37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 421582 |
Time | |
Date | 199812 |
Day | Tue |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | atc facility : sju |
State Reference | PR |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Dusk |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tracon : sju |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | government : faa |
Function | controller : approach |
Qualification | controller : radar |
Experience | controller military : 10 controller non radar : 8 controller radar : 15 |
ASRS Report | 421582 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | government : faa |
Function | oversight : supervisor |
Qualification | controller : radar |
Events | |
Anomaly | other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other controllera |
Resolutory Action | other |
Consequence | faa : investigated |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | ATC Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Intra Facility Coordination Failure other |
Situations | |
ATC Facility | procedure or policy : unspecified |
Navigational Aid | Unspecified |
Narrative:
I was working the east control approach sector with moderate traffic and WX (rain) in the area. The ASR-8 (short range radar) failed and the pico sensor (long range radar) was selected. Data blocks and beacon targets were displaced from 1/2 - 3 mi. Targets were coasting in all quadrants and at altitudes from 1500-11000 ft. The presentation on my scope (ec) was different from the wc sector, although we were both on pico. (His targets were not as displaced.) the satcs was notified and the technician's response was that this happens when the ASR-8 fails and the antenna continues to turn. We are a cerap approach and en route center combined. Both radars are used daily and we have had previous failures. I have never witnessed nor heard of this until now. If what the technician says is true (I do not think so), the potential for an incident is great. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that management's response to his ucr was not satisfactory. Management stated that the tracking correlation problem was caused by the adjoining controller, trying to manually override the ASR-8 failure default to the pico site long range radar. The controller's union, the reporter advised, also did not concur with management's response and were planning another ucr on the same subject. The reporter could not confirm to the analyst if a supervisor, data system specialist or maintenance was responsible to manually change radar system when a failure occurred. The reporter stated he was aware only of 2 functions required to change radar tracking. One, a switch, that was supposed to be an all- in-one switch, automatically bringing on line the long range radar, and the other required a series of manual keyboard inputs. No one had, to his knowledge, reviewed a computer printout of the functions initiated to change from one system to the other to see if there was a mechanical hang-up somewhere in the process. The long range radar site provides a mosaic radar depiction accrued from the 3 terminal sites -- sju, saint thomas, and saint johns.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: SJU TRACON CTLR ENCOUNTERS RADAR TRACKING PROB WHEN TERMINAL RADAR FAILS AND SYS TRANSITIONS TO LONG RANGE RADAR. CTLR CONCERNED WITH TRANSITION TIME TO LONG RANGE SYS AND INTERIM OFFSET DATA BLOCK TRACKING.
Narrative: I WAS WORKING THE E CTL APCH SECTOR WITH MODERATE TFC AND WX (RAIN) IN THE AREA. THE ASR-8 (SHORT RANGE RADAR) FAILED AND THE PICO SENSOR (LONG RANGE RADAR) WAS SELECTED. DATA BLOCKS AND BEACON TARGETS WERE DISPLACED FROM 1/2 - 3 MI. TARGETS WERE COASTING IN ALL QUADRANTS AND AT ALTS FROM 1500-11000 FT. THE PRESENTATION ON MY SCOPE (EC) WAS DIFFERENT FROM THE WC SECTOR, ALTHOUGH WE WERE BOTH ON PICO. (HIS TARGETS WERE NOT AS DISPLACED.) THE SATCS WAS NOTIFIED AND THE TECHNICIAN'S RESPONSE WAS THAT THIS HAPPENS WHEN THE ASR-8 FAILS AND THE ANTENNA CONTINUES TO TURN. WE ARE A CERAP APCH AND ENRTE CTR COMBINED. BOTH RADARS ARE USED DAILY AND WE HAVE HAD PREVIOUS FAILURES. I HAVE NEVER WITNESSED NOR HEARD OF THIS UNTIL NOW. IF WHAT THE TECHNICIAN SAYS IS TRUE (I DO NOT THINK SO), THE POTENTIAL FOR AN INCIDENT IS GREAT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT MGMNT'S RESPONSE TO HIS UCR WAS NOT SATISFACTORY. MGMNT STATED THAT THE TRACKING CORRELATION PROB WAS CAUSED BY THE ADJOINING CTLR, TRYING TO MANUALLY OVERRIDE THE ASR-8 FAILURE DEFAULT TO THE PICO SITE LONG RANGE RADAR. THE CTLR'S UNION, THE RPTR ADVISED, ALSO DID NOT CONCUR WITH MGMNT'S RESPONSE AND WERE PLANNING ANOTHER UCR ON THE SAME SUBJECT. THE RPTR COULD NOT CONFIRM TO THE ANALYST IF A SUPVR, DATA SYS SPECIALIST OR MAINT WAS RESPONSIBLE TO MANUALLY CHANGE RADAR SYS WHEN A FAILURE OCCURRED. THE RPTR STATED HE WAS AWARE ONLY OF 2 FUNCTIONS REQUIRED TO CHANGE RADAR TRACKING. ONE, A SWITCH, THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE AN ALL- IN-ONE SWITCH, AUTOMATICALLY BRINGING ON LINE THE LONG RANGE RADAR, AND THE OTHER REQUIRED A SERIES OF MANUAL KEYBOARD INPUTS. NO ONE HAD, TO HIS KNOWLEDGE, REVIEWED A COMPUTER PRINTOUT OF THE FUNCTIONS INITIATED TO CHANGE FROM ONE SYS TO THE OTHER TO SEE IF THERE WAS A MECHANICAL HANG-UP SOMEWHERE IN THE PROCESS. THE LONG RANGE RADAR SITE PROVIDES A MOSAIC RADAR DEPICTION ACCRUED FROM THE 3 TERMINAL SITES -- SJU, SAINT THOMAS, AND SAINT JOHNS.
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.