2010-11 · NASA ASRS report 920291
A ZOB Associate Controller described a very confused coordination problem that involving several RADAR and Associate RADAR positions. The result was a near loss of separation.
I was assigned to the IRL Associate RADAR Position. The IRL RADAR Controller took a hand off from the AGC RADAR Controller on an A319 at FL350 landing SYR via PSB VOR. At that time; the IRL RADAR Controller had hand offs on two aircraft crossing the path of the A319; another Air Carrier flight inbound to PHL and a BE40 landing TTN. Both of these flights were eastbound over JST. Both were at FL340. The two eastbound jets were to cross the ZNY boundary at FL250; per the LOA. The A319 was to cross the boundary between the IRL Sector and the BKL Sector at FL290; also per the LOA. In between the PHL and TTN flights; the IRL RADAR Controller also had another Air Carrier flight at FL310; also inbound to PHL. The only way to get each of these four aircraft to their LOA altitudes was to descend either the SYR inbound and then ladder down the PHL area traffic over top or vice versa. The IRL RADAR Controller; being very newly certified; was too lax in accomplishing this task. As a result; he decided to reroute the A319 via BEEPS SYR; therefore allowing the IRL Controller to leave the A319 at FL350; and execute a hand off to the FKL Sector. Shortly thereafter; the FKL associate Radar Controller called me at the IRL Associate RADAR position and requested the A319 be put back on his original route over PSB. I explained to him that I was the 'D-guy'; I hinted that I was not the one talking on the frequency; ended the call and passed the instructions along to IRL Controller. A number of seconds later; the FKL Associate Controller called me again with more instructions. I repeated that I was the 'D-guy'; I hinted that I was not the one talking on the frequency; ended the call and passed along the information to the IRL Controller. In the meantime; the IRL had turned the BE40 to a heading of 060 degrees to effect spacing behind the other Air Carrier. It was around this time that I observed the BE40 veering towards the FKL/BKL sectors. It was also around this time that I received another call from the FKL Associate Controller with an additional instruction for the A319. I repeated that I was just the 'D-guy'; hinting that I was not the one talking on the frequency; ended the call and passed along the latest instructions to the IRL Controller. The Cleveland Center Management Team insists on funneling critical RADAR instructions through the ASSOCIATE RADAR POSITION. Contributing factors in this event include: 1. The inability of the AGC-R Controller to correctly space two PHL area inbounds with another PHL inbound worked by another sector. 2. The inability of the IRL-R Controller to expedite descent on either the PHL area inbounds or the SYR inbound and then ladder the other traffic down over top.3. The inability of the FKL-R Controller to accept the A319's routing over BEEPS Intersection; a routing that is approved by many AREA 7 Controllers. 4. The unsafe practice of the Cleveland Center Management Team insisting that important RADAR-type instructions go through the Associate RADAR position; thereby leading to critical loss of time along with the possibility of something being 'lost in translation'. This practice must come to aRecommendation; contributing factors in this event include: 1. The inability of the AGC-R Controller to correctly space two PHL area inbounds with another PHL inbound worked by another sector. 2. The inability of the IRL-R Controller to expedite descent on either the PHL area inbounds or the SYR inbound and then ladder the other traffic down over top.3. The inability of the FKL-R Controller to accept the A319's routing over BEEPS Intersection; a routing that is approved by many AREA 7 Controllers. 4. The unsafe practice of the Cleveland Center Management Team insisting that important RADAR-type instructions go through the Associate RADAR position; thereby leading to critical loss of time along with the possibility of something being 'lost in translation'. This practice must come to a halt ASAP.
Imperial Sector 67: During a session of PHL spacing; I was working an Air Carrier at FL310 in the vicinity if JST following another carrier at FL350 descending to FL340 controlled by the AGC Sector. The AGC Sector handed off an A319; a SYR lander; FL370 descending to FL350 direct PSB approximately ten miles inside the boundary. A moment later the AGC Sector handed off a BE40; a TTN lander; leveling FL340 inside five miles of the first Air Carrier. Needing to space these two; I began by turning the BE40 on a 50 heading and did the point out coordination with Area 5. Knowing I was going to have a problem getting the A319 down through the PHL spacing; I decided to put the aircraft over BEEPS Intersection and hand it off the FKL Sector. A moment or so later my D-Side said that Area 5 wanted the A319 back over PSB. By this time the A319 was approximately fifteen miles from the boundary. As I was re clearing the A319 back over PSB; my D-Side was on and off the line with Area 5; I assumed; because the data block was changing. While my D-Side was coordinating with Area 5; I continued to work on the PHL spacing; and other sector duties. I was told by my D-Side to descend the A319 to FL310; now inside Area 5's airspace. At this time I asked my D-Side who I should put the aircraft on because the aircraft was in FKL airspace descending into BKL airspace; approaching the New York Center boundary; and he did all of the coordination with Area 5. Seconds later the A319 began to flash with another carrier in New York Center's airspace. I hear my Supervisor say turn the aircraft 30 right and complied immediately. I was told to put the aircraft on PSB Sectors frequency; complied; and continued with the rest of the sector duties. RADAR Controllers should have done the coordination with each other; not through the D-Side. Some information and urgency gets lost in the relaying of information.
More incidents for this aircraft family
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.
Loading the flight search…
Pick an aircraft model — Boeing 737, Airbus A320, A380, Boeing 787 Dreamliner and more — enter your origin airport, and FlightFinder shows every route that plane flies from there with live fares.
We support Boeing 737/747/757/767/777/787, the full Airbus A220/A319/A320/A321/A330/A340/A350/A380 family, Embraer E170/E175/E190/E195, Bombardier CRJ and Dash 8, and the ATR 42/72 turboprops.
Search and schedules are free. Pro ($4.99/month, $39/year, or $99 one-time lifetime) unlocks the enriched flight card — on-time stats, CO₂ per passenger, amenities, live gate & weather — plus My Trips with push alerts.
Live schedules come from Amadeus, AeroDataBox and Travelpayouts. Observed routes (which aircraft actually flew a given city pair) are crowdsourced from adsb.lol ADS-B data under the Open Database License.