2 acrs being vectored to final approach on converging courses have less than standard separation because of controller distraction.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	220203
Time
Date	199208
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : ord
State Reference	IL
Altitude	msl bound lower : 4000 msl bound upper : 4000
Environment
Flight Conditions	Marginal
Light	Dusk
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : ord
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	descent other
Route In Use	arrival other enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	descent : approach descent other
Route In Use	arrival other enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : approach
Qualification	controller : radar
ASRS Report	220203
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : approach
Qualification	controller : radar
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe non adherence : published procedure non adherence : required legal separation
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance other
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 9000 vertical : 0
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Operational Error

Narrative:

We were using runways 9L and 9R at ord for arriving traffic aircraft a was on a southwesterly heading and descending to 4000 ft for runway 9L. Aircraft B was on a southeasterly heading to join the localizer 9L. The parallel monitor controller instructed us to give aircraft C another call as he was not monitoring the tower. I should say at this point that I was the controller being relieved from position and the relieving controller had already assumed the position and was transmitting to all aircraft involved. I noticed the 2 aircraft (a and B) on converging courses and instructed my fellow controller to turn 1 aircraft and descend the other. I believe that this may have occurred because we were both distracted by the parallel monitor. Also, since I wasn't talking or sitting at the position, I hadn't realized the other didn't turn aircraft a to a downwind. I think this may have been prevented if aircraft C, who acknowledged a change to monitor, had actually switched over instead of staying on our frequency.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: 2 ACRS BEING VECTORED TO FINAL APCH ON CONVERGING COURSES HAVE LTSS BECAUSE OF CTLR DISTR.

Narrative: WE WERE USING RWYS 9L AND 9R AT ORD FOR ARRIVING TFC ACFT A WAS ON A SOUTHWESTERLY HDG AND DSNDING TO 4000 FT FOR RWY 9L. ACFT B WAS ON A SOUTHEASTERLY HDG TO JOIN THE LOC 9L. THE PARALLEL MONITOR CTLR INSTRUCTED US TO GIVE ACFT C ANOTHER CALL AS HE WAS NOT MONITORING THE TWR. I SHOULD SAY AT THIS POINT THAT I WAS THE CTLR BEING RELIEVED FROM POS AND THE RELIEVING CTLR HAD ALREADY ASSUMED THE POS AND WAS XMITTING TO ALL ACFT INVOLVED. I NOTICED THE 2 ACFT (A AND B) ON CONVERGING COURSES AND INSTRUCTED MY FELLOW CTLR TO TURN 1 ACFT AND DSND THE OTHER. I BELIEVE THAT THIS MAY HAVE OCCURRED BECAUSE WE WERE BOTH DISTRACTED BY THE PARALLEL MONITOR. ALSO, SINCE I WASN'T TALKING OR SITTING AT THE POS, I HADN'T REALIZED THE OTHER DIDN'T TURN ACFT A TO A DOWNWIND. I THINK THIS MAY HAVE BEEN PREVENTED IF ACFT C, WHO ACKNOWLEDGED A CHANGE TO MONITOR, HAD ACTUALLY SWITCHED OVER INSTEAD OF STAYING ON OUR FREQ.

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.