Foreign air carrier X non adherence to ATC clearance wrong heading had less than standard separation...

Attributes
ACN	234289
Time
Date	199302
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : tus
State Reference	AZ
Altitude	msl bound lower : 6000 msl bound upper : 6000
Environment
Flight Conditions	Mixed
Light	Dusk
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : tus
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight Phase	cruise other
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng
Flight Phase	cruise other
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : approach
Qualification	controller : radar
Experience	controller non radar : 6 controller radar : 10 controller supervisory : 3
ASRS Report	234289
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	other other : other
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe non adherence : published procedure non adherence : required legal separation non adherence : clearance other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance other
Consequence	faa : investigated
Miss Distance	horizontal : 3000 vertical : 0
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation Operational Error

Narrative:

I was working the arrival radar position and was briefed that WX conditions were improving and visual approachs could be made from all directions. I was working 5 IFR aircraft and 2 VFR and accepted 2 more IFR inbounds. The runway in use was 11L. 2 of the IFR aircraft were: an atx light twin and an air carrier X scheduled air carrier. Both aircraft were nwbound, heading 300 degrees, the twin at 7000 ft and air carrier X at 8000 ft directly above the twin. I turned the twin to the northeast and descended it to 5000, the MVA, and asked it to report the field in sight. Another IFR twin was heading south and descending from 7000 to 6000, through the altitude of a VFR small aircraft orbiting at 6500 ft. Traffic was issued. The twin was descended to 5000 and told to report the field in sight. An IFR small transport Y arriving from the northwest was observed going through the runway 11L localizer and instructed to turn right and intercept the localizer and 140 degree heading. My plan was for the IFR twin from the south to be first on a visual approach, the IFR twin from the north to be second, on a visual approach, air carrier X to be third on a visual straight-in followed by small transport Y. I turned air carrier X to a heading of 060 degrees and descended it to 6000. Small transport Y was at 6000 ft. The air carrier X made a large wide turn and I realized that it would not fit inside small transport Y. I instructed air carrier X to stop its turn on a heading 360. Air carrier X responded with '360 confirmed.' I cleared the first twin for a visual approach and looked at air carrier X flight path, then I asked air carrier X to verify its heading and was told 060 degrees. I descended small transport Y to 5700 MVA and climbed air carrier X to 7000, issued a TA as traffic 12 O'clock 1 mi. Air carrier X reported the traffic in sight. Separation was lost, same salt and .5 mi. The tape replay of air carrier X's transmission '360 confirmed' sounded as a question rather than a statement as I took it to be. If the air carrier X pilot had said 'verify,' or 'confirm that heading' or 'say again.' I would have responded as it was the stating of the heading of '360.'

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FOREIGN ACR X NON ADHERENCE TO ATC CLRNC WRONG HDG HAD LTSS FROM SMT Y. SYS ERROR. PLTDEV.

Narrative: I WAS WORKING THE ARR RADAR POS AND WAS BRIEFED THAT WX CONDITIONS WERE IMPROVING AND VISUAL APCHS COULD BE MADE FROM ALL DIRECTIONS. I WAS WORKING 5 IFR ACFT AND 2 VFR AND ACCEPTED 2 MORE IFR INBOUNDS. THE RWY IN USE WAS 11L. 2 OF THE IFR ACFT WERE: AN ATX LIGHT TWIN AND AN ACR X SCHEDULED ACR. BOTH ACFT WERE NWBOUND, HDG 300 DEGS, THE TWIN AT 7000 FT AND ACR X AT 8000 FT DIRECTLY ABOVE THE TWIN. I TURNED THE TWIN TO THE NE AND DSNDED IT TO 5000, THE MVA, AND ASKED IT TO RPT THE FIELD IN SIGHT. ANOTHER IFR TWIN WAS HDG S AND DSNDING FROM 7000 TO 6000, THROUGH THE ALT OF A VFR SMA ORBITING AT 6500 FT. TFC WAS ISSUED. THE TWIN WAS DSNDED TO 5000 AND TOLD TO RPT THE FIELD IN SIGHT. AN IFR SMT Y ARRIVING FROM THE NW WAS OBSERVED GOING THROUGH THE RWY 11L LOC AND INSTRUCTED TO TURN R AND INTERCEPT THE LOC AND 140 DEG HDG. MY PLAN WAS FOR THE IFR TWIN FROM THE S TO BE FIRST ON A VISUAL APCH, THE IFR TWIN FROM THE N TO BE SECOND, ON A VISUAL APCH, ACR X TO BE THIRD ON A VISUAL STRAIGHT-IN FOLLOWED BY SMT Y. I TURNED ACR X TO A HDG OF 060 DEGS AND DSNDED IT TO 6000. SMT Y WAS AT 6000 FT. THE ACR X MADE A LARGE WIDE TURN AND I REALIZED THAT IT WOULD NOT FIT INSIDE SMT Y. I INSTRUCTED ACR X TO STOP ITS TURN ON A HDG 360. ACR X RESPONDED WITH '360 CONFIRMED.' I CLRED THE FIRST TWIN FOR A VISUAL APCH AND LOOKED AT ACR X FLT PATH, THEN I ASKED ACR X TO VERIFY ITS HDG AND WAS TOLD 060 DEGS. I DSNDED SMT Y TO 5700 MVA AND CLBED ACR X TO 7000, ISSUED A TA AS TFC 12 O'CLOCK 1 MI. ACR X RPTED THE TFC IN SIGHT. SEPARATION WAS LOST, SAME SALT AND .5 MI. THE TAPE REPLAY OF ACR X'S XMISSION '360 CONFIRMED' SOUNDED AS A QUESTION RATHER THAN A STATEMENT AS I TOOK IT TO BE. IF THE ACR X PLT HAD SAID 'VERIFY,' OR 'CONFIRM THAT HDG' OR 'SAY AGAIN.' I WOULD HAVE RESPONDED AS IT WAS THE STATING OF THE HDG OF '360.'

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.

Foreign air carrier X non adherence to ATC clearance wrong heading had less than standard separation from small transport Y. System error. Pilot deviation.