View Full Version : Air traffic control, so easy even a kid can do it.
Title pretty much says it all. An air traffic controller let his son and daughter talk to aircraft in two different cases.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35683779/ns/travel-news
NEW YORK - An air traffic controller at one of the nation's busiest airport was suspended after his young son was permitted to give radio instructions to pilots. NBC News has learned the controller at Kennedy Airport brought his daughter into the tower the next night.
The man's daughter communicated with pilots twice, NBC News' Tom Costello reports.
His young son had several quick exchanges with pilots. The recorded clips were played repeatedly across a variety of news outlets on Wednesday.
Some of the exchanges appeared to delight pilots at the time.
"I wish I could bring my kid to work," one said, wistfully.
But the Federal Aviation Administration suspended the controller and a supervisor Wednesday after recordings of the calls were posted on the Internet, then reported on by a Boston television station.
"This lapse in judgment not only violated FAA's own policies, but common sense standards for professional conduct. These kinds of distractions are totally unacceptable," FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt said in a statement. "This kind of behavior does not reflect the true caliber of our work force."
On the recording, which lasts about a minute, the boy appears to repeat instructions fed to him by his father. At no time does the child tell aircraft how to maneuver or where they should go.
The FAA said it has also barred unofficial visits by friends or relatives to FAA air traffic operational areas while it reviews its policies.
Radio chatter between air traffic controllers and pilots is routinely streamed live on the Internet. A user of one popular Web site devoted to controller talk, LiveATC.net, posted a recording of the child's radio calls not long after they happened on Feb. 16 — a date when many New York schoolchildren were on a midwinter break.
The boy made five transmissions to pilots preparing for departure, according to the recording.
"JetBlue 171 cleared for takeoff," the boy says in his first call. His father follows that up with a more detailed instruction for the aircraft, which was headed to Sacramento, Calif. He then offers an explanation to pilots on the air: "This is what you get, guys, when the kids are out of school."
In a second exchange, the boy instructs the same JetBlue flight to contact departure controllers. The pilot responds: "Over to departure JetBlue 171, awesome job!"
There are a few more similar exchanges. A pilot laughs. The boy can be overheard giggling.
In his last call, the youngster signs off, "Adios, amigo." The pilot responds in kind.
Based on the flight numbers called out during the exchange, the episode appears to have happened in the early evening, when JFK is often bustling with international flights.
The controller’s 8-year-old daughter was in the tower on Feb. 17 between 4 and 4:30 p.m.
"JetBlue 57 contact New York departure," the girl said. The pilot responded, saying "JetBlue 57 thank you, good day." The controller then adds, "That's the next generation of air traffic controller going here."
The FAA offered scant detail on its investigation and wouldn't reveal the name of the controller or supervisor. Control towers are highly secure areas, although the agency does sometimes give employees permission to bring their children for a tour.
The union representing air traffic controllers condemned the worker's behavior.
"It is not indicative of the highest professional standards that controllers set for themselves and exceed each and everyday in the advancement of aviation safety," the National Air Traffic Controllers Association said in a statement.
LiveATC founder Dave Pascoe, a pilot and radio enthusiast, said he was sickened at the thought that the controller could be disciplined.
"I absolutely believe that this is being blown out of proportion," he said. "This is just a completely controlled situation. A child was being told exactly what to say."
He added: "I think it's just fantastic that this guy cared enough to take his kid to work. How many parents take their kids to work these days?"
The episode comes less than seven months after a controller at an airport in nearby Teterboro, N.J., was placed on leave for his actions in the moments leading up to a deadly crash between a helicopter and small plane over the Hudson River. The controller was recorded joking on the phone with his girlfriend as he dispatched instructions to the doomed plane. He ended the call when he realized the plane had dropped out of radio contact, just seconds before the crash.
NBC News' Tom Costello and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
I don't really think this is a big deal. The kid is just telling the pilots to contact the departure frequency and that they are clear to land. It's obvious that he was being told by his father what to say so I don't really think it is a big issue. How many times have we told our kids to say something? The only difference is that they are speaking into a microphone. If the kids were allowed to be there at work with him then I don't see an issue. I can remember when I was about 8, I went to work with my grandfather (County Detective) and he let me use the car radio to put him out of service at his office. "County 51, Out of service at headquarters." How bad is that?
