Fighter
Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 13.5
Situational Awareness
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Human Factors; Manuals; Procedure; Company Policy; Chart Or Publication; Airspace Structure; Aircraft
I took over the sector from a radar controller who was trying to figure out if Aircraft Y could be cleared for approach into KALS. He had a flight plan on Aircraft X and Aircraft Z from ZAB but no datablock. The problem with the RNAV Runway 20 Approach is that the missed approach is not separated from the route that Aircraft X (IR137) and Aircraft Z (IR109) were on. I took over after the radar controller told the first arrival; Aircraft Y; that they were cleared for the RNAV RWY 20 but they couldn't do the missed approach. I read in the flight plan that Aircraft X was entering at IR137 at XA:20z and exiting at XA:35z. I called ZAB Sector 16 to confirm the information and the controller told me he just sat down and had no idea. He would call me back. He didn't call me back. I called him at approximately XA:50z when I saw the Aircraft X in my airspace at 14;000 feet about 15-20 miles north of the boundary with ZAB Sector 16. I called and the controller told me then that the previous controller transposed XA:35z and meant to type XA:53z. I didn't get a datablock on this aircraft either. A similar scenario happened in the last month where the coordination was inaccurate and no datablock was given. It is really hard to separate for aircraft in a non-radar environment when there is no coordination through the flight plan or a datablock. Aircraft Z had a remark that said in IR109 from XA:20z-XB:50z. That is a long time to separate for this aircraft especially when the info in EDST times out and there is nothing in our computer showing them in the space. Aircraft A asked to also do the RNAV Runway 2 because it was IFR conditions but the missed approach is not separated from IR109. Aircraft A said they could fly the approach; get low enough to cancel and heard all the communications with Aircraft Y that were discussed earlier so they didn't have to fly the missed approach. I told them I couldn't authorize them to fly the missed approach with Aircraft Z in the route. ZAB continues to not coordinate aircraft in the IR routes accurately. I cannot count the times they fail to put an accurate time in the remark section of the flight plan; they fail to hand off or display the data block. They call after we stop separating for the aircraft and then they appear in our airspace. They don't build a delay in the flight plan so it won't time out of the computer. These routes begin in their airspace and the aircraft flies through ours without ZDV speaking to them. There are lots of ways they can communicate that they have cleared an aircraft into IR 109/137/308 and let us know because most of the route is non-radar in our airspace. It is unsafe and luckily we haven't had any incidents but it's just a matter of time.
Denver Center Controller reported delaying two aircrafts' approach clearances due to incomplete coordination of military training routes.