DCA Tower Controller reported the suspension of visual separation and the use of minimum radar separation at DCA Airport has led to increased complexity; risk; and go-arounds for arrivals.

Date: 2025-02 · Aircraft: Helicopter

Anomalies: atc-issue-all-types|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|no-specific-anomaly-occurred-unwanted-situation

Synopsis

DCA Tower Controller reported the suspension of visual separation and the use of minimum radar separation at DCA Airport has led to increased complexity; risk; and go-arounds for arrivals.

Narrative

DCA has been suspended from using Pilot Applied and Tower Applied Visual Separation per 7110.65AA. There is already a TFR and a NOTAM in place which are directly conflicting as they restrict different parts from helicopters in close proximity to the airport. The suspension of visual separation went into effect; introduced complexity while introducing risk to DCA and PCT TRACON. Aircraft X was being held approximately 3 miles west of DCA as we are required to provide radar separation between helicopters and fixed wing aircraft in a Class B airspace (1.5 miles or 500 feet). Aircraft X reported that he was minimum fuel while waiting for a gap in the arrivals to be able to proceed back to DCA. Aircraft Y was roughly 3.5 miles south of the field on a visual approach and already cleared to land when I gave him go-around instructions to climb and maintain 3000 feet; turn left heading of 280 in accordance with DCA and PCT's LOA (Letter of Agreement) for go-around procedures. Aircraft Z was approximately 5 miles behind Aircraft Y on a visual approach; also already cleared to land when I also issued a go-around instruction to climb and maintain 3000 feet. Coordination was done at the assistant Local Control position with the Final Controller who was already inundated with other arrivals behind Aircraft Z and an aircraft who was doing checks nearby only adding to the already complex and busy operation at PCT. I told Aircraft Z to continue with his present heading until further advised to not turn him directly towards the Aircraft Y and then issued Aircraft Z the 280 heading when he was already well above Aircraft X and past the point where he would be in direct conflict with Aircraft Y.Recommendation: Allow controllers to use the tools that are prescribed within the 7110.65 as it is the way we are trained to work at a VFR Tower. We are being forced to use minimum radar separation rules while only having a Radar Qualification CBI (Computer Based Instruction) that I had years ago at a different VFR Tower that also had a different class of airspace.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.