Narrative:

I was working the flight data position in the panama city, fl, ATCT (pfn) when I observed the following occurrence. Small aircraft X was given an IFR release by tyndall air force base RAPCON, the IFR controling facility for pfn, off runway 14 at pfn. Small aircraft X's instructions were to turn left on course and climb and maintain 5000 ft. Small transport Y was, at this time, 10 mi north of pfn, inbound IFR on a visual approach to runway 23. The departure instructions for small aircraft X took him directly into a head-on situation with small transport Y, although they were approximately 7 mi apart at this time. As small aircraft X was climbing, small transport Y was descending. They were approximately 5 mi apart at the same altitude. When small aircraft X passed over small transport Y there was only 500 ft of vertical separation between the 2 aircraft. The local controller said at that point they were both in sight and could be separated visually. Small transport Y was issued traffic calls at least twice on small aircraft X and was told to deviate to avoid the other aircraft. When the aircraft were approximately 1 mi apart, small transport Y saw small aircraft X and stayed on course, thus passing below him. The watch supervisor at tyndall air force base RAPCON was notified of the incident and admitted the departure approach controller made a mistake and that training was going on at the time. The excuse of 'training' is used often at tyndall RAPCON to justify loss of separation or violations of the pfn ATCT/tyndall RAPCON LOA. Closer supervision of developmental controllers may eliminate these and other mistakes.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA X HAD LTSS FROM SMT Y ON VISUAL APCH. SYS ERROR.

Narrative: I WAS WORKING THE FLT DATA POS IN THE PANAMA CITY, FL, ATCT (PFN) WHEN I OBSERVED THE FOLLOWING OCCURRENCE. SMA X WAS GIVEN AN IFR RELEASE BY TYNDALL AIR FORCE BASE RAPCON, THE IFR CTLING FACILITY FOR PFN, OFF RWY 14 AT PFN. SMA X'S INSTRUCTIONS WERE TO TURN L ON COURSE AND CLB AND MAINTAIN 5000 FT. SMT Y WAS, AT THIS TIME, 10 MI N OF PFN, INBOUND IFR ON A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 23. THE DEP INSTRUCTIONS FOR SMA X TOOK HIM DIRECTLY INTO A HEAD-ON SIT WITH SMT Y, ALTHOUGH THEY WERE APPROX 7 MI APART AT THIS TIME. AS SMA X WAS CLBING, SMT Y WAS DSNDING. THEY WERE APPROX 5 MI APART AT THE SAME ALT. WHEN SMA X PASSED OVER SMT Y THERE WAS ONLY 500 FT OF VERT SEPARATION BTWN THE 2 ACFT. THE LCL CTLR SAID AT THAT POINT THEY WERE BOTH IN SIGHT AND COULD BE SEPARATED VISUALLY. SMT Y WAS ISSUED TFC CALLS AT LEAST TWICE ON SMA X AND WAS TOLD TO DEVIATE TO AVOID THE OTHER ACFT. WHEN THE ACFT WERE APPROX 1 MI APART, SMT Y SAW SMA X AND STAYED ON COURSE, THUS PASSING BELOW HIM. THE WATCH SUPVR AT TYNDALL AIR FORCE BASE RAPCON WAS NOTIFIED OF THE INCIDENT AND ADMITTED THE DEP APCH CTLR MADE A MISTAKE AND THAT TRAINING WAS GOING ON AT THE TIME. THE EXCUSE OF 'TRAINING' IS USED OFTEN AT TYNDALL RAPCON TO JUSTIFY LOSS OF SEPARATION OR VIOLATIONS OF THE PFN ATCT/TYNDALL RAPCON LOA. CLOSER SUPERVISION OF DEVELOPMENTAL CTLRS MAY ELIMINATE THESE AND OTHER MISTAKES.

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.