Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LIT.Airport, AR
Light: Night
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C LIT
ATC / advisory: TRACON LIT
Second aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working all radar positions combined and had Aircraft X coming from the north landing Runway 36 VFR. Aircraft had been reporting that staying above 4;000 was not possible to maintain VFR (Local Control departure pie goes up to 4;000). I called Local Control and did a point out for Aircraft X descending through his departure corridor. My request was approved. I told Aircraft X to continue his descent. He was number two in a three plane sequence to Runway 36. The Local Controller called me back several minutes later and asked if I could put Aircraft X on a 220 heading so he could; 'get Aircraft Y off of 4R.' I was puzzled by Local Control's request as it would delay Aircraft X for no reason and place him right over the top of the airport and destroy my sequence. I 'un-abled' his request and said; 'No just wait for Aircraft X he will be through the extended centerline in about sixty seconds.' Local Control responded; 'OK.' The next thing I know Aircraft Y is climbing off of Runway 4R and turning to a 080 heading right toward Aircraft X who at this time was just to the right (already passed) the extended centerline for Runway 4R. There was no target resolution and maybe 400 FT of altitude separation. I was in shock that Local Control launched and put a plane in that situation and wondered why he didn't leave Aircraft Y on runway heading. After I got off position I spoke to the Tower CIC who was in the break room and was informed that when the Local Controller had asked me to turn Aircraft X to a 220 heading he had already cleared Aircraft Y for takeoff. Had I known that Aircraft Y was rolling I would have immediately turned Aircraft X to avoid conflict. I would have turned him to a 360 [heading] though because the suggested 220 heading could have been even worse than the actual outcome. The Locals' failure to tell me what was actually happening along with his decision to turn Aircraft Y to a 080 heading created a bad situation. I also learned from the CIC that the pilot of Aircraft Y switched back to the Tower frequency and asked Local Control what had happened after I had switched Aircraft Y to the Center. Aircraft Y never asked me or said anything about the situation.Local Control should have told me that he had erroneously cleared someone for takeoff after accepting my point-out instead of requesting a heading that made zero sense to me for an aircraft that was already in a sequence.


Second narrative: We were cleared for takeoff 4R LIT with a right turn to 080. Upon initial climb; Tower advised of traffic in close proximity and quickly advised that we expedite the turn to 080 (we did not begin our right hand turn late). We saw the conflict on the TCAS and became visual with the other aircraft and were surprised to see how close it was. The aircraft was to our left and remained to our left throughout the incident. At the closest point of separation; we noticed that we passed the aircraft at the same altitude and passed it horizontally by 500 FT (estimated). TCAS RA occurred with climb command and we complied by increasing our pitch and rate of climb.Error: We should not have been cleared for takeoff. I believe that the Tower was not aware of the position of the conflicting aircraft. It is possible that the aircraft was still talking to Approach Control at the time. However; the aircraft was in very close proximity to the airport at the time and this situation should not have occurred. We were not notified of the conflicting aircraft; nor did we see it on the TCAS or visually until we were airborne.Always scan for traffic when in VFR conditions; especially during terminal operations. ATC Tower and Approach communications need to be reviewed.


Synopsis: LIT Approach Controller reports of an aircraft that takes off into the path of an aircraft that he had just told the Local Controller to wait for. Pilot report of same incident reports of an aircraft very close to them as they climbed out of LIT.