Narrative:

In the spring of 2002, chicago center transitioned to uret. During training we were told, or led to believe, that this would only be used as a d-side tool and used as a conflict probe, and that we would still retain flight progress strips. After it was put in, we were told that 'uret' would replace the paper flight progress strip, this is a big problem due to the fact that the display is not programmed to do what the strips do. Only 1 person can use the uret at a time, and this has increased the workload on the radar -- d-side due to the fact that they must have to verbally coordination item now that could be shown on strip, which was used as a form of non-verbal communication. The information is time consuming to enter into it, if pointed out, or other control information due to its design. The display is also hard to read and find the information due to information both places on a straight line, instead of the form of the flight progress strip, which is a logical layout. The system is so bad that people who say they like it don't use it when they are busy, due to it being very time consuming. This has led to what I believe is an increase of errors in ZAU. This system should not be used as a strip replacement until most of these problems are addressed.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZAU CTLR EXPRESSED CONCERN WITH NEWLY DEPLOYED 'USER REQUEST EVALUATION TOOL' (URET) AND ITS LIMITATIONS.

Narrative: IN THE SPRING OF 2002, CHICAGO CTR TRANSITIONED TO URET. DURING TRAINING WE WERE TOLD, OR LED TO BELIEVE, THAT THIS WOULD ONLY BE USED AS A D-SIDE TOOL AND USED AS A CONFLICT PROBE, AND THAT WE WOULD STILL RETAIN FLT PROGRESS STRIPS. AFTER IT WAS PUT IN, WE WERE TOLD THAT 'URET' WOULD REPLACE THE PAPER FLT PROGRESS STRIP, THIS IS A BIG PROB DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE DISPLAY IS NOT PROGRAMMED TO DO WHAT THE STRIPS DO. ONLY 1 PERSON CAN USE THE URET AT A TIME, AND THIS HAS INCREASED THE WORKLOAD ON THE RADAR -- D-SIDE DUE TO THE FACT THAT THEY MUST HAVE TO VERBALLY COORD ITEM NOW THAT COULD BE SHOWN ON STRIP, WHICH WAS USED AS A FORM OF NON-VERBAL COM. THE INFO IS TIME CONSUMING TO ENTER INTO IT, IF POINTED OUT, OR OTHER CTL INFO DUE TO ITS DESIGN. THE DISPLAY IS ALSO HARD TO READ AND FIND THE INFO DUE TO INFO BOTH PLACES ON A STRAIGHT LINE, INSTEAD OF THE FORM OF THE FLT PROGRESS STRIP, WHICH IS A LOGICAL LAYOUT. THE SYS IS SO BAD THAT PEOPLE WHO SAY THEY LIKE IT DON'T USE IT WHEN THEY ARE BUSY, DUE TO IT BEING VERY TIME CONSUMING. THIS HAS LED TO WHAT I BELIEVE IS AN INCREASE OF ERRORS IN ZAU. THIS SYS SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A STRIP REPLACEMENT UNTIL MOST OF THESE PROBS ARE ADDRESSED.

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.