Less than standard separation between air carrier and another (unknown type) aircraft. Probably an o...

Attributes
ACN	91824
Time
Date	198807
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : orf
State Reference	VA
Altitude	msl bound lower : 29000 msl bound upper : 30500
Environment
Flight Conditions	Mixed
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zdc
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors enroute airway : zdc
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight Phase	cruise other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : radar
Qualification	controller : radar
Experience	controller military : 4 controller non radar : 2 controller radar : 13
ASRS Report	91824
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe non adherence : clearance non adherence : required legal separation
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance other
Consequence	faa : investigated
Miss Distance	horizontal : 25200 vertical : 1500
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

Southbound air carrier X was climbing to FL310. Northbound aircraft Y was at FL290. The southbound aircraft was given a clearance to turn right heading 230 degrees for traffic, the northbound aircraft wa turned right heading 070 degrees. These clrncs were issued in sufficient time, in my judgement, to maintain the required 5 mi sep. The northbound made a normal turn (as observed on the radar) and the southbound aircraft made much less than a normal standard rate turn (as observed on the radar). I believe the pilot of the southbound aircraft failed to comply with ATC instructions in a timely manner, and caused this incident. This same pilot, on a previous turn, for other northbound traffic, when instructed to turn left heading 160 degrees, responded that he didn't want to go left, but desired to go straight ahead for fuel consideration, and when issued the heading of 160 degrees a second time responded that he didn't want to go left, but straight ahead or to the right, even after being advised that the turn was for traffic. This pilot demonstrated a lack of concern for traffic.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LESS THAN STANDARD SEPARATION BETWEEN ACR AND ANOTHER (UNKNOWN TYPE) ACFT. PROBABLY AN OPERATIONAL ERROR.

Narrative: SBND ACR X WAS CLBING TO FL310. NBOUND ACFT Y WAS AT FL290. THE SBND ACFT WAS GIVEN A CLRNC TO TURN RIGHT HDG 230 DEGS FOR TFC, THE NBOUND ACFT WA TURNED RIGHT HDG 070 DEGS. THESE CLRNCS WERE ISSUED IN SUFFICIENT TIME, IN MY JUDGEMENT, TO MAINTAIN THE REQUIRED 5 MI SEP. THE NBOUND MADE A NORMAL TURN (AS OBSERVED ON THE RADAR) AND THE SBND ACFT MADE MUCH LESS THAN A NORMAL STANDARD RATE TURN (AS OBSERVED ON THE RADAR). I BELIEVE THE PLT OF THE SBND ACFT FAILED TO COMPLY WITH ATC INSTRUCTIONS IN A TIMELY MANNER, AND CAUSED THIS INCIDENT. THIS SAME PLT, ON A PREVIOUS TURN, FOR OTHER NBOUND TFC, WHEN INSTRUCTED TO TURN LEFT HDG 160 DEGS, RESPONDED THAT HE DIDN'T WANT TO GO LEFT, BUT DESIRED TO GO STRAIGHT AHEAD FOR FUEL CONSIDERATION, AND WHEN ISSUED THE HDG OF 160 DEGS A SECOND TIME RESPONDED THAT HE DIDN'T WANT TO GO LEFT, BUT STRAIGHT AHEAD OR TO THE RIGHT, EVEN AFTER BEING ADVISED THAT THE TURN WAS FOR TFC. THIS PLT DEMONSTRATED A LACK OF CONCERN FOR TFC.

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.

Less than standard separation between air carrier and another (unknown type) aircraft. Probably an operational error.