO CONTACT RDU APCH ON 134.3, RDU'S S DEP SATELLITE POS (SDS). I HAD ALREADY BEEN WORKING COMMUTE X AS A DEP FROM RDU. HE WAS LEVEL AT 3000 AND ON AN ASSIGNED HDG OF 190 DEG, AND DIRECT FAY WHEN ABLE. ACFT Y WAS HANDED OFF TO ME FROM SDS. I DID NOT HEAR Y CHK IN BUT I ISSUED A 210 DEG HDG TO HIM WHICH WAS NOT ACKNOWLEDGED. I DON'T BELIEVE HE WAS YET ON MY FREQ. THE 210 DEG HDG WOULD HAVE AVERTED THE CONFLICT, HOWEVER AS HE WAS ON A TWR ASSIGNED HDG OF 115 DEG, IT CREATED A CONFLICT WITH ACFT X. AS SOON AS CONFLICT WAS OBSERVED FROM THE CONFLICT ALERT, ACTIONS WERE TAKEN TO RESOLVE IT. IN MY OPINION, SEVERAL EVENTS CONTRIBUTED TO THIS INCIDENT. THEY ARE: IN GENERAL, AT TDU, SATELLITE AIRSPACE IS VERY POORLY DESIGNED (HIGH CLBING ACFT MUST LEVEL AT 2000 3000 AND POSSIBLY 4000 MSL UNTIL THEY ARE HANDED OFF TO THE NEXT SECTOR UNLESS POINT-OUTS ARE INITIATED). NO MAP CHANGES WERE EVER MADE DEPICTING SATELLITE AIRSPACE. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, SDS HAS NEVER BEEN STAFFED, EXCEPT FOR TRAINING, WITHIN THE LAST 4 MONTHS. NEW SDS AIRSPACE AND PROCS WERE APPROVED APPROX 1 MONTH AGO AND HAVE YET TO BE IMPLEMENTED. SPECIFICALLY, WHILE I WAS BEING TRAINED, THE ADJACENT POS (S DEP SATELLITE) WAS ALSO TRAINING. THIS SHOULD NOT OCCUR (SIDE-BY-SIDE). MY HDOF POS COULD NOT BE STAFFED BECAUSE THE S DEP SATELLITE (SDS) WAS OPEN. (THEY OCCUPY THE SAME AREA). AUTOMATION WAS NOT WORKING PROPERLY. ALL ACFT DEPARTING RDU THAT SHOULD HAVE ACQUIRED ON THE SDS POS INSTEAD ACQUIRED ON MINE (SDR), THUS PLACING ON ME THE EXTRA DUTY OF HANDING OFF THOSE ACFT TO SDS. MOST IF NOT ALL OF THE ACFT THAT SHOULD HAVE INITIALLY CONTACTED SDS CAME UP ON MY FREQ. I THEREFORE HAD TO TAKE THE TIME TO TRANSFER COMS. TFC WAS HVY. BEFORE HE INCIDENT OCCURRED I ISSUED ACFT Y A 210 DEG HDG WHICH WOULD HAVE AVERTED CONFLICT. BUT SINCE HE WAS IN THE MIDST OF SEVERAL FREQ CHANGES AND 2 HDOFS HE NEVER HEARD THE 210 DEG HDG. SOLUTION: ABOLISH RDU SDS POS IN ITS PRESENT FORM. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 188402. AS THINGS INCREASED, MY TRAINEE BECAME BUSIER IN SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE SCOPE AT ONCE REQUIRING POINT OUTS TO ADJACENT FACILITY ETC. HE TURNED BUT FAILED TO CLB COMMUTER X FROM 3000 FT AND TOOK THE HDOF ON ANOTHER AT 3000 FT. BY THE TIME I SAW IT, THE ACFT WERE CONVERGING. I BROKE IN, ISSUED TFC AND A CLB TO X. SIMULTANEOUSLY ISSUING TFC TO THE OTHER ACFT Y. ACFT Y SAID 'TFC IN SIGHT, HE'LL PASS BEHIND US.' THE TARGETS CONTINUED TO MERGE WITH EACH HAVING THE OTHER IN SIGHT. TO SUMMARIZE: TRAINING ON THESE 2 SECTORS SIMULTANEOUSLY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DONE. THE COMPUTER ARTS PROBLEM WAS NOT NEW AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN CORRECTED. THERE ARE NO MAP MARKINGS DEPICTING THE SATELLITE AIRSPACE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.