PDA

View Full Version : Tokyo air controllers 'forget' runway closed.


Farrell
5th May 2005, 10:12
Tokyo air controllers 'forget' runway closed.
Daily Yomiuri


A Japan Airlines jetliner lands at Haneda Airport, Tokyo in this March, 2005 photo. (James Rowson/View Full Size)
An error by air traffic controllers at Tokyo's Haneda Airport on Friday night in which all 18 controllers on duty forgot about a runway closure has brought to light a number of problems that, if left unaddressed, could lead to disaster, analysts said Sunday.
The blunder took place minutes after one of the domestic airport's three runways closed at 9:30 p.m. for repair work to runway lights.

The information on the repair work--scheduled to continue through October after starting in April--was sent to Haneda's 136 controllers in early March.

Despite this, the controllers gave two incoming Japan Airlines planes wrong instructions to land on the airport's runway A, despite the fact that the planes' pilots--who also had been informed of the closure--queried the instructions four times.

The controllers admitted to repeatedly telling the pilots their landing clearance information was not mistaken. The first of the two JAL planes landed on the closed runway at 9:39 p.m., while the captain of the second plane, suspicious of the validity of the landing clearance information, landed on the airport's runway C, parallel to runway A, after forcing the issue with controllers.

The Construction and Transport Ministry's Aircraft and Railway Accident Investigation Commission has taken a dim view of the incident, saying if any repair vehicles had been on the runway, it could have led to a major accident.

"Under normal circumstances, it could never have happened," Haneda's air traffic control chief Masaaki Naito said at a press conference at the ministry Saturday.

Of the 18 air traffic controllers on duty at the time, three were directly responsible for radio contact with the approaching JAL planes, he said.

Two others were supposed to assist the three by confirming the accuracy of their instructions, but all controllers on duty had forgotten about the runway repair work, Naito said.

When questioned by Civil Aviation Bureau officials, one of the controllers reportedly said, "We mistakenly thought the repair work would be done late at night, not the hours we were on duty."

Runway A is closed for repairs from 9:30 p.m. through 7 a.m. Wednesday to Thursday.

Another was cited as admitting, "Although I had been well aware of the runway closure due to the repair work up until a week before, I forgot about it when on duty on Friday."

Another controller told officials the information-sharing arrangements among the controllers were badly insufficient, and only one controller was responsible for reconfirming air traffic safety information from the bureau or other sources.

Nothing learned from past incidents

An incident very similar to that at Haneda occurred at Niigata Airport in June.

After receiving faulty instructions, a small plane landed on a closed runway, almost colliding with a crane that was engaged in maintenance work on the runway.

In the wake of the incident at Niigata Airport, the Civil Aviation Bureau issued instructions to airports nationwide to review preventive steps against accidents involving runways closed for maintenance work or other reasons.

As analysts point out, Friday's incident at Haneda suggests that none of the 18 air traffic controllers on duty had learned from Niigata Airport's near miss.

The bureau regularly provides air traffic controllers with safety notices. In addition to the regular safety information, urgent information involving safety control operations, called "NOTAM (Notice to Airmen)," is issued by the bureau to all airports via a secure intranet.

Two other categories of information, that concerning permanent changes in airport conditions such as the length of runways, and temporary but long-term changes in airport conditions that last for three months or more are called "amendments" and "supplements." The bureau mails information to controllers across the country at least 28 days before the changes are implemented.

Information on the repair work at Haneda was sent to the chief traffic controller in early March, who conveyed it to all 136 controllers. The information also was put up on a notice board in the airport's briefing room, to ensure all controllers would know about the repair work.

But according to a ministry official who used to be an air traffic controller, the notice board is full of notices, making it difficult for controllers to find relevant and priority information.

"Any controller may well be unable to be careful about all the information put up on the board," he said.

New work schedule a factor?

Some analysts note that changes to the working shifts of Haneda's air traffic controllers' from early April may have had something to do with Friday's incident.

The old schedule had controllers working four shifts a day, but from April 6 it changed to six a day.