Jay Cunningham
03-03-10, 20:32
This was an almost unbelievable lapse of judgment.
Would it be okay if an 8 year old kid performed a reactivity manipulation on a nuclear reactor?
Alpha Sierra
03-03-10, 20:36
This was an almost unbelievable lapse of judgment.
Would it be okay if an 8 year old kid performed a reactivity manipulation on a nuclear reactor?
Holding both a private pilot certificate from the FAA and a surface nuclear power plant operator subspecialty code from the US Navy, I can unequivocally say that your analogy is invalid.
What these kids did was to parrot some standard phraseology to another, highly trained human being.
FAR less risk than letting them at the controls of a machine that sometimes operates in a counterintuitive manner.
This was an almost unbelievable lapse of judgment.
Would it be okay if an 8 year old kid performed a reactivity manipulation on a nuclear reactor?
Uh, what size reactor? :D
Seriously - whether it was dangerous I not I cannot say, I wasn't there and am not a pilot or an ATC. However, I do think it was bad judgement ... at least in realizing that some people would not look at his actions favorably. Especially not these days.
pilotguyo540
03-03-10, 20:50
This was an almost unbelievable lapse of judgment.
Would it be okay if an 8 year old kid performed a reactivity manipulation on a nuclear reactor?
I can't possibly disagree more. Civilians are allowed and in some cases encouraged to visit the tower. He told his kid what to say. it was just the friendly change frequency, cleared to land, see ya command. The professional pilots usually already have the next frequency dialed and on standby. If people get their panties in a wad over this it is clearly because they are ignorant to the practice, execution, and redundancy of the air traffic control system. It is not like he was having his kid rattle off departure clearance, weather, position and hold, and land and hold short procedures during ORD rush hour.
During this portion of ATC flow, the controllers (usually) already have everybody in single file, flying the same vectors at regular intervals. As a pilot, I love that kind of stuff. Lets you know that everyone is real and not a robot after all. Aviation should not have any semblance of humanity gutted.
Sorry for my rant, I deleted half of it because it got way off topic:D. I can get a little animated!
Jay Cunningham
03-03-10, 20:50
Holding both a private pilot certificate from the FAA and a surface nuclear power plant operator subspecialty code from the US Navy, I can unequivocally say that your analogy is invalid.
What these kids did was to parrot some standard phraseology to another, highly trained human being.
FAR less risk than letting them at the controls of a machine that sometimes operates in a counterintuitive manner.
Never been a pilot but have worked in nuclear power for over 17 years. Both are regulated and have strict federal oversight. I know for a fact who is and is not allowed to perform a reactivity manipulation because I know what the plant's operating license (the law) says. I can only *assume* there is similar standard in aviation.
Sure, my analogy might have been more appropriate if the kid had taken the yoke of a 747 for a few minutes - but it was still irresponsible behavior on the part of the controller. The only reason people think it was cute was because nothing happened.
pilotguyo540
03-03-10, 20:54
Lighten up francis.
Even if an emergency were to pop up, the dad was right there to take over.
If dad was passed out in the corner, story would be different. I have let my daughter manipulate the controls (ever so supervised) since she was 4 and a half.
This same panic logic is used to ban guns.
It is not any worse than when pilots allow their kids/passengers speak on the radio to atc - it happens all the time and there is NOTHING in FARs about it.
Traffic was light and Dad was there to correct any slips. You should hear the number of mistakes that ATC trainees (or brand new First Officers) make on the radios during peak hours. There is always a trainer on hand to correct then, as there was in this case.
While I'm sure that the controller may have violated some regulations, it is nothing for the world to get their panties in a bunch over.
