Sct controller described a conflict event when an IFR departure conflicted with a VFR aircraft. The ...

Narrative:

I took radar on a jet aircraft routed over palmdale from woodland. I'm supposed to get them climbing to 13;000 ft on a northerly heading. Woodland sector had VFR traffic at 8;300 ft or 8;500 ft so they stopped the jet at 8;000 ft and shipped them to me without any coordination. I'm really not sure if the BE36 was level at 8;500 ft or not. It had been very turbulent all day so I wouldn't be surprised if it was difficult for the lighter aircraft to climb and remain level. I called traffic for aircraft X as I turned him on course direct pmd. Aircraft X told me they got an RA; but I observed no change in altitude as a result. It should be noted that the runway configuration in use during the event was very out of the ordinary and certainly the most complex bur has to offer. Bur [runways] 8/15 and vny [runway] 34.recommendation; the airport configuration on this day was very out of the ordinary; so I would say that everyone was a little bit rusty on the procedures. It would be great to have an accurate and up to date reference for the traffic flows and procedures. Currently; the displays we have to look up that kind of information are nearly impossible to read. I do believe the equipment is older then I am. I think coordination was the real problem here; the woodland controller should have told me what was going on.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SCT Controller described a conflict event when an IFR departure conflicted with a VFR aircraft. The reporter listed weather; unusual runway configurations; and failed coordination efforts as causal factors.

Narrative: I took RADAR on a jet aircraft routed over Palmdale from Woodland. I'm supposed to get them climbing to 13;000 FT on a northerly heading. Woodland sector had VFR traffic at 8;300 FT or 8;500 FT so they stopped the jet at 8;000 FT and shipped them to me without any coordination. I'm really not sure if the BE36 was level at 8;500 FT or not. It had been very turbulent all day so I wouldn't be surprised if it was difficult for the lighter aircraft to climb and remain level. I called traffic for aircraft X as I turned him on course direct PMD. Aircraft X told me they got an RA; but I observed no change in altitude as a result. It should be noted that the runway configuration in use during the event was very out of the ordinary and certainly the most complex BUR has to offer. BUR [Runways] 8/15 and VNY [Runway] 34.Recommendation; the airport configuration on this day was very out of the ordinary; so I would say that everyone was a little bit rusty on the procedures. It would be great to have an accurate and up to date reference for the traffic flows and procedures. Currently; the displays we have to look up that kind of information are nearly impossible to read. I do believe the equipment is older then I am. I think coordination was the real problem here; the Woodland Controller should have told me what was going on.

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.

Attributes
ACN	984492
Time
Date	201112
Local Time Of Day	1201-1800
Place
Locale Reference	SCT.TRACON
State Reference	CA
Environment
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Gulfstream G200 (IAI 1126 Galaxy)
Flight Phase	Climb
Route In Use	Vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Bonanza 36
Flight Phase	Climb
Flight Plan	VFR
Person 1
Function	Approach Departure
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Developmental
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Conflict Airborne Conflict

Sct controller described a conflict event when an IFR departure conflicted with a VFR aircraft. The reporter listed weather; unusual runway configurations; and failed coordination efforts as causal factors.