Narrative:

Aircraft X was on a vector from north of hnl airport. He was being vectored to jrf (an airport west of hnl) from ngf (an airport north of hnl). He was north of hnl heading southbound on a 190 heading when he was instructed to turn right heading 260; descend and maintain 6;200 feet. Pilot read back 2;000 feet for the altitude. Neither I nor my trainee caught the read back. I noticed aircraft X at an altitude below the MVA and instructed him to maintain his present altitude. He was already below the MVA of 6;200 feet; he was at 4;700 feet. Once clear of the 6;200 feet foot MVA he then transitioned to an area where the MVA was 5;600 feet. After clearing that area we continued to vector him for the approach into jrf. The time he was in the 6;200 feet and 5;600 feet MVA areas was minimal; however; he was still in them. Recommendation; I will be much more careful in listening to a pilot's read back of a descent clearance; or any clearance; for that matter; especially when in an area where multiple mvas are associated. Also; there was no inherent need to vector the aircraft north of hnl. He could very well have been vectored south of the field. I think that contributed to the pilot not hearing the right altitude to maintain - being in an area which wasn't a usual occurrence. The read back error was entirely mine. It is ultimately my responsibility when instructing a trainee and I failed at that job. I let other factors get in the way of my ultimate responsibility of hearing everything a pilot reads back. I was upset at another sector for not descending an arriving aircraft in a better manner. I was also concerned about getting other arrivals and departures moving expeditiously. However; none of those other factors excuse my not hearing a pilot's read back. I merely think I need to listen to what a pilot is saying rather than just hearing it.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: HNL Controller providing OJT failed to note an incorrect altitude assignment read back that resulted in the aircraft descending below MVA minimums.

Narrative: Aircraft X was on a vector from North of HNL Airport. He was being vectored to JRF (an airport West of HNL) from NGF (an airport North of HNL). He was north of HNL heading Southbound on a 190 heading when he was instructed to turn right heading 260; descend and maintain 6;200 feet. Pilot read back 2;000 feet for the altitude. Neither I nor my trainee caught the read back. I noticed Aircraft X at an altitude below the MVA and instructed him to maintain his present altitude. He was already below the MVA of 6;200 feet; he was at 4;700 feet. Once clear of the 6;200 feet foot MVA he then transitioned to an area where the MVA was 5;600 feet. After clearing that area we continued to vector him for the approach into JRF. The time he was in the 6;200 feet and 5;600 feet MVA areas was minimal; however; he was still in them. Recommendation; I will be much more careful in listening to a pilot's read back of a descent clearance; or any clearance; for that matter; especially when in an area where multiple MVAs are associated. Also; there was no inherent need to vector the aircraft North of HNL. He could very well have been vectored South of the field. I think that contributed to the pilot not hearing the right altitude to maintain - being in an area which wasn't a usual occurrence. The read back error was entirely mine. It is ultimately my responsibility when instructing a trainee and I failed at that job. I let other factors get in the way of my ultimate responsibility of hearing everything a pilot reads back. I was upset at another sector for not descending an arriving aircraft in a better manner. I was also concerned about getting other arrivals and departures moving expeditiously. However; none of those other factors excuse my not hearing a pilot's read back. I merely think I need to listen to what a pilot is saying rather than just hearing it.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.