Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Air Traffic Controller Errors Soaring, Government Watchdog Reports
WASHINGTON — Errors by air traffic controllers in the vicinity of airports as well as incidents in which there was an unauthorized plane, vehicle, or person on a runway have increased sharply, a government watchdog said in a report released Thursday. Mistakes by controllers working at radar facilities that handle approaches and departures within about 30 miles of an airport that cause planes to fly too close together nearly doubled over three years ending in March, the Government Accountability… (www.huffingtonpost.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
N90 is the New York TRACON. Most complex airspace in the world!
Thanks, I just never got up that way much for it to be familiar and FA would not pull it up on their Airport ID.
First heard about this on FOXNews' Fox Report either this past Fri or Sat. They gave it the typical MSM alarmist treatment, but also put forward the notion that some of the increase may be due to increased self-reporting of errors which previously might have been held back for risk of receiving punishment.
I guess the FAA has been encouraging a no-fault reporting of operational errors, with the rationale that to really go to the heart of improving the situation, you must have good data about what's _really_ going on. Remove risk of sanction, you maybe get more self-reporting, and then the agency can better analyze trend and implement better safety improvements on an organization-wide basis.
Sort of a no-harm/no-foul, but tell us so we can work on making things better. It reminds me of NASA's ASRS system many pilots may use to self-report blunders without risk of a punitive response based solely on making the report.
So, I am not sure if this news is emblematic of a dangerous new trend, or merely a revealing of the underlying reality of ATC which had hitherto been hidden in a dark corner. Either way, the data will be used to drive improvements, and if you felt safe flying yesterday, you ought to feel AS safe tomorrow.
I guess the FAA has been encouraging a no-fault reporting of operational errors, with the rationale that to really go to the heart of improving the situation, you must have good data about what's _really_ going on. Remove risk of sanction, you maybe get more self-reporting, and then the agency can better analyze trend and implement better safety improvements on an organization-wide basis.
Sort of a no-harm/no-foul, but tell us so we can work on making things better. It reminds me of NASA's ASRS system many pilots may use to self-report blunders without risk of a punitive response based solely on making the report.
So, I am not sure if this news is emblematic of a dangerous new trend, or merely a revealing of the underlying reality of ATC which had hitherto been hidden in a dark corner. Either way, the data will be used to drive improvements, and if you felt safe flying yesterday, you ought to feel AS safe tomorrow.
Well, the article says this as well about reporting. Probably the dark corner is correct.I forget the name of it but the Airlines have a similar program. The 2 AA pilots that had the problem the other day used it on their reporting that 2 go round pressurization problem
DOT LaHood at National Press Club said delays are up. 74% on time arrival. Now GAO says "deals" doubled. Babbitt agrees.
March 27, 1977 on an airport runway on the Spanish island of Tenerife in the Canary Islands when two Boeing 747s collided, killing 583 people.
March 27, 1977 on an airport runway on the Spanish island of Tenerife in the Canary Islands when two Boeing 747s collided, killing 583 people.
Mr. Webb: I don't want to sound ignorant or naive here but what are you talking about in your 2 previous comments talking 30 and 34 years ago??
The Tenerife incident is the signature event of runway incursions. Mostly in the transportation insurance business. It was reference in the "Huff Post" political article. In my center after computer's started generating targets, computer programs were developed to spot less than 5 miles. Under longitudinal and lateral non radar rules one can have aircraft separated but when targets appear on the display you have less than 5 miles and target overlap with the target generator (especially in the way the targets are orientated to the radar site). N204TA points out problems of safe in trail operations but the aircraft targets are not precisely separated by the computer. We had the same air traffic management problems in 1981 as are today. Its called "management embarrassment" or "lack of faith" in the workforce. For anybody that is dealing with or applying air traffic safety references to "body counts" or "Airplanes are not running into each other" is very dangerous. Controllers "control" the traffic and are not after the fact referees.
As far as controller errors, the article mentions that Babbitt himself said they had a better error reporting system, so in that respect, we don't know what went unreported from the git go. Personally, I think they do a damn good job. It's kinda like the air crashes and pilot errors. All you hear about are the bad ones from which no recovery was made.You never hear about all the success stories where somebody does what they are supposed to.