Narrative:

After departing btv, we were cleared direct to ptk and told to maintain 8000 ft MSL. We turned on course and were handed off to ZBW. ZBW confirmed radar contact. Later, while being controled by ZBW, they (ZBW) began to handle an emergency military aircraft on UHF. We continued flying towards our destination until we began to lose boston's signal. We then contacted toronto center and reported that we had lost boston and were never given a handoff to another controller. Toronto informed us that we had been out of radio contact for approximately 20 mins and that we were in their airspace. We were given 2 vectors and told to descend to 7000 ft MSL. These vectors were followed by new routing to pontiac, mi (yqo, hadar, hadar 2 arrival). The next day we were informed by our chief pilot of a mistake. Apparently, when the captain filed the flight plan, he gave the latitude and longitude for pontiac, mi, in the wrong order. Boston did discover this error, but due to a shift change, they failed to correct this information with us. This led to the controller coming on duty not tracking the flight correctly and not questioning what was an obvious mistake. This lost communication event took place because of several factors: 1) the captain transposed the latitude and longitude when giving them to the FSS briefer for the flight plan. 2) the computer system that the flight plan is entered into, did not detect the error. The computer system should be updated to contain the latitude and longitude of the airports and automatically enter them. Another improvement that would be beneficial would be to allow the computers to talk to each other. I have heard from briefers that they need the latitude and longitude because that airport or fix is not within their center's airspace. Why can't all the computers have access to the same database of information for navaids, fixes, and airports? 3) boston began working an emergency military aircraft on UHF. This added to the controller's workload. I am not sure what could be done to help with this. Perhaps another controller could plug in and work the other aircraft while letting 1 controller concentrate on the emergency aircraft. Also, I feel that military should use VHF when practical. This would help with situational awareness with the other aircraft and would keep other aircraft from trying to talk to center on VHF when center is listening on UHF. This would eliminate a lot of controller confusion of 2 people talking to him at once and possibly getting confused or not hearing a transmission. 4) a shift change at ZBW. The mistake was noted by the original controller but, never corrected nor was it passed on to the controller coming on duty. This was a breakdown in communication between the controllers and led to the controller not tracking our flight correctly.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN EMB110 FLC RPTED THAT ZBW CTLR FAILED TO HAND THEM OFF TO CYYZ WHEN HE BECAME DISTR BY MIL ACFT EMER.

Narrative: AFTER DEPARTING BTV, WE WERE CLRED DIRECT TO PTK AND TOLD TO MAINTAIN 8000 FT MSL. WE TURNED ON COURSE AND WERE HANDED OFF TO ZBW. ZBW CONFIRMED RADAR CONTACT. LATER, WHILE BEING CTLED BY ZBW, THEY (ZBW) BEGAN TO HANDLE AN EMER MIL ACFT ON UHF. WE CONTINUED FLYING TOWARDS OUR DEST UNTIL WE BEGAN TO LOSE BOSTON'S SIGNAL. WE THEN CONTACTED TORONTO CTR AND RPTED THAT WE HAD LOST BOSTON AND WERE NEVER GIVEN A HDOF TO ANOTHER CTLR. TORONTO INFORMED US THAT WE HAD BEEN OUT OF RADIO CONTACT FOR APPROX 20 MINS AND THAT WE WERE IN THEIR AIRSPACE. WE WERE GIVEN 2 VECTORS AND TOLD TO DSND TO 7000 FT MSL. THESE VECTORS WERE FOLLOWED BY NEW ROUTING TO PONTIAC, MI (YQO, HADAR, HADAR 2 ARR). THE NEXT DAY WE WERE INFORMED BY OUR CHIEF PLT OF A MISTAKE. APPARENTLY, WHEN THE CAPT FILED THE FLT PLAN, HE GAVE THE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE FOR PONTIAC, MI, IN THE WRONG ORDER. BOSTON DID DISCOVER THIS ERROR, BUT DUE TO A SHIFT CHANGE, THEY FAILED TO CORRECT THIS INFO WITH US. THIS LED TO THE CTLR COMING ON DUTY NOT TRACKING THE FLT CORRECTLY AND NOT QUESTIONING WHAT WAS AN OBVIOUS MISTAKE. THIS LOST COM EVENT TOOK PLACE BECAUSE OF SEVERAL FACTORS: 1) THE CAPT TRANSPOSED THE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE WHEN GIVING THEM TO THE FSS BRIEFER FOR THE FLT PLAN. 2) THE COMPUTER SYS THAT THE FLT PLAN IS ENTERED INTO, DID NOT DETECT THE ERROR. THE COMPUTER SYS SHOULD BE UPDATED TO CONTAIN THE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE OF THE ARPTS AND AUTOMATICALLY ENTER THEM. ANOTHER IMPROVEMENT THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL WOULD BE TO ALLOW THE COMPUTERS TO TALK TO EACH OTHER. I HAVE HEARD FROM BRIEFERS THAT THEY NEED THE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE BECAUSE THAT ARPT OR FIX IS NOT WITHIN THEIR CTR'S AIRSPACE. WHY CAN'T ALL THE COMPUTERS HAVE ACCESS TO THE SAME DATABASE OF INFO FOR NAVAIDS, FIXES, AND ARPTS? 3) BOSTON BEGAN WORKING AN EMER MIL ACFT ON UHF. THIS ADDED TO THE CTLR'S WORKLOAD. I AM NOT SURE WHAT COULD BE DONE TO HELP WITH THIS. PERHAPS ANOTHER CTLR COULD PLUG IN AND WORK THE OTHER ACFT WHILE LETTING 1 CTLR CONCENTRATE ON THE EMER ACFT. ALSO, I FEEL THAT MIL SHOULD USE VHF WHEN PRACTICAL. THIS WOULD HELP WITH SITUATIONAL AWARENESS WITH THE OTHER ACFT AND WOULD KEEP OTHER ACFT FROM TRYING TO TALK TO CTR ON VHF WHEN CTR IS LISTENING ON UHF. THIS WOULD ELIMINATE A LOT OF CTLR CONFUSION OF 2 PEOPLE TALKING TO HIM AT ONCE AND POSSIBLY GETTING CONFUSED OR NOT HEARING A XMISSION. 4) A SHIFT CHANGE AT ZBW. THE MISTAKE WAS NOTED BY THE ORIGINAL CTLR BUT, NEVER CORRECTED NOR WAS IT PASSED ON TO THE CTLR COMING ON DUTY. THIS WAS A BREAKDOWN IN COM BTWN THE CTLRS AND LED TO THE CTLR NOT TRACKING OUR FLT CORRECTLY.

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.