I think it'a a bunch of panicky kneejerk BS from a lot of people that
a. don't know anyhting about ATC other than "one mistake and fifteenKERBILLIONZ could DIE!!!!11!"
or
b. realize that people from group a. are going to stampede and so are looking to crucify the guy so they appear to be doing something about it (to distance themselves from the issue before it can more seriously affect THEM)
What was done was nothing. It'd be like the engineer letting a kid reach up and tute the horn on a locamotive. If the pilots aren't confused, and their's low risk with AMPLE time for any type of correction (which is the case here as in my horn-tuting analogy) it isn't a problem. This "incident" is the result of politics, not reality.
I’ve heard far worse phraseology come from one of my trainees mouths than from this kid, and as mentioned dad had an over-ride switch on his mike if the kid said something wrong. Do you know how many times a monitor or trainer has to over-ride a trainees command in a given day throughout all of the air traffic system. People need to relax.
b. realize that people from group a. are going to stampede and so are looking to crucify the guy so they appear to be doing something about it (to distance themselves from the issue before it can more seriously affect THEM)
SCORE! That is what is happening.
What was done was nothing. It'd be like the engineer letting a kid reach up and tute the horn on a locamotive. If the pilots aren't confused, and their's low risk with AMPLE time for any type of correction (which is the case here as in my horn-tuting analogy) it isn't a problem. This "incident" is the result of politics, not reality.
Good example...
Don Robison
03-04-10, 00:09
Non issue IMHO. The kid wasn't controlling anything. He was repeating what a qualified controller who was controlling the aircraft told him to say.
It's not like dad was a brain surgeon letting little Johny perform his first lobotomy. :eek:
ABC played the audio on their evening news cast. While it probably wasn't the smartest decision the father ever made, I don't think there was any real danger. The kids were more calm than some adults I've heard speaking over radios.
Holding both a private pilot certificate from the FAA and a surface nuclear power plant operator subspecialty code from the US Navy, I can unequivocally say that your analogy is invalid.
What these kids did was to parrot some standard phraseology to another, highly trained human being.
FAR less risk than letting them at the controls of a machine that sometimes operates in a counterintuitive manner.
I agree... I don't have any training on nuclear reactors [though I did grow up 93KM from Chernobyl ;-)] But I do have a FAA Prive Pilot and IFR Rating and let me tell you. That little kid(s) gave better transmissions that some ATC's I have heard in the NJ/NY/PA area!
Especialy flying IFR, those guys garble up transmissions left and right. I would be eleated to hear a little kid tell me something as simple as "Jet Blue 171 cleared for take off" or "Jet Blue 171 contact New York Departure"
Honestly, I do not see a big deal with it.
If the transmissions was something like "Jet Blue 171 daddy is a meany poo poo head and barney said you are cleared to land and hold short runway 31 left contact tower on 123.Dora The Explorer" I may have an issue... but the kids gave the right transmission [i assume by the pilot's responce] so who cares.
"next on msnbc, a new report is out on fathers not spending enough time with their children."
Another vote for it being "cute" but not newsworthy.
16 yrs flying helos courtesy Uncle Sam on two continents and one subcontinent.
People really need to lighten up. This is no worse than the kid sitting in the drivers seat of a fire engine and getting to press the switch for the siren . Dad was right there to correct any problems . Trainers have to correct atc trainees all of the time .
No worse. IMHO. and NOTHING happened.
It was a breach of procedure at the least. Dangerous? I don't think so. Remember that Russian airliner that augured into the ground some years back when the pilot allowed his kid to take the controls? Now that was dangerous....
Holding both a private pilot certificate from the FAA and a surface nuclear power plant operator subspecialty code from the US Navy, I can unequivocally say that your analogy is invalid.
What these kids did was to parrot some standard phraseology to another, highly trained human being.
FAR less risk than letting them at the controls of a machine that sometimes operates in a counterintuitive manner.
Welp... Who woulda thunk that would happen? Ha.
Air traffic control is a difficult job that requires a lot of attention. Children probably shouldn't be in the room at all. What if an accident happened? Then everyone would wonder why the kids were there.
Welp... Who woulda thunk that would happen? Ha.
Air traffic control is a difficult job that requires a lot of attention. Children probably shouldn't be in the room at all. What if an accident happened? Then everyone would wonder why the kids were there.
