Air carrier heavy transport flight crew resisted clearance to lower altitude resulting in less than ...

Attributes
ACN	88404
Time
Date	198806
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	0001 To 0600
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : uam
State Reference	GU
Altitude	msl bound lower : 31000 msl bound upper : 33000
Environment
Flight Conditions	Marginal
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : uam artcc : zgoa
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Heavy Transport, Low Wing, 4 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	cruise other descent other
Route In Use	enroute : pacific enroute : other oceanic
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight Phase	cruise other
Route In Use	enroute : other oceanic enroute : pacific
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : cfi pilot : flight engineer pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 250 flight time total : 10000 flight time type : 3000
ASRS Report	88404
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : non radar
Qualification	controller : non radar
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe non adherence : required legal separation non adherence : clearance
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	faa : assigned or threatened penalties faa : investigated
Miss Distance	horizontal : 59000 vertical : 0
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

Had engine failure in 4 engine jet at FL370. Due to loss of oil quantity and pressure secured engine. Also requested received clearance from oak oceanic to descend to FL330. Oak issued clearance to FL330. Oak had also cleared traffic to same point 16 degrees 00.0 north 150 degrees 00.0 east at FL330--opp direction. I was unable to accept lower due fuel use on #3 engine, being 600 mi from land. Did not know of opp direction traffic at this time. ATC requested we drop to FL310. I said unable due fuel state. Request stall at FL330. ATC advised us of opp direction traffic. ATC had opp direction traffic, same route and same altitude. This traffic was in radar contact with guam center. Oak says I violated sep standards for oceanic clearance (20 min and 100 NM) by not immediately accepting FL310 approximately 10 mins after receiving FL330. Question: why did oak oceanic clear me to FL330 in the first place if they knew it would cause a conflict within 10 mins? Also, they knew I had lost 1 engine and secured this engine. Why didn't they instruct opp direction traffic to climb or descend while in positive radar control? Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter called ZOA by telephone on the ground in guam. Supervisor said that his failure to reach FL310 on time had caused a loss of sep with the outbnd aircraft that was already at FL310. Reporter stated that he told the supervisor that he felt with an engine out he should have been given consideration to stay at his altitude and the other aircraft should have been descended. The supervisor disagreed and stated that he had no alternative but to process a deviation report. Reporter has received preliminary correspondence outlining an FAA investigation into the matter. Reporter stated that supervisor was very belligerent on the telephone and it appeared that he would not really listen to reporter's statement that with an engine OTS, he should have been given consideration for preferential treatment.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR HVT FLT CREW RESISTED CLRNC TO LOWER ALT RESULTING IN LESS THAN STANDARD SEPARATION OF OCEANIC ROUTE.

Narrative: HAD ENG FAILURE IN 4 ENG JET AT FL370. DUE TO LOSS OF OIL QUANTITY AND PRESSURE SECURED ENG. ALSO REQUESTED RECEIVED CLRNC FROM OAK OCEANIC TO DSND TO FL330. OAK ISSUED CLRNC TO FL330. OAK HAD ALSO CLRED TFC TO SAME POINT 16 DEGS 00.0 N 150 DEGS 00.0 E AT FL330--OPP DIRECTION. I WAS UNABLE TO ACCEPT LOWER DUE FUEL USE ON #3 ENG, BEING 600 MI FROM LAND. DID NOT KNOW OF OPP DIRECTION TFC AT THIS TIME. ATC REQUESTED WE DROP TO FL310. I SAID UNABLE DUE FUEL STATE. REQUEST STALL AT FL330. ATC ADVISED US OF OPP DIRECTION TFC. ATC HAD OPP DIRECTION TFC, SAME ROUTE AND SAME ALT. THIS TFC WAS IN RADAR CONTACT WITH GUAM CENTER. OAK SAYS I VIOLATED SEP STANDARDS FOR OCEANIC CLRNC (20 MIN AND 100 NM) BY NOT IMMEDIATELY ACCEPTING FL310 APPROX 10 MINS AFTER RECEIVING FL330. QUESTION: WHY DID OAK OCEANIC CLR ME TO FL330 IN THE FIRST PLACE IF THEY KNEW IT WOULD CAUSE A CONFLICT WITHIN 10 MINS? ALSO, THEY KNEW I HAD LOST 1 ENG AND SECURED THIS ENG. WHY DIDN'T THEY INSTRUCT OPP DIRECTION TFC TO CLB OR DSND WHILE IN POSITIVE RADAR CTL? CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR CALLED ZOA BY TELEPHONE ON THE GND IN GUAM. SUPVR SAID THAT HIS FAILURE TO REACH FL310 ON TIME HAD CAUSED A LOSS OF SEP WITH THE OUTBND ACFT THAT WAS ALREADY AT FL310. RPTR STATED THAT HE TOLD THE SUPVR THAT HE FELT WITH AN ENG OUT HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN CONSIDERATION TO STAY AT HIS ALT AND THE OTHER ACFT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DSNDED. THE SUPVR DISAGREED AND STATED THAT HE HAD NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO PROCESS A DEVIATION RPT. RPTR HAS RECEIVED PRELIMINARY CORRESPONDENCE OUTLINING AN FAA INVESTIGATION INTO THE MATTER. RPTR STATED THAT SUPVR WAS VERY BELLIGERENT ON THE TELEPHONE AND IT APPEARED THAT HE WOULD NOT REALLY LISTEN TO RPTR'S STATEMENT THAT WITH AN ENG OTS, HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN CONSIDERATION FOR PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.

Air carrier heavy transport flight crew resisted clearance to lower altitude resulting in less than standard separation of oceanic route.