Narrative:

Airport was departing runway 01 and I was working west radar that gets the northwest/southwest departures. There was a lot of weather to the northwest and both of our departure gates were combined into one. An A319 departed runway 01 climbing to 40 on runway heading. I radar identified the aircraft and climbed him to 15;000 and left him on runway heading for noise abatement. Right behind the A319 departed a C560 was climbing to 40;000. I thought they were a little close so I didn't climb the aircraft and scanned the northwest side of my scope where I had traffic. I scanned back and thought that the A319 and the C560 were less than three miles and the C560 was out climbing the A319. I amended the C560's altitude back to two thousand. The pilot of the C560 reported he was passing two thousand but going back down. It happened so fast that I didn't know if we lost a thousand feet. The pilot of the C560 did want a turn to get out of the A319's wake. I gave him the turn and stepped him up with the A319. Recommendation; this should have never ever been any problem. The local controller was not trying to get the C560 out in front of a lander and they knew we were busy with the weather. This was caused the old rule of 6;000 ft and airborne. This rule does not always give you 3 miles and a thousand feet. Even if it did why would you pack two departures going out the same gate with minimum spacing? I had to give the center more than 5 miles anyway. A team player would hold the C560 on the ground for an extra thirty seconds to a minute and this report would not be necessary. The only recommendation is brief that towers must give radar 3 miles separation on departure. We briefed this before and some people may have forgotten.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TRACON Controller described a minimally spaced departure event when the Local Controller launched two successive departures possibly losing separation; the reporter advocating increased Tower separation.

Narrative: Airport was departing Runway 01 and I was working West RADAR that gets the northwest/southwest departures. There was a lot of weather to the northwest and both of our departure gates were combined into one. An A319 departed Runway 01 climbing to 40 on runway heading. I RADAR identified the aircraft and climbed him to 15;000 and left him on runway heading for noise abatement. Right behind the A319 departed a C560 was climbing to 40;000. I thought they were a little close so I didn't climb the aircraft and scanned the northwest side of my scope where I had traffic. I scanned back and thought that the A319 and the C560 were less than three miles and the C560 was out climbing the A319. I amended the C560's altitude back to two thousand. The pilot of the C560 reported he was passing two thousand but going back down. It happened so fast that I didn't know if we lost a thousand feet. The pilot of the C560 did want a turn to get out of the A319's wake. I gave him the turn and stepped him up with the A319. Recommendation; this should have never ever been any problem. The Local Controller was not trying to get the C560 out in front of a lander and they knew we were busy with the weather. This was caused the old rule of 6;000 FT and airborne. This rule DOES NOT always give you 3 miles and a thousand feet. Even if it did why would you pack two departures going out the same gate with minimum spacing? I had to give the Center more than 5 miles anyway. A team player would hold the C560 on the ground for an extra thirty seconds to a minute and this report would not be necessary. The only recommendation is brief that Towers must give RADAR 3 miles separation on departure. We briefed this before and some people may have forgotten.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.