Aircraft equipment problem stuck microphone.

Attributes
ACN	207124
Time
Date	199204
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : lvs
State Reference	NM
Altitude	msl bound lower : 35000 msl bound upper : 35000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zab
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Navigation In Use	Other Other
Flight Phase	cruise other
Route In Use	enroute : direct
Aircraft 2
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	cruise other other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : radar
Qualification	controller : radar
Experience	controller radar : 21
ASRS Report	207124
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : radar
Qualification	controller : radar
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe conflict : airborne less severe other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance other
Consequence	faa : investigated
Miss Distance	horizontal : 18000 vertical : 0
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Aircraft
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

Lax lost an ILS visibility at lax was reported as 9 mi. ZAB metering decided to implement holding in our facility (800 mi from lax). ZAB sector 70 had 5 aircraft holding when they got a stuck microphone. They were unable to contact any of the aircraft to affect separation. I was working an adjacent sector, and I sent several aircraft to their frequency in an attempt to bring some of the other aircraft back to my frequency. 2 of the aircraft holding at FL350 had conflicting traffic. Air carrier medium large transport flight came to my frequency when he was approximately 10 mi from impact on a collision course. I gave him an immediate descent to FL330 and issued traffic. He saw his traffic and managed to get level at 330 before separation was lost. Both the pilot and all the controllers involved were very concerned about the obvious potentially disastrous situation. The other air carrier holding at FL350 was involved in a system error because no one could get a hold of him to separate him from air carrier Y. The point of this is that en route holding can be very dangerous and should not be implemented unless absolutely necessary. I don't believe that loss of an ILS with 9 mi visibility necessitates en route holding 800 mi from the airport. Granted, metering could not predict a stuck microphone, but why put ourselves in any dangerous posture.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACFT EQUIP PROBLEM STUCK MIKE.

Narrative: LAX LOST AN ILS VISIBILITY AT LAX WAS RPTED AS 9 MI. ZAB METERING DECIDED TO IMPLEMENT HOLDING IN OUR FAC (800 MI FROM LAX). ZAB SECTOR 70 HAD 5 ACFT HOLDING WHEN THEY GOT A STUCK MIKE. THEY WERE UNABLE TO CONTACT ANY OF THE ACFT TO AFFECT SEPARATION. I WAS WORKING AN ADJACENT SECTOR, AND I SENT SEVERAL ACFT TO THEIR FREQ IN AN ATTEMPT TO BRING SOME OF THE OTHER ACFT BACK TO MY FREQ. 2 OF THE ACFT HOLDING AT FL350 HAD CONFLICTING TFC. ACR MLG FLT CAME TO MY FREQ WHEN HE WAS APPROX 10 MI FROM IMPACT ON A COLLISION COURSE. I GAVE HIM AN IMMEDIATE DSCNT TO FL330 AND ISSUED TFC. HE SAW HIS TFC AND MANAGED TO GET LEVEL AT 330 BEFORE SEPARATION WAS LOST. BOTH THE PLT AND ALL THE CTLRS INVOLVED WERE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE OBVIOUS POTENTIALLY DISASTROUS SITUATION. THE OTHER ACR HOLDING AT FL350 WAS INVOLVED IN A SYS ERROR BECAUSE NO ONE COULD GET A HOLD OF HIM TO SEPARATE HIM FROM ACR Y. THE POINT OF THIS IS THAT ENRTE HOLDING CAN BE VERY DANGEROUS AND SHOULD NOT BE IMPLEMENTED UNLESS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT LOSS OF AN ILS WITH 9 MI VISIBILITY NECESSITATES ENRTE HOLDING 800 MI FROM THE ARPT. GRANTED, METERING COULD NOT PREDICT A STUCK MIKE, BUT WHY PUT OURSELVES IN ANY DANGEROUS POSTURE.

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.