Reporter alleges the local controller did not provide appropriate separation between a VFR inbound PA31 and a VFR overflt helicopter on reporter's approach frequency which had approval by the local controller to go through the class C.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	381331
Time
Date	199709
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : anc
State Reference	AK
Altitude	msl bound lower : 1500 msl bound upper : 1500
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : anc tower : anc
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	PA-31 Navajo Chieftan/Mojave/Navajo T1020
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 135
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	arrival other
Flight Plan	VFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude
Flight Plan	VFR
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : approach
Qualification	controller : radar pilot : student
Experience	controller non radar : 6 controller radar : 7 flight time total : 9
ASRS Report	381331
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : local
Qualification	controller : non radar
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance other
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 9000 vertical : 0
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

PA31 arriving runway 6L from the southwest, descending from 2000 ft. Helicopter departed lake hood, approved through anc class C, with 'south' for sbound indicated on the departure strip. The PA31 was on tower frequency when the helicopter contacted me. I issued traffic, then observed the helicopter on a southwest heading directly at the PA31. The helicopter did not see the PA31, and asked me his direction, indicating that he didn't even know about him. I turned the helicopter to avoid the PA31. Separation was accomplished, no thanks to tower. When queried, the tower controller said 'I didn't even talk to him,' as if it was an excuse for not ensuring separation of an aircraft she approved to transit her 'airspace.' anc tower consistently allows lhd departures to transit without applying any separation criteria. Even though they are required to do so, management seems to view it as, at most, a very minor issue. As a matter of fact, I was chastised by management for 'correcting' the tower controller over the land line.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RPTR ALLEGES THE LCL CTLR DID NOT PROVIDE APPROPRIATE SEPARATION BTWN A VFR INBOUND PA31 AND A VFR OVERFLT HELI ON RPTR'S APCH FREQ WHICH HAD APPROVAL BY THE LCL CTLR TO GO THROUGH THE CLASS C.

Narrative: PA31 ARRIVING RWY 6L FROM THE SW, DSNDING FROM 2000 FT. HELI DEPARTED LAKE HOOD, APPROVED THROUGH ANC CLASS C, WITH 'S' FOR SBOUND INDICATED ON THE DEP STRIP. THE PA31 WAS ON TWR FREQ WHEN THE HELI CONTACTED ME. I ISSUED TFC, THEN OBSERVED THE HELI ON A SW HEADING DIRECTLY AT THE PA31. THE HELI DID NOT SEE THE PA31, AND ASKED ME HIS DIRECTION, INDICATING THAT HE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT HIM. I TURNED THE HELI TO AVOID THE PA31. SEPARATION WAS ACCOMPLISHED, NO THANKS TO TWR. WHEN QUERIED, THE TWR CTLR SAID 'I DIDN'T EVEN TALK TO HIM,' AS IF IT WAS AN EXCUSE FOR NOT ENSURING SEPARATION OF AN ACFT SHE APPROVED TO TRANSIT HER 'AIRSPACE.' ANC TWR CONSISTENTLY ALLOWS LHD DEPS TO TRANSIT WITHOUT APPLYING ANY SEPARATION CRITERIA. EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE REQUIRED TO DO SO, MGMNT SEEMS TO VIEW IT AS, AT MOST, A VERY MINOR ISSUE. AS A MATTER OF FACT, I WAS CHASTISED BY MGMNT FOR 'CORRECTING' THE TWR CTLR OVER THE LAND LINE.

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.