Narrative:

I noticed my uret (user request evaluation tool) starting to populate to almost a full page; but then it would die down again to 1/2-3/4 page and this kept happening. There was a controller in charge at the desk who was busy conversing with another controller who was working at sector 17/11. Because the uret kept showing uncertain numbers; I didn't feel like I needed to ask for a D side/or to split out a sector. The following narrative is the chain of events that happened afterwards; making an extremely unsafe situation that probably should have never happened. We were feeding 20 mit (miles in trail) for lga; 10 and 12 were combined; 17 and 11 were combined.aircraft X came over at FL290 from sector 20 with a speed 310+ displayed in the data block navigating direct to pxt. The point the aircraft was flying over and the angle he was coming; and his altitude; combined with a speed made him look like he was direct to bukyy to stay in line with the phl flow as there was another phl coming from sector 16; in trail. So I vectored aircraft X like a phl and the plane got to about 15 miles south of bukyy before I got a phone call (unsure who) telling me aircraft X was a lga; not a phl; so I turned him to a 100 heading to get him back in with the lga.as this was being resolved; and I was looking for place to put aircraft X another situation happened.sector 07 called saying 'what do you want me to do with the aircraft Z; I can't move him up or down.' I replied back to her 'I have no idea who that is' and the controller at 07 replied 'aircraft Z; the one flashing.' I looked down at the bottom left corner and saw aircraft Z flashing in conflict with aircraft Y coming from sector 16 navigating towards ldn; both level at FL350. I evaluated the situation and told sector 07 not to worry about it; and I'll call 16. So I called 16 and ask the controller at sector 16 to turn aircraft Y 30 degree right (which puts him more in my airspace so I have time resolve the conflict in my airspace; instead of turning him 30L which turns him into 07's airspace). Sector 16 ended up turning him 30L (I don't know if that was coordinated or not); aircraft Z stayed on the route; still level at FL350 tracking to colin. As I see aircraft Z tracking east bound; I notice a limited data block 5 miles from my boundary not in a handoff status. I see that it is aircraft a; also level at FL350; also in conflict with aircraft Z; who is now known traffic to sector 16. I call sector 16 and ask for aircraft a to be descended to FL340. I don't see the descent right away; so I turned aircraft Z 30L to miss aircraft a.I have 9-10 lga's in my sector all on extremely aggressive headings to get the required in trail. I decided to shut off bay 2 so I can hold lga's that didn't fit. I issued holding instructions to a total of 4 different airplanes; but due to the aggressive vectoring; only 1 (to my knowledge) did an actual turn in the pattern (aircraft B) in my airspace; although I am unsure of sector 16. I gave the sector to my D side.the aircraft Y route (fak.J109.ldn) should be fixed to not clip sector 12's airspace. That corner is dangerous enough when we have 20 miles to fix the conflict. It really doesn't give anyone enough time to react to that conflict or complete coordination to resolve the conflict.secondly; 10 and 12 should have been split out long before that situation developed. I realized I could have taken control and ask to have it split out; but there needs to be an accountability from the controller in charge/flm to pay attention to these numbers and volume issues; but she was too busy socializing.lastly; the lga situation and sequencing was another classic example of when bay 2 has their planes in trail; and bay 5 has their planes in trail but there isn't any space whatsoever to blend the two flows together. During times where we are required to feed any amount of in trail of rbv; the gve flow should not be an option. They should either go to the north or down tobay 2 and come up. Or; place very heavy restrictions on the lesser flow (which is usually bay 5) with getting at least 30 mit in from each plane.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Washington Center Controllers reported of an unsafe condition when an aircraft was turned the wrong direction after coordination which led to a loss of separation.

Narrative: I noticed my URET (User Request Evaluation Tool) starting to populate to almost a full page; but then it would die down again to 1/2-3/4 page and this kept happening. There was a CIC at the desk who was busy conversing with another controller who was working at sector 17/11. Because the URET kept showing uncertain numbers; I didn't feel like I needed to ask for a D side/or to split out a sector. The following narrative is the chain of events that happened afterwards; making an extremely unsafe situation that probably should have never happened. We were feeding 20 MIT (Miles in Trail) for LGA; 10 and 12 were combined; 17 and 11 were combined.Aircraft X came over at FL290 from sector 20 with a speed 310+ displayed in the data block navigating direct to PXT. The point the aircraft was flying over and the angle he was coming; and his altitude; combined with a speed made him look like he was direct to BUKYY to stay in line with the PHL flow as there was another PHL coming from sector 16; in trail. So I vectored Aircraft X like a PHL and the plane got to about 15 miles south of BUKYY before I got a phone call (unsure who) telling me Aircraft X was a LGA; not a PHL; so I turned him to a 100 heading to get him back in with the LGA.As this was being resolved; and I was looking for place to put Aircraft X another situation happened.Sector 07 called saying 'What do you want me to do with the Aircraft Z; I can't move him up or down.' I replied back to her 'I have no idea who that is' and the controller at 07 replied 'Aircraft Z; the one flashing.' I looked down at the bottom left corner and saw Aircraft Z flashing in conflict with Aircraft Y coming from sector 16 navigating towards LDN; both level at FL350. I evaluated the situation and told sector 07 not to worry about it; and I'll call 16. So I called 16 and ask the controller at sector 16 to turn Aircraft Y 30 degree right (which puts him more in my airspace so I have time resolve the conflict in my airspace; instead of turning him 30L which turns him into 07's airspace). Sector 16 ended up turning him 30L (I don't know if that was coordinated or not); Aircraft Z stayed on the route; still level at FL350 tracking to COLIN. As I see Aircraft Z tracking east bound; I notice a limited data block 5 miles from my boundary not in a handoff status. I see that it is Aircraft A; also level at FL350; also in conflict with Aircraft Z; who is now known traffic to sector 16. I call sector 16 and ask for Aircraft A to be descended to FL340. I don't see the descent right away; so I turned Aircraft Z 30L to miss Aircraft A.I have 9-10 LGA's in my sector all on extremely aggressive headings to get the required in trail. I decided to shut off Bay 2 so I can hold LGA's that didn't fit. I issued holding instructions to a total of 4 different airplanes; but due to the aggressive vectoring; only 1 (to my knowledge) did an actual turn in the pattern (Aircraft B) in my airspace; although I am unsure of sector 16. I gave the sector to my D side.The Aircraft Y route (FAK.J109.LDN) should be fixed to not clip sector 12's airspace. That corner is dangerous enough when we have 20 miles to fix the conflict. It really doesn't give anyone enough time to react to that conflict or complete coordination to resolve the conflict.Secondly; 10 and 12 should have been split out long before that situation developed. I realized I could have taken control and ask to have it split out; but there needs to be an accountability from the CIC/FLM to pay attention to these numbers and volume issues; but she was too busy socializing.Lastly; the LGA situation and sequencing was another classic example of when Bay 2 has their planes in trail; and Bay 5 has their planes in trail but there isn't any space whatsoever to blend the two flows together. During times where we are required to feed any amount of in trail of RBV; the GVE flow should not be an option. They should either go to the north or down toBay 2 and come up. Or; place very heavy restrictions on the lesser flow (which is usually Bay 5) with getting at least 30 MIT in from each plane.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.