37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1417685 |
Time | |
Date | 201701 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZDC.ARTCC |
State Reference | VA |
Environment | |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Light Transport High Wing 2 Turboprop Eng |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | Descent |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Make Model Name | Widebody Low Wing 2 Turbojet Eng |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 129 |
Flight Phase | Cruise |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Enroute |
Qualification | Air Traffic Control Fully Certified |
Experience | Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 11 |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
I was working R12 providing 25 miles in trail for ewr satellites and holding for ewr. Satellites were on alternate routing to accommodate holding aircraft. While coming out of hold; low sector presented a handoff for satellites without proper spacing for restrictions. I put them into a hold since I was too busy coming out of the hold for ewr and the high side had a long stream of satellite aircraft. Once I put the sector in hold; the controller in charge for that area began to scream across the aisle to get 'the crappy controller' off position and that they didn't need to provide spacing since they were a separate sector. Meanwhile; the controller I put in hold was relieved and his relief continued to call asking how much longer. Overflight traffic via rbv is normally routed via thump but aircraft Y was shortcutted to eno. I missed this and issued the normal descent clearance to the satellite aircraft. I wasn't alerted to my mistake until a conflict alert was activated. I was distracted by the unprofessional outburst of the controller in charge and the new controller who was holding the aircraft. Tmu initiatives need to be passed back as one; the sectors in the same area; should be required to space accordingly with each other and if this isn't feasible; then hold then aircraft without disruption when told to do so. There's a mentality amongst ZDC controllers that anything happening outside their airspace is not their concern; even if that controller is not adhering to SOP; LOA; 7110.65; and tmu initiatives. There is no safety culture here at ZDC. Everything here is done in reverse order. There are no more app reqs (approval request) for anything. If there is an aircraft doing something you don't like; even in violation of SOP; LOA; 7110.65 it is incumbent upon the receiving controller to reach out and fix. Handoffs are presented/retracted; presented/retracted; presented/retracted; and it's up to you to figure out what has changed. Positive control is a lost art. As long as 2 aircraft don't hit; everyone here is happy. This is unacceptable.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ZDC Controller reported of problems with flows into the airspace. High workload and distractions led to a conflict alert.
Narrative: I was working R12 providing 25 miles in trail for EWR satellites and holding for EWR. Satellites were on alternate routing to accommodate holding aircraft. While coming out of hold; low sector presented a handoff for satellites without proper spacing for restrictions. I put them into a hold since I was too busy coming out of the hold for EWR and the high side had a long stream of satellite aircraft. Once I put the sector in hold; the CIC for that area began to scream across the aisle to get 'the crappy controller' off position and that they didn't need to provide spacing since they were a separate sector. Meanwhile; the controller I put in hold was relieved and his relief continued to call asking how much longer. Overflight traffic via RBV is normally routed via THUMP but Aircraft Y was shortcutted to ENO. I missed this and issued the normal descent clearance to the satellite aircraft. I wasn't alerted to my mistake until a conflict alert was activated. I was distracted by the unprofessional outburst of the CIC and the new controller who was holding the aircraft. TMU initiatives need to be passed back as one; the sectors in the same area; should be required to space accordingly with each other and if this isn't feasible; then hold then aircraft without disruption when told to do so. There's a mentality amongst ZDC controllers that anything happening outside their airspace is not their concern; even if that controller is not adhering to SOP; LOA; 7110.65; and TMU initiatives. There is no safety culture here at ZDC. Everything here is done in reverse order. There are no more app reqs (Approval Request) for anything. If there is an aircraft doing something you don't like; even in violation of SOP; LOA; 7110.65 it is incumbent upon the receiving controller to reach out and fix. Handoffs are presented/retracted; presented/retracted; presented/retracted; and it's up to you to figure out what has changed. Positive control is a lost art. As long as 2 aircraft don't hit; everyone here is happy. This is unacceptable.
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.