Narrative:

The carj (rj) was turning from 290 degree heading clockwise to 320 degree heading, to leave 6000 ft and climb to 13000 ft. The MD80 was on 240 degree heading at 230 KTS leaving 5300 ft for 6000 ft. The rj was at 250 KTS (surface wind 070 degrees at 11 KTS). At a point with 4 NM horizontal/700 ft vertical, the rj was turned from 290 degree heading and climbed. The 240 degree heading versus 320 degree heading would provide approximately 1 1/2 - 2 NM at the closest between aircraft. The rj delayed the climb, later claiming to be 'just using the autoplt?' with the carj passing the 12 O'clock position and 3 mi, there was 300 ft difference in altitude (mode C's). The carj was then on the 320 degree heading and the MD80 had just leveled off, and advised me of the TCASII event with the carj 'just off the nose.' traffic had been called between aircraft, and the MD80 had the carj in sight. Chain of events: runway change in progress, coordination/distraction with the situation of a nearby arrival aircraft caused me to not have issued higher to the carj sooner. I thought I had done that (climb the carj) prior to the 4 mi development. I must have observed mode C 5700 ft on the carj, confirming that 6000 ft could be issued to the MD80. Also, the 2 aircraft involved needed 'in-trail' separation out the same departure gate and the tower had basically departed them off different runways, resulting in a 'tie' -- ie, higher complexity.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DEP CTLR AT CVG ISSUED A LATE CLB INSTRUCTION TO A SLOW CLBING CARJ ACFT RESULTING IN A LOSS OF SEPARATION WITH AN MD80.

Narrative: THE CARJ (RJ) WAS TURNING FROM 290 DEG HDG CLOCKWISE TO 320 DEG HDG, TO LEAVE 6000 FT AND CLB TO 13000 FT. THE MD80 WAS ON 240 DEG HDG AT 230 KTS LEAVING 5300 FT FOR 6000 FT. THE RJ WAS AT 250 KTS (SURFACE WIND 070 DEGS AT 11 KTS). AT A POINT WITH 4 NM HORIZ/700 FT VERT, THE RJ WAS TURNED FROM 290 DEG HDG AND CLBED. THE 240 DEG HDG VERSUS 320 DEG HDG WOULD PROVIDE APPROX 1 1/2 - 2 NM AT THE CLOSEST BTWN ACFT. THE RJ DELAYED THE CLB, LATER CLAIMING TO BE 'JUST USING THE AUTOPLT?' WITH THE CARJ PASSING THE 12 O'CLOCK POS AND 3 MI, THERE WAS 300 FT DIFFERENCE IN ALT (MODE C'S). THE CARJ WAS THEN ON THE 320 DEG HDG AND THE MD80 HAD JUST LEVELED OFF, AND ADVISED ME OF THE TCASII EVENT WITH THE CARJ 'JUST OFF THE NOSE.' TFC HAD BEEN CALLED BTWN ACFT, AND THE MD80 HAD THE CARJ IN SIGHT. CHAIN OF EVENTS: RWY CHANGE IN PROGRESS, COORD/DISTR WITH THE SIT OF A NEARBY ARR ACFT CAUSED ME TO NOT HAVE ISSUED HIGHER TO THE CARJ SOONER. I THOUGHT I HAD DONE THAT (CLB THE CARJ) PRIOR TO THE 4 MI DEVELOPMENT. I MUST HAVE OBSERVED MODE C 5700 FT ON THE CARJ, CONFIRMING THAT 6000 FT COULD BE ISSUED TO THE MD80. ALSO, THE 2 ACFT INVOLVED NEEDED 'IN-TRAIL' SEPARATION OUT THE SAME DEP GATE AND THE TWR HAD BASICALLY DEPARTED THEM OFF DIFFERENT RWYS, RESULTING IN A 'TIE' -- IE, HIGHER COMPLEXITY.

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.