Narrative:

The E145 was climbing to FL330 requesting a final altitude of FL370, eastbound toward cyhz. The B747 was swbound level at FL350. Traffic was called to both aircraft and both pilots responded with no contact. As the converging aircraft approached each other, I asked the pilot of the E145 if he was 'rvsm capable.' he immediately responded 'affirmative.' I then asked the pilot what his equipment qualifier was. He said he wasn't sure. I told him that rvsm qualifiers are /Q or /west. He said 'we have FMS onboard so whatever you need it to be is fine.' I told him I would show his equipment as /Q and issued the E145 a climb to FL340 and again issued his traffic. The pilot reported the B747 in sight and acknowledged climbing to FL340. When seen leaving FL332, the E145 pilot asked, 'center, what was the question you asked us before our qualifier type?' I said, 'are you rvsm qualified?' he replied, 'exactly what does that mean?' technically, separation was lost at this point with less than 4 mi and less than 2000 ft not being sure that this procedure was legal for the E145. I explained to the pilot what rvsm was, and he was very unsure sounding. He said, 'if it is not a problem for you, it's not a problem for us.' (standard pilot deviation response.) due to the speed and no chance that the aircraft would actually hit (the E145 was behind the B747) no action was taken separation wise. Because the pilot's initial 'affirmative' answer to his capabilities was received, I followed all correct procedures and issued a clearance to provide a service. It is obvious this problem arose because a pilot confidently answered a question he was not sure of. Rvsm on the east coast is just over 1 month new and not all pilots are aware of it.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AFTER APPLYING RVSM SEPARATION BTWN AN E145 AND A B747, A ZBW CTLR LEARNS THE E145 ACFT IS NOT PROPERLY EQUIPPED FOR RVSM.

Narrative: THE E145 WAS CLBING TO FL330 REQUESTING A FINAL ALT OF FL370, EBOUND TOWARD CYHZ. THE B747 WAS SWBOUND LEVEL AT FL350. TFC WAS CALLED TO BOTH ACFT AND BOTH PLTS RESPONDED WITH NO CONTACT. AS THE CONVERGING ACFT APCHED EACH OTHER, I ASKED THE PLT OF THE E145 IF HE WAS 'RVSM CAPABLE.' HE IMMEDIATELY RESPONDED 'AFFIRMATIVE.' I THEN ASKED THE PLT WHAT HIS EQUIP QUALIFIER WAS. HE SAID HE WASN'T SURE. I TOLD HIM THAT RVSM QUALIFIERS ARE /Q OR /W. HE SAID 'WE HAVE FMS ONBOARD SO WHATEVER YOU NEED IT TO BE IS FINE.' I TOLD HIM I WOULD SHOW HIS EQUIP AS /Q AND ISSUED THE E145 A CLB TO FL340 AND AGAIN ISSUED HIS TFC. THE PLT RPTED THE B747 IN SIGHT AND ACKNOWLEDGED CLBING TO FL340. WHEN SEEN LEAVING FL332, THE E145 PLT ASKED, 'CTR, WHAT WAS THE QUESTION YOU ASKED US BEFORE OUR QUALIFIER TYPE?' I SAID, 'ARE YOU RVSM QUALIFIED?' HE REPLIED, 'EXACTLY WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?' TECHNICALLY, SEPARATION WAS LOST AT THIS POINT WITH LESS THAN 4 MI AND LESS THAN 2000 FT NOT BEING SURE THAT THIS PROC WAS LEGAL FOR THE E145. I EXPLAINED TO THE PLT WHAT RVSM WAS, AND HE WAS VERY UNSURE SOUNDING. HE SAID, 'IF IT IS NOT A PROB FOR YOU, IT'S NOT A PROB FOR US.' (STANDARD PLTDEV RESPONSE.) DUE TO THE SPD AND NO CHANCE THAT THE ACFT WOULD ACTUALLY HIT (THE E145 WAS BEHIND THE B747) NO ACTION WAS TAKEN SEPARATION WISE. BECAUSE THE PLT'S INITIAL 'AFFIRMATIVE' ANSWER TO HIS CAPABILITIES WAS RECEIVED, I FOLLOWED ALL CORRECT PROCS AND ISSUED A CLRNC TO PROVIDE A SVC. IT IS OBVIOUS THIS PROB AROSE BECAUSE A PLT CONFIDENTLY ANSWERED A QUESTION HE WAS NOT SURE OF. RVSM ON THE EAST COAST IS JUST OVER 1 MONTH NEW AND NOT ALL PLTS ARE AWARE OF IT.

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.