Near-collision of two Boeing 747s avoided by last-minute controller intervention

Casualties unknown • Saskatoon, Saskatchewan 50 nm E, CA

A controller in Saskatchewan narrowly averted a mid-air conflict between two heavy Boeing 747 aircraft after failing to identify a crossing path during routine monitoring.

What happened

At approximately 2130 local time, a conflict was identified between a Korean Airlines Boeing 747-20 and a British Airways Boeing 747-400 flying at flight level 330. The two aircraft were on intersecting paths approximately 63 nautical miles east of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. The Prince Albert sector controller realized the collision risk when the aircraft were only about 10 nautical miles from the crossing point.

To resolve the situation, the controller instructed the Korean Airlines crew to turn left and descend to flight level 310, while directing the British Airways crew to turn right. During the maneuvering, the vertical separation between the two aircraft dropped to just 700 feet, and the lateral distance reached a minimum of 7.9 nautical miles. Although the required 5 nautical mile separation was technically maintained, the aircraft had reached the crossing point without any planned separation, leaving safety unassured.

The investigation

The investigation examined the controller's workload and the procedures used for conflict prediction. At the time of the incident, the controller was managing 12 aircraft flight data strips. It was noted that the controller had not completed the conflict prediction sequence for the British Airways flight because his attention had been diverted to a hand-off for another aircraft and to re-programming radar display preferences following a software upgrade.

Furthermore, the investigation looked into the practice of grouping all flight progress strips under a single "Saskatoon" header on the data board. This method required the controller to manually search through all strips to identify potential conflicts, rather than using specific fix designator headers. The investigation also noted that the controller did not use the specific, imperative phraseology required for safety alerts, which likely contributed to a 23-second delay in the Korean Airlines crew beginning their descent.

Findings

  • The controller failed to monitor flight progress strips with enough detail to identify the impending conflict.
  • The controller did not adequately utilize the conflict prediction tools available on the radar situational display.
  • The lack of automatic conflict detection software in the Winnipeg area control centre meant there was no automated alert for the developing risk.
  • The practice of consolidating flight progress strips under a single header increased the difficulty of detecting potential crossing points.
  • The use of non-imperative language and the failure to provide immediate traffic information to the crews delayed the necessary corrective maneuvers.

Probable cause

The primary cause was the controller's failure to identify a potential conflict between the two aircraft due to interrupted monitoring and inadequate use of conflict prediction tools. Contributing factors included the increased cognitive load from manual strip management and the absence of automatic conflict detection software.

Frequently asked questions

What happened in the 2002-04-25 Winnipeg Area Control Centre - Prince Albert Sector accident near Saskatoon, Saskatchewan 50 nm E, CA?

A controller in Saskatchewan narrowly averted a mid-air conflict between two heavy Boeing 747 aircraft after failing to identify a crossing path during routine monitoring.

What aircraft was involved and where did it happen?

The accident on 2002-04-25 involved a Winnipeg Area Control Centre - Prince Albert Sector, operated by Nav Canada, at Saskatoon, Saskatchewan 50 nm E, CA.

What was the probable cause of the accident?

The primary cause was the controller's failure to identify a potential conflict between the two aircraft due to interrupted monitoring and inadequate use of conflict prediction tools. Contributing factors included the increased cognitive load from manual strip management and the absence of automatic conflict…

Loading the flight search…

What you can do on Flight Finder

  • Search flights between any two airports with live fares.
  • By aircraft — pick a plane model (e.g. Boeing 787, Airbus A350) and see every route it flies from your origin.
  • Route map — click any airport worldwide to explore its destinations, or draw a radius to find nearby airports.
  • Global aviation safety — aviation accident database, 40,000+ records since 1980, with map and rankings by aircraft and operator.
  • NTSB safety feed — recent U.S. aviation accidents and incidents from the official NTSB CAROL database, updated daily.