Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure; Instructor; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was conducting OJT with a developmental who had only worked the unusual runway configuration once. The developmental (DEV) has no prior RADAR experience. His training on the adjacent sector had been going well over the past few days; so when we were asked if we would like to conduct OJT on Maverick/Shore sectors combined with SNA North Traffic; I asked him if he wanted to. He said he had worked it once before with his primary instructor; and so said; 'Yes.' We had no hand-off. I assisted the developmental by performing the hand-off duties (acknowledging departure rundowns; passing him departure strips; typing in pop-up VFR info; etc.) while reviewing the airspace boundaries; hand-offs and procedures. We were 'busy' off the frequency for most of the session; as I tried to explain many of the unusual situations he had never encountered before. Aircraft X popped up VFR requesting flight following to FUL. He was RADAR identified approximately 15 southeast SNA. As his flight progressed; I asked the developmental if he was happy where Aircraft X's flight path was taking him (across the SNA departure corridor). He agreed; no; and so advised Aircraft X to 'proceed midfield SNA at or above 2;600' (remaining above Tower's Class-D). The pilot acknowledged. Shortly thereafter; I observed Aircraft X approximately 3 miles northeast of SNA; northwest bound; still heading for the departure corridor. Again; I pointed this fact out to the developmental. He started to question the pilot; I over-rode him and instructed Aircraft X to 'Turn left heading 250.' Pilot acknowledged. Air Carrier Y departed SNA on the standard runway heading (014 degrees) assigned 5;000; but checked in advising that he had stopped his climb at 2;000 for traffic. When my attention was brought back to the departure corridor; I observed Aircraft X still northwest bound; just crossing the path of Air Carrier Y at 3;000. I asked Aircraft X to 'say heading.' He responded; '320; we're going to FUL.' Both aircraft pilots contacted our facility after the event; Aircraft X after being asked to do so; and Air Carrier Y on his own. Obviously; conducting OJT with a low-experience developmental with combined sectors; no hand-off; in an unusual runway configuration did contribute to this event. Had we had a hand-off person; my attention would not have been distracted from the RADAR scope. CICs/FLMs should take these factors into account when assigning OJT. Tower controllers should be reminded to scan not only the runway environment and upwind when clearing aircraft for departure; but also the departure corridor. SNA is a limited RADAR facility and clearly could have observed the target that close to their runway.


Second narrative: From San Diego area I knew from my weather briefing that there was going to be a high wind warning going to be in effect starting that afternoon. I was wheels up departing toward Fortune Mountain VFR. Once I was released from several Towers I contacted the Flight Service Station to open my flight plan. Once again I was reminded of the TFR over Disneyland. I then proceeded to contact SCT Approach (119.60) and received a Flight Following Squawk Code exactly 2 miles northwest of the Mission Bay VOR (MZB). By this time I had reached my cruise altitude of 4;500 FT proceeding east of V23 on a heading direct to just east of Dana Point. I was handed off twice from SCT Approach (127.30 then 124.10). From East of Dana Point; I headed direct to Signal Peak where SCT Approach handed me off again to 121.30. From Signal Peek I mistakenly was heading direct to El Toro thinking that I was on course for John Wayne maintaining my altitude of 4;500 FT. Here is where my confusion began; SCT Approach was very busy and I believe changing the departure direction to the east because of the Santa Ana winds. The reason I believe this was because I saw to my west side (left side of my aircraft) the departure of an Air Carrier flight. I immediately saw John Wayne airport and realized that I was not were I thought; nor were I should have been. From the departure of the Air Carrier jet I immediately proceeded to take evasive action in order to maintain visual separation. It turned out to be north eastern correction. Once I was clear from the jet; SCT Approach gave me a number to call once I landed at my destination. I freely admit guilt for the mistake of confusing the airports El Toro and John Wayne. I felt bad for how I handled the Class C Airspace and took full responsibility as pilot in command of this flight.


Synopsis: SCT Controller described a conflict event when traffic assigned a midfield crossing at SNA misidentified the airport and crossed at the departure end conflicting with an Air Carrier departure.