Narrative:

Training session on low east radar; a BE20 departed ngp IFR runway heading climbing to 1;600 looking to pick up his stereo flight plan. Developmental radar identified the aircraft and the stereo flight plan which is the NUBIN3 to psx 'cleared via the NUBIN3 stereo flight plan.' [aircraft] also issued an altitude to maintain and remain this frequency. When the pilot read back the clearance he read back all correct and added proceeding to crp. Developmental then instructed the BE20 to climb and maintain 6;000. A T34 was handed off from north radar heading 130 at 3;000 for vectors to and instrument approach. Developmental turned aircraft to a 040 heading with no response. Issued heading again and pilot reads back heading 040. The T34 was issued a climb to 4;000 to protect uav airspace for the predator departing ngp who was climbing to 3;000 reaching point hooks. Now is when I notice the BE20 turning northwest climbing to 6;000. I issued a 360 heading to the BE20 and issue traffic to the T34 with a reply of not in sight. I verified assigned altitude on the T34 and re-instructed to maintain 4;000 and told the BE20 to expedite his climb. The [military] pilots not normally turning to the first fix to join the flight plan on the stereo fight plan is what was the unexpected. Although he is legal to do so; the way the developmental read the clearance. I think the uav complicated the situation by having a point where he is to start his climb automatically to a very common altitude. Three thousand is used very often and no aircraft should climb automatically. The uav should be instructed by ATC when he may begin his climb. I think this was just a small contributing factor but nonetheless did add to the loss of separation between the BE20 and the T34.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CRP Controller described a likely loss of separation event listing a UAV operation as a complicating factor.

Narrative: Training session on Low East RADAR; a BE20 departed NGP IFR runway heading climbing to 1;600 looking to pick up his stereo flight plan. Developmental RADAR identified the aircraft and the stereo flight plan which is the NUBIN3 to PSX 'cleared via the NUBIN3 stereo flight plan.' [Aircraft] also issued an altitude to maintain and remain this frequency. When the pilot read back the clearance he read back all correct and added proceeding to CRP. Developmental then instructed the BE20 to climb and maintain 6;000. A T34 was handed off from North RADAR heading 130 at 3;000 for vectors to and instrument approach. Developmental turned aircraft to a 040 heading with no response. Issued heading again and pilot reads back heading 040. The T34 was issued a climb to 4;000 to protect UAV airspace for the predator departing NGP who was climbing to 3;000 reaching point hooks. Now is when I notice the BE20 turning northwest climbing to 6;000. I issued a 360 heading to the BE20 and Issue traffic to the T34 with a reply of not in sight. I verified assigned altitude on the T34 and re-instructed to maintain 4;000 and told the BE20 to expedite his climb. The [military] pilots not normally turning to the first fix to join the flight plan on the stereo fight plan is what was the unexpected. Although he is legal to do so; the way the Developmental read the clearance. I think the UAV complicated the situation by having a point where he is to start his climb automatically to a very common altitude. Three thousand is used very often and no aircraft should climb automatically. The UAV should be instructed by ATC when he may begin his climb. I think this was just a small contributing factor but nonetheless did add to the loss of separation between the BE20 and the T34.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.