 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
An air carrier medium large transport crew misspelled an intersection into their FMC causing less than standard separation. Cockpit coordination management problem.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 264927 |
| Time | |
| Date | 199403 |
| Day | Fri |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | atc facility : cvg |
| State Reference | OH |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 19000 msl bound upper : 23000 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Night |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | artcc : zid |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Navigation In Use | Other Other |
| Flight Phase | climbout : intermediate altitude cruise other cruise other |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Make Model Name | Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer |
| Operating Under FAR Part | other : unknown |
| Flight Phase | cruise other |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 6000 flight time type : 3000 |
| ASRS Report | 264927 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | conflict : airborne less severe non adherence : clearance non adherence : required legal separation other anomaly other other spatial deviation |
| Independent Detector | aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified other controllera other flight crewa |
| Resolutory Action | flight crew : took evasive action flight crew : returned to intended course or assigned course other |
| Consequence | Other |
| Miss Distance | horizontal : 30000 vertical : 500 |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
During climb to FL230 controller gave route change 'direct perri intersection, J8 ott, OTT3 arrival kbwi.' he spelled out the intersection and gave 230 as an altitude. The captain began programming the FMS while we both reached for en route charts. The captain loaded 'direct perry' and the course indicated about 140 degrees which was reasonable from assigned 090 degree heading (i.e., did not appear obviously incorrect). The FMS would not accept J8 and we began to analyze why. TCASII indicated traffic which was descending through our altitude and a potential conflict. The captain initiated a left turn and increased climb to avoid visually the traffic. Center issued a 'turn left immediately' and then assigned 100 degrees. The conflict potential could have been averted by: 1) controller issuing a heading initially until direct perri was established. The potential for conflict existed when the route change was initiated. 2) my verifying perri versus perry as the FMS entry. The controller spelled out perri and I wrote it down correctly, but did not verify the captain's input for several seconds. The error was discovered but over communications by the traffic conflict event. 3) controller could have acknowledged traffic with the route change transmission, ensuring visual contact.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AN ACR MLG CREW MISSPELLED AN INTXN INTO THEIR FMC CAUSING LTSS. COCKPIT COORD MGMNT PROB.
Narrative: DURING CLB TO FL230 CTLR GAVE RTE CHANGE 'DIRECT PERRI INTXN, J8 OTT, OTT3 ARR KBWI.' HE SPELLED OUT THE INTXN AND GAVE 230 AS AN ALT. THE CAPT BEGAN PROGRAMMING THE FMS WHILE WE BOTH REACHED FOR ENRTE CHARTS. THE CAPT LOADED 'DIRECT PERRY' AND THE COURSE INDICATED ABOUT 140 DEGS WHICH WAS REASONABLE FROM ASSIGNED 090 DEG HDG (I.E., DID NOT APPEAR OBVIOUSLY INCORRECT). THE FMS WOULD NOT ACCEPT J8 AND WE BEGAN TO ANALYZE WHY. TCASII INDICATED TFC WHICH WAS DSNDING THROUGH OUR ALT AND A POTENTIAL CONFLICT. THE CAPT INITIATED A L TURN AND INCREASED CLB TO AVOID VISUALLY THE TFC. CTR ISSUED A 'TURN L IMMEDIATELY' AND THEN ASSIGNED 100 DEGS. THE CONFLICT POTENTIAL COULD HAVE BEEN AVERTED BY: 1) CTLR ISSUING A HDG INITIALLY UNTIL DIRECT PERRI WAS ESTABLISHED. THE POTENTIAL FOR CONFLICT EXISTED WHEN THE RTE CHANGE WAS INITIATED. 2) MY VERIFYING PERRI VERSUS PERRY AS THE FMS ENTRY. THE CTLR SPELLED OUT PERRI AND I WROTE IT DOWN CORRECTLY, BUT DID NOT VERIFY THE CAPT'S INPUT FOR SEVERAL SECONDS. THE ERROR WAS DISCOVERED BUT OVER COMS BY THE TFC CONFLICT EVENT. 3) CTLR COULD HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED TFC WITH THE RTE CHANGE XMISSION, ENSURING VISUAL CONTACT.
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.