Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ROA.TRACON, VA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ROA
ATC / advisory: TRACON ROA
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Instructor; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The Lynchburg West Radar position has become increasingly difficult with a very high amount of flight training occurring daily. Aircraft X was on a round robin flight plan from LYH to LYH for the purposes on practice approaches. Aircraft Y was an IFR departure routed LYH to DAN which is about a 200 degree heading. We had just taken the position relief briefing and there was a high volume of traffic. Aircraft X was on the published missed approach for the ILS Runway 4 and was climbing to 3;000 FT on about a 060 degree heading. The LYH Tower called for release of Aircraft Y and called him rolling on a 010 heading. Aircraft X wanted to proceed to the LYH VOR for a full procedure VOR Runway 4 approach. The developmental climbed Aircraft X to 4;000 FT and turned them right to a 190 degree heading. Aircraft Y checked in and the developmental climbed them to 4;000 FT on a 140 degree heading. They had about 3.5 miles separation with diverging headings and matched speeds; so I felt this was a safe operation. There were several other things going on at the time and my attention was diverted for a short time. The developmental turned Aircraft X right to the LYH VOR; about a 250 degree heading still at 4;000 FT; this decreased separation but we still had diverging headings. The developmental then cleared Aircraft Y direct to DAN; which was about 200 degrees and we no longer had legal separation. I told the developmental to descend Aircraft X to 3;000 FT and turn Aircraft Y back to the left. Aircraft X started to descend but Aircraft Y didn't understand the instructions but stated that they had the other aircraft in sight. Aircraft Y was instructed to maintain visual separation with Aircraft X and proceed direct DAN. The minimum amount of separation was about 1.5 miles. The developmental explained to me that he/she got DAN confused with the SBV VOR which was about a 150 heading and would have fine for separation.A flight started school a couple of years ago and traffic is increasing exponentially. They currently have [a number of] practice areas which will soon expand and [they] are adding new aircraft and instructors every month. The volume of traffic has increased to a point where it's becoming managed chaos and close calls are becoming more numerous. We have been discussing ways to lighten the workload at this sector including possibly splitting the sector; limiting traffic advisories in the practice areas etc. This all takes time; I understand; but meaningful training is almost impossible because so much time is spent making traffic calls. We took over this airspace 10 years ago and it was never designed for this amount of traffic and there are no procedures in place to split the sector this should be a high priority before a mid air happens.




Synopsis: ROA TRACON Controller reports of an airborne conflict caused by the Developmental becoming confused and issuing an incorrect heading.