Narrative:

On date of incident; ZBW amended the type aircraft on an inbound heavy airbus to boston. For undetermined reasons; the amendment showed the aircraft as a non heavy A320 to bos approach. The approach controller didn't question the crew as other carriers are starting to fly non heavies to boston. The actual type went undiscovered until the aircraft broke out of the clouds on approximately a 3 mi final to logan. On nov/08; ZBW assigned a beacon code to aircraft X; an IFR inbound 6b6; one of the boston satellite fields. The aircraft displayed a 'V' on his data tag; indicating VFR. The controller and his trainee were unaware that the aircraft was IFR until the trainee told him to descend at his discretion for his destination at which time the pilot told the controller that he was IFR. The aircraft penetrated another ZBW sector boundary before a pointout was made. The controller is charged with an airspace deviation on this. On nov/08; a GLF4; was on a flight from pvd to ZZZ. The aircraft was tagged as XXX and flashing to the wrong sector. Although previous coordination avoided a deviation; it was a very confusing situation that could have led to problems. I dec/8; an air carrier departed bos with a notation on his data tag for an exit fix. This is a nonstandard exit fix not contained in the ZBW-A90 LOA. 2 ZBW sectors hesitated in taking a handoff; almost leading to another airspace deviation as the controller was trying to verbally coordination the handoff. After an A90 supervisory inquiry; ZBW parso sector said it was an inadvertent change made by one of their controllers. It concerns me that it appears that the FAA is taking the easy way out by blaming the controllers when their biggest mistake was trusting the stars automation.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A90 CONTROLLER DESCRIBED SEVERAL AUTOMATION ANOMALIES THAT RESULTED IN INCORRECT AIRCRAFT TYPES; ROUTING AND FLIGHT PLAN/HANDOFF STATUS; SUGGESTING STARS EQUIPMENT AS CONTRIBUTORY.

Narrative: ON DATE OF INCIDENT; ZBW AMENDED THE TYPE ACFT ON AN INBOUND HVY AIRBUS TO BOSTON. FOR UNDETERMINED REASONS; THE AMENDMENT SHOWED THE ACFT AS A NON HVY A320 TO BOS APCH. THE APCH CTLR DIDN'T QUESTION THE CREW AS OTHER CARRIERS ARE STARTING TO FLY NON HEAVIES TO BOSTON. THE ACTUAL TYPE WENT UNDISCOVERED UNTIL THE ACFT BROKE OUT OF THE CLOUDS ON APPROX A 3 MI FINAL TO LOGAN. ON NOV/08; ZBW ASSIGNED A BEACON CODE TO ACFT X; AN IFR INBOUND 6B6; ONE OF THE BOSTON SATELLITE FIELDS. THE ACFT DISPLAYED A 'V' ON HIS DATA TAG; INDICATING VFR. THE CTLR AND HIS TRAINEE WERE UNAWARE THAT THE ACFT WAS IFR UNTIL THE TRAINEE TOLD HIM TO DSND AT HIS DISCRETION FOR HIS DEST AT WHICH TIME THE PLT TOLD THE CTLR THAT HE WAS IFR. THE ACFT PENETRATED ANOTHER ZBW SECTOR BOUNDARY BEFORE A POINTOUT WAS MADE. THE CTLR IS CHARGED WITH AN AIRSPACE DEV ON THIS. ON NOV/08; A GLF4; WAS ON A FLT FROM PVD TO ZZZ. THE ACFT WAS TAGGED AS XXX AND FLASHING TO THE WRONG SECTOR. ALTHOUGH PREVIOUS COORD AVOIDED A DEV; IT WAS A VERY CONFUSING SITUATION THAT COULD HAVE LED TO PROBS. I DEC/8; AN ACR DEPARTED BOS WITH A NOTATION ON HIS DATA TAG FOR AN EXIT FIX. THIS IS A NONSTANDARD EXIT FIX NOT CONTAINED IN THE ZBW-A90 LOA. 2 ZBW SECTORS HESITATED IN TAKING A HDOF; ALMOST LEADING TO ANOTHER AIRSPACE DEV AS THE CTLR WAS TRYING TO VERBALLY COORD THE HDOF. AFTER AN A90 SUPERVISORY INQUIRY; ZBW PARSO SECTOR SAID IT WAS AN INADVERTENT CHANGE MADE BY ONE OF THEIR CTLRS. IT CONCERNS ME THAT IT APPEARS THAT THE FAA IS TAKING THE EASY WAY OUT BY BLAMING THE CTLRS WHEN THEIR BIGGEST MISTAKE WAS TRUSTING THE STARS AUTOMATION.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 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.