Less than standard separation between two enroute aircraft on crossing courses.

Attributes
ACN	171432
Time
Date	199102
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : ggg
State Reference	TX
Altitude	msl bound lower : 5000 msl bound upper : 5000
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : alb
Operator	common carrier : air taxi
Make Model Name	Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Recip Eng
Flight Phase	cruise other
Route In Use	enroute airway : ggg
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 1 Eng, Retractable Gear
Flight Phase	cruise other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : handoff position
Qualification	controller : radar
Experience	controller radar : 4
ASRS Report	171432
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : departure
Qualification	controller : radar
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe non adherence : required legal separation
Independent Detector	atc equipment other atc equipment : unspecified other controllera
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 13500 vertical : 0
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Operational Error

Narrative:

Small transport X was established on V289 north of GGG VORTAC going to txk. Small aircraft Y was eastbound on V18. The aircraft passed within 2 to 2 1/2 mi of each other. The controller was apparently trying to use the FAA 7110.65E, paragraph 5-73 rule for diverging courses; however, vertical sep was not discontinued because it never existed in the first place. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information. In both cases the reporter was working the radar assist (rho) position and it appears he did not 'assist' in at least one of these problems. In first incident there was a delay in getting the light transport on departure control frequency, not sure if flight crew or tower problem, but aircraft should have been stopped at lower altitude or turned. In second case the radar controller was trying to apply diverging course sep, but did not have vertical sep to begin with. Reporter is 4 yr fpl and radar controller in both cases was experienced 'old timer'.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LESS THAN STANDARD SEPARATION BETWEEN TWO ENROUTE ACFT ON CROSSING COURSES.

Narrative: SMT X WAS ESTABLISHED ON V289 N OF GGG VORTAC GOING TO TXK. SMA Y WAS EBND ON V18. THE ACFT PASSED WITHIN 2 TO 2 1/2 MI OF EACH OTHER. THE CTLR WAS APPARENTLY TRYING TO USE THE FAA 7110.65E, PARAGRAPH 5-73 RULE FOR DIVERGING COURSES; HOWEVER, VERT SEP WAS NOT DISCONTINUED BECAUSE IT NEVER EXISTED IN THE FIRST PLACE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO. IN BOTH CASES THE RPTR WAS WORKING THE RADAR ASSIST (RHO) POS AND IT APPEARS HE DID NOT 'ASSIST' IN AT LEAST ONE OF THESE PROBS. IN FIRST INCIDENT THERE WAS A DELAY IN GETTING THE LTT ON DEP CTL FREQ, NOT SURE IF FLT CREW OR TWR PROB, BUT ACFT SHOULD HAVE BEEN STOPPED AT LOWER ALT OR TURNED. IN SEC CASE THE RADAR CTLR WAS TRYING TO APPLY DIVERGING COURSE SEP, BUT DID NOT HAVE VERT SEP TO BEGIN WITH. RPTR IS 4 YR FPL AND RADAR CTLR IN BOTH CASES WAS EXPERIENCED 'OLD TIMER'.

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