The team in charge of the control tower on Friday evening had never been at work during the runway closure hours before, analysts said. They were reminded about the closure by the group of controllers who were to take over duty at 10 p.m., they said.

Osamu Takeda, vice chairman of the central committee of the Federation of Public-Sector Transport Trade Unions (Zenunyu), who worked as an air traffic controller at Haneda for four years, noted, "Controllers pass on safety information for 20 to 30 minutes every time they start their shift. It's almost impossible that all 18 controllers forgot the runway closure."

"Such a serious mistake can hardly be put down to carelessness--behind the incident may be errors in the entire personnel management system, including arrangements to ensure double checks on safety."

HEATHROW DIRECTOR
5th May 2005, 10:37
Interesting - I wonder if many other countries employ the very simple system I was used to at several airports where I worked. Runways were represented by bays to hold flight progress strips in front of the controllers. Each bay had a runway designator strip and if a runway was closed for a significant period that runway designator was removed and (usually) handed to the GMC controller. This immediately indicated to the Air controllers that the runway was not available for landing or take-off. Short term closures were covered by the insertion of a red "blocker" strip under the runway designator to warn controllers that the runway could not be used. Simple, but very safe.

Is such a system employed elsewhere?

AlanM
5th May 2005, 12:51
Shocking really (and not just having 18 controllers on a shift!)

But seriously, I am with HD on the physical strip bay - and a physical barrier of a strip side on if need be to stop strips being put in the bay.

Canoehead
5th May 2005, 22:34
Such Crap! Yomiuri's article is another blatant attempt to sensationalize. Controllers "forget"...bla bla bla. To me, he digs his own grave at that point. NOBODY FORGOT ANYTHING! This is another case of system error, where the controller gets the shaft in the end. Do I need to go on?:yuk:

M609
5th May 2005, 23:47
I'm a fan of the physical strip bay with bright red marker stips for vehicle traffic etc, snow clearence etc.

Keep it simple.

Uncommon Sense
6th May 2005, 06:52
Works at Night Time only.

Just Turn the Runway / APP lights off?

Farrell
6th May 2005, 21:30
"Just Turn the Runway / APP lights off"

providing you haven't forgotten that the runway is closed! :E

Revnetwork
11th May 2005, 16:02
Anyone remember Hydro Air at DNMM not that long ago. Very similar,only that there was heavy equipment on that runway at the time.

av8boy
16th May 2005, 20:04
I worked with a gentleman some years ago who had also been an ATC in the USAF. One particularly snowy day he was working in the tower at his (unnamed) air force base. The runway was closed for snow removal… one of those shin-digs with about a zillion plows working all at once. In that the snow was still falling at a heavy rate, he could not see the equipment on the runway. He dutifully placed the appropriate reminder in the strip bay, and then turned his attention to other matters. A short while later, a C5 called for departure. My friend cleared the C5 for takeoff. At the appropriate time he told the aircraft to contact departure, and looked down at the strip to mark it. That’s when he saw the strip reminding him that the runway was closed due to a few hundred tons of metal being engaged in snow removal. He knew that the C5 had at least survived, because the crew had acknowledged the frequency change. However, he DID have more than a little concern for the plow crews on the runway. With the permission of the ground controller, he brought up the ground freq and called the foreman of the crew. “Are you guys OK out there?” The answer… “Yeah. All of us had pulled over to the side to have some coffee. We DID hear something go by though. Are you aware that the runway is closed?”

My friend turned himself in. Decertification ensued, as well as retraining and recert. Still, he always maintained that NOTHING was as painful as that moment when he realized what he had done.

This guy turned out to be one of the most careful, professional controllers I ever worked with (as well as a pleasure to be around). Hearing him relate this story, one always got the impression that he was the same way as an air force controller (in other words, he wasn’t just this professional because of what had happened to him in the AF). It always sticks in my mind and reminds me (among other things) that things like a red strip in the bay is there as a backup, not as a primary means of keeping you out of trouble, and that a lack of eternal vigilance will quickly take out even the best among us.

Thus endeth today's lesson

Dave