 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Enroute controller described a conflict event when dealing with bad ride requests. The reporter failed to observe the conflict developing.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 994324 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201202 |
| Local Time Of Day | 0001-0600 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZZZ.ARTCC |
| State Reference | US |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | B737-400 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Climb |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Make Model Name | B737-900 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Cruise |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Enroute |
| Qualification | Air Traffic Control Fully Certified |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
Working sector X; a B737-400 asked for higher due to a bad ride at FL330 after he heard another aircraft asked and was issued FL350. He was issued FL350 and became uncomfortably close to a B737-900 at FL340 during his climb. I noticed it just before the conflict alert began. I attempted to issue a turn but was told by the B737-900 that the traffic was 200 ft above him. I asked the B737-400 to expedite and report level. He notified me that he had 400 ft to go and I simultaneously measured 5.9 miles. The next radar update showed FL350 with 4.3 miles of separation. The biggest lesson learned is do not let your scan deteriorate; especially with only one set of eyes and aircraft wanting different attitudes because of bad rides. I should have double checked to make sure the altitude was clean and at the very least told the B737-400 to expedite to the altitude he wanted because first glance there was no aircraft near him. Anything would have helped in this situation; from having a d-side to looking at the uret for red 1's after entering the altitude. The thing that concerned me is that the conflict alert did not engage until after I recognized the conflict. It actually went off when the two aircraft where FL340 and FL342 head on.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Enroute Controller described a conflict event when dealing with bad ride requests. The reporter failed to observe the conflict developing.
Narrative: Working Sector X; a B737-400 asked for higher due to a bad ride at FL330 after he heard another aircraft asked and was issued FL350. He was issued FL350 and became uncomfortably close to a B737-900 at FL340 during his climb. I noticed it just before the Conflict Alert began. I attempted to issue a turn but was told by the B737-900 that the traffic was 200 FT above him. I asked the B737-400 to expedite and report level. He notified me that he had 400 FT to go and I simultaneously measured 5.9 miles. The next RADAR update showed FL350 with 4.3 miles of separation. The biggest lesson learned is DO NOT let your scan deteriorate; especially with only one set of eyes and aircraft wanting different attitudes because of bad rides. I should have double checked to make sure the altitude was clean and at the very least told the B737-400 to expedite to the altitude he wanted because first glance there was no aircraft near him. Anything would have helped in this situation; from having a D-Side to looking at the URET for red 1's after entering the altitude. The thing that concerned me is that the Conflict Alert did not engage until after I recognized the conflict. It actually went off when the two aircraft where FL340 and FL342 head on.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 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.