Narrative:

We combined up sectors when the previous controller working sector 90 said he couldn't figure out why aircraft X was going the wrong way. Upon investigating the trainee and I discovered that the aircraft was routed elmuc lucti L454 aleri L454 okonu. Aleri is in ZMA cerda sector so advanced technologies and oceanic procedures (atop) probed aircraft X going to lucti; then back to aleri; then back up to okonu. There is no way to notice this unless you scan every element of the coordination window. Even with us investigating it took a minute or two to find it. Upon deleting and replacing the flight plan; aircraft X was wired with aircraft Y both crossing at rabal. We immediately descended aircraft X to 36000 feet. Neither aircraft reported TCAS events or seeing traffic. I never actually looked at the conflict window but would imagine that the aircraft had less than 5 minutes on the cross when the standard is 15 minutes.of note - this happened to me and another trainee [before with a different aircraft from the same company]. This leads me to believe that this is either a problem with the way [aircraft X's company] flight plans over L454 or has to do with something ZMA does when they amend the flight plan. I know that [company] uses 'canned' flight plans for certain routes. Something should possibly be investigated to see if this is causing the issue. The dispatcher should only be able to file the airway once. Filing lucti L454 gramn L454 perdo L454 okonu does no good and is just an easy way for us to miss the aircraft going backwards. Also; atop should provide a warning that the aircrafts' route doubles back on itself and do we want it to do that.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZNY Controller noticed an aircraft's' route in the ATC computer was not correct. After they fixed the route; the software detected the aircraft had less than required separation with another aircraft.

Narrative: We combined up sectors when the previous controller working Sector 90 said he couldn't figure out why Aircraft X was going the wrong way. Upon investigating the trainee and I discovered that the aircraft was routed ELMUC LUCTI L454 ALERI L454 OKONU. ALERI is in ZMA CERDA sector so Advanced Technologies and Oceanic Procedures (ATOP) probed Aircraft X going to LUCTI; then back to ALERI; then back up to OKONU. There is no way to notice this unless you scan every element of the coordination window. Even with us investigating it took a minute or two to find it. Upon deleting and replacing the flight plan; Aircraft X was wired with Aircraft Y both crossing at RABAL. We immediately descended Aircraft X to 36000 feet. Neither aircraft reported TCAS events or seeing traffic. I never actually looked at the conflict window but would imagine that the aircraft had less than 5 minutes on the cross when the standard is 15 minutes.Of note - this happened to me and another trainee [before with a different aircraft from the same Company]. This leads me to believe that this is either a problem with the way [Aircraft X's Company] flight plans over L454 or has to do with something ZMA does when they amend the flight plan. I know that [Company] uses 'canned' flight plans for certain routes. Something should possibly be investigated to see if this is causing the issue. The dispatcher should only be able to file the airway once. Filing LUCTI L454 GRAMN L454 PERDO L454 OKONU does no good and is just an easy way for us to miss the aircraft going backwards. Also; ATOP should provide a warning that the aircrafts' route doubles back on itself and do we want it to do that.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.