The skill/dificulty lies in being able to controll the locations of aircraft and predict their routs so that they pass safely through the airspace. Propper spacing, timing or T/O and Landings, runway incursions and so on is the hard part. Talking on the radio is not hard.
Clearly the father had everything done correctly, just let the kid to the easy job.
This would be the same as me gathering all the Zoning information, doing a building code analasys, design, drawing all the plans/sections/elevations/details and when Im done letting a child hit the print botton.
The skill/dificulty lies in being able to controll the locations of aircraft and predict their routs so that they pass safely through the airspace. Propper spacing, timing or T/O and Landings, runway incursions and so on is the hard part. Talking on the radio is not hard.
Clearly the father had everything done correctly, just let the kid to the easy job.
This would be the same as me gathering all the Zoning information, doing a building code analasys, design, drawing all the plans/sections/elevations/details and when Im done letting a child hit the print botton.
This sounds more like what happened, but the bigger issue I see is why is there anything/anyone present in the room that could distract the workers? I havent been in a tower, but I can imagine there are buttons and switches there that could have a huge impact if toyed with, so why take a kid who will most likely feel the need to mess with stuff. Honestly, I dont know many adults who wouldnt get in the way somehow just looking at stuff.
This sounds more like what happened, but the bigger issue I see is why is there anything/anyone present in the room that could distract the workers? I havent been in a tower, but I can imagine there are buttons and switches there that could have a huge impact if toyed with, so why take a kid who will most likely feel the need to mess with stuff. Honestly, I dont know many adults who wouldnt get in the way somehow just looking at stuff.
the controller should have a display showing air traffic he/she is monitoring, tiles with flight numbers in order that they must be issued/read back clearance or given clearance to t/o, land or transision trough the airspace. Since the controll is on frequency all the time, I dont think they change it often, in smaller airports you will change your frequency as a pilot a few times from approche to tower to ground and so on and speak with the same person. [Lancaster and Reading airports in PA are prime examples of this] So I don't really know how much the kid could have messed up. Maybe if he knocked the tiles off the rack, or rearanged them the ATC could have given clearance to an airplane which was not at the runway yet, but then the pilot would have still been talking to ground control, not the tower so he would not have even heard it. This was JFK so they have seperate people doing approche/departure, tower and ground.
If the kid told a plane to take off that was not on the runway, they would have come back and asked to retransmit, by that time, the dad would have cought it.
It happend to me once, I contacted Ground and asked to taxi to the runway. I was given permission, about 100 yards after I started taxing and about .8 miles before I got to the runway, tower came on and said I was cleared for t/o lol. This was Lancaster Airport so the tower/ground and approch were all the same guy, even though you change the freq. on your radio, and call them using different names, the same voice answers. My GF heard the transmission and looked at me like "WTF, they want you to take off from the parking lot" I laughed and got back on the radio saying they had made a mistake and I was just starting to taxi. He laughed as well cause he just realised that he cleared me for t/o on the ground frequency and I was not even close to the runway.
The point is, that people f'up all the time in this field. And when it comes to a transmission like the ones the kid was making, its no big deal. Even if he told Jet Blue 171 to take off from the gate, the pilot would have known this was a mistake and cought it as fast as the kid's father would have and nothing bad would have happend.
Peoples panties are just too bunched up.
RogerinTPA
03-04-10, 14:23
Being a former Army Aviator (Instructor Pilot) and commercial aviator (PIC and line Check Airman) for 24+ years and 17,000+ hours of flight time, I thought the story was pretty cool, BUT, the fact remains, the kid was not a FAA Licensed Air Traffic Controller. What if I brought my 8 year old nephew, who's a master at flying microsoft flight sim programs, into the cockpit of my aircraft and had him fly and answer radios for a major airline? I would be just as guilty of bad judgment and need I say, criminal negligence in the performance of my duties as the pilot in command. The kid had not met the FAA certification required to perform the duties of the job, even if supervised by his father. He could have accomplished the same thing in a simulator with faux radio traffic, and the flying public and his job, would not have been in jeopardy.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.