Date: 201711
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Military Transport
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Company Policy; Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was conducting training on the Radar position. The weather was MVFR with multiple IFR aircraft both in and outbound. We previously had worked Aircraft X for an IFR approach before they entered the VFR traffic pattern. I had been keeping track of their pattern work even though they were squawking VFR. Local Control switched Aircraft X to us without any coordination. When they checked in I observed their radar target 4 miles south of the airport southbound at 1400 ft. On initial call; they reported their position and requested an IFR clearance for practice approaches. We instructed them to stand by because as far as we knew they were VFR and we had multiple IFR aircraft on approaching the airport that needed to be sequenced.About a minute later they called again. They were instructed to reenter the VFR pattern. At this point they told us they were unable to maintain VFR. Noting their position now further south of the airport at 1800 ft in a 3500 ft MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude) headed straight for a 2200 ft obstacle; I immediately yelled to the CIC (Controller in Charge) I was [using my authority] and issued a turn away from both the obstacle and other traffic and a climb above the MVA. I then issued an IFR clearance. They were able to after they had climbed up to the MVA and were no longer in danger. We resumed normal operations. After the incident; I learned that Aircraft X had told Local Control that they could not maintain VFR. The controller working Local Control at the time is a trainee currently training on radar and is struggling. He was alone in the tower working all positions including CIC. Their inexperience in combination with lack of understanding of the big picture led them to just switch the aircraft to another controller rather than solve the problem themselves. Had the aircraft taken the frequency wrong it likely would have resulted in an accident; additionally; they should have asked for help when they didn't know what to do. I have many times complained about trainees receiving CIC certification in the tower before they are ready. It seems to be the practice of as soon as they are eligible to train and certify them with no concern for how they might actually perform in the position.The primary motivation for this is they are then useful for staffing. As such this problem is twofold. If staffing numbers were better there might not be the push to use trainees for staffing; which could have prevented this situation. Additionally; I think having a committee vote for someone before training them for CIC would help prevent those who aren't ready from being checked out. Who better to make the judgment than the controllers who work with the individual every day?




Synopsis: TRACON Controller reported a Local Controller vectored an aircraft that was below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.