ZDV controller concerned with A320 pilot response when originally advising that a time clearance restr could be met, then advising aircraft computer failed. Restr was not me, and the controller had less than standard separation.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	430222
Time
Date	199903
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	navaid : dvv.vortac
State Reference	CO
Altitude	msl single value : 36500
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zdv.artcc tower : oejn.tower
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	A320
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	cruise : enroute altitude change
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : radar
Experience	controller radar : 5
ASRS Report	430222
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe altitude deviation : undershoot conflict : airborne less severe non adherence : required legal separation non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other
Independent Detector	atc equipment : conflict alert other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance none taken : insufficient time
Consequence	faa : investigated
Miss Distance	horizontal : 28020
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Flight Crew Human Performance ATC Human Performance Aircraft
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Operational Error

Narrative:

A cleared air carrier X to FL370. Pilot told me he would be able to be level in 4 mins. He later again assured me he would be level in a certain time frame. He failed and claimed the aircraft computer failed. When the crew of an A320 can't accurately predict a climb rate, I think that something needs to be fixed. I, the controller, was only given a 1 min warning that this aircraft could not meet his restr and would need turns to avoid traffic. With the turns given, I only ended up with 4.67 mi. Somehow we controllers need more warning time to execute plan B.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZDV CTLR CONCERNED WITH A320 PLT RESPONSE WHEN ORIGINALLY ADVISING THAT A TIME CLRNC RESTR COULD BE MET, THEN ADVISING ACFT COMPUTER FAILED. RESTR WAS NOT ME, AND THE CTLR HAD LTSS.

Narrative: A CLRED ACR X TO FL370. PLT TOLD ME HE WOULD BE ABLE TO BE LEVEL IN 4 MINS. HE LATER AGAIN ASSURED ME HE WOULD BE LEVEL IN A CERTAIN TIME FRAME. HE FAILED AND CLAIMED THE ACFT COMPUTER FAILED. WHEN THE CREW OF AN A320 CAN'T ACCURATELY PREDICT A CLB RATE, I THINK THAT SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE FIXED. I, THE CTLR, WAS ONLY GIVEN A 1 MIN WARNING THAT THIS ACFT COULD NOT MEET HIS RESTR AND WOULD NEED TURNS TO AVOID TFC. WITH THE TURNS GIVEN, I ONLY ENDED UP WITH 4.67 MI. SOMEHOW WE CTLRS NEED MORE WARNING TIME TO EXECUTE PLAN B.

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.