ZNY Controller described a loss of separation event involving three arrival aircraft to three different airports; the reporter listing the URET implementation and the absence of strip information as casual factors.
Synopsis
ZNY Controller described a loss of separation event involving three arrival aircraft to three different airports; the reporter listing the URET implementation and the absence of strip information as casual factors.
Narrative
Air Carrier X was a CAMRN arrival to JFK and was issued 250 knots and 5 miles south of CAMRN at 11 thousand. Air Carrier Y was an ISP arrival level at 13 thousand. There was an additional aircraft level at 15 thousand which was a DSH8 and was landing at HVN. This aircraft was slower and ahead of Air Carrier Y and direct PLUME. I had initially issued a left turn to Air Carrier Y. Air Carrier X came back and said that he would be unable to make the restriction. I then issued the Air Carrier X to cross CAMRN at 11 thousand and 250 knots. I then turned Air Carrier Y 20 degrees left to move the confliction point further north. Upon realizing that this would not be sufficient I issued a heading of 040 which would have provided positive separation. Unfortunately; I incorrectly issued the heading to the DSH8 at 15 thousand. Upon realizing that a loss of separation was still occurring; I issued an additional left turn to Air Carrier Y to mitigate the loss of separation. Recommendation; Sector 68 is a complex sector that has many confliction points with aircraft climbing and descending through each others altitudes. When URET was implemented all flight progress strips were removed. Furthermore; URET was implemented without any procedures/SOPs to address the proper methods to document the various headings/speeds/altitudes issued. If flight progress strips were still used I would have recognized that I issued the 040 heading to the wrong aircraft. I would recommend in the future that URET be removed from Sector 68 along with other sectors that share this complexity. If this cannot be done; I would recommend that a comprehensive SOP be developed to correctly implement URET at Sector 68.
Second reporter narrative
[I was] working RA68 at time of incident. [I] did identify a conflict developing [and] asked the R68 Controller if he was alright with the developing conflict. [I was] advised by R68 Controller that the CRJ2 was vectored to a 045 degree heading. Since no strips are being used at Sector 68 there was no means to verify the action was taken correctly. Assumed that the heading would work and went back to doing RA Duties. Recommend a complete overhaul of the existing URET procedures at Sector 68. If this cannot be completed in a timely manner then I would like to see use of flight progress strips returned to use at this Sector.
More incidents for this aircraft family →
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.