JFK ATC in the news...

[skidbuggy]

Child directs traffic at major airport

By Ted Daniel from MyFox National From: NewsCore March 03, 2010 12:50PM

AN investigation is under way after a child was heard giving instructions to a pilot from the air-traffic control tower at one of America's busiest airports, reports say.

In a recording that has been confirmed as genuine by the Federal Aviation Administration, the child makes five transmissions - with the pilots in each case all responding enthusiastically to him, MyFox National reports.

One conversation between the tower at JFK Airport in New York and a pilot goes as follows:

JFK TOWER: Jet Blue 171 contact departure.

PILOT: Over to departure jet blue 171, awesome job.


The child appears to be supervised, with a controller explaining the reason for the young voice to the pilot.

JFK TOWER: That's what you get guys when the kids are out of school. (laugh)

The airport is the sixth busiest in the country with thousands of planes taking off and landing every day.

The control tower is a highly secure area and the FAA says only licensed controllers are supposed to communicate with planes.

“I have never ever heard a small kid in the tower giving instructions for an airplane to take off or cross a runway or any kind of instructions,” Jim Baker, a retired chief pilot at Delta airlines, told FOX25.

The FAA said: "Pending the outcome of our investigation, the employees involved in this incident are not controlling air traffic.

"This behavior is not acceptable and does not demonstrate the kind of professionalism expected from all FAA employees."

The union that represents air traffic controllers said: "We do not condone this type of behavior in any way, and it is not indicative of the highest professional standards that controllers set for themselves and exceed each and every day in the advancement of aviation safety."


For the full story, head to MyFox National

Child directs traffic at major airport | Perth Now (http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/breaking-news/child-directs-traffic-at-major-airport/story-e6frg12u-1225836613142)

[Shytehawk]

I just cannot believe my ears. An aircraft actually took off on the instructions of a child without verifying the clearance was genuime.

[Basil]

with a controller explaining the reason for the young voice to the pilot
Pretty much covers it.

[Dont Hang Up]

I just cannot believe my ears. An aircraft actually took off on the instructions of a child without verifying the clearance was genuime.


The example quoted was a (presumably expected)frequency change. Hardly safety critical.

And may it have been a "take your child to work day"? In which case the presence of a child may well have been authorised, even in a secure area.

Without more information I would not be so quick to condemn.

[bzh]

must be a very slow news day.... give me a break... maybe we should send the kid to guantanamo...:rolleyes:

[paxsign]

Or the reporter.........

[WHBM]

Maybe the child's speech was more understandable than the usual US staccato machine-gun-speak of the regular team.

[JamesA]

So, it's back to child labour. Saves money even if not very PC.

[merlinxx]

Send him round, I need my chimney swept & my boots cleaned :ugh:

[protectthehornet]

so easy, a child can do it.

[blueloo]

appropriately supervised, in a "calm" period...whats the big deal.


Didnt guys in the old days allow a kid on the flight deck to transmit a radio call or heaven forbid, twist the heading bug.


Everyone is so paranoid these days.

Paranoia is replacing paranoia. It really is ridiculous.

[Lon More]

A supervised child in the Tower seens a bit safer than an unsupervised one in the cockpit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_593)

[springbok449]

...the child probably did a better job than the usual controllers...

[Global Warrior]

The kid was asked to comment on his 13th Birthday treat from his Dad by his teacher:

My Daddy took me to work today
and with all the planes he let play
The big one the little one
the one with the blue tail
and even the one whose engine did fail

I lined them up
i cleared them to go
one even told me
damn fine show

Then the man from the paper wrote his bit
and now my dad is well in the s**t
So im back on the streets and i'm number one
at selling my drugs, i've got a big gun. :ugh::ugh::ugh::=:=

[AnthonyGA]

If the person had been the spouse, brother, sister, or friend of the controller, instead of a child, would your opinions change?

[st7860]

YouTube - Awesome ATC recording - JFK ground - KJFK tower - funny ATC (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4s2irdJpEk)

[Checkboard]

Didnt guys in the old days allow a kid on the flight deck to transmit a radio call or heaven forbid, twist the heading bug.

"The old days!" :} It was only 10 years ago! (Although I see your profile says you are "3" :} )

I once had the 18 year old daughter of one of the local controllers on a flight. He contacted us, and asked if she could visit the cockpit (he would be in the tower that day). We sat her on the jump seat, and had her make the ground calls for clearance and taxi (she read them from a bit of paper) to her father, who answered. Many chuckles and giggles (and queries from other planes), and we departed. Had a nice short cut and straight in approach on the way back in thanks.

If you can't have the odd day of fun at work, is there any point ? :ugh:

Many times had children visit the flight deck, and "turn the aeroplane" with the heading bug. (Pre Sep 11, obviously.)

[Avman]

All quite obviously under control (pardon the pun) and great for the kid. Good recruiting policy for future ATCOs. Anyone who condemns this, including the FAA, need to get a life. I controlled a/c (during quieter periods) for years as an ATCA - always with a fully qualified ATCO monitoring my every move. No different to a trainee ATCO. Trainee ATCOs have no licence; they train on their coach's licence. Yet another nanny state shock horror story to make headlines. Non event.

[axefurabz]

Without more information I would not be so quick to condemn.

Call yourself a Ppruner? :}

[Bomber Harris]

Avman....you summarised the views of most of I think....

I guess the thing that would send the press into a flat spin is if the controller was the Hudson Bay ATCO......shall we start the rumour?

[blackbaron]

That kid must have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night:ok:

[Sgt.Slabber]

BBC News(?) have picked it up - BBC News - New York airport jets 'directed by child' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8547875.stm)

Is the kid in the Union? I agree with most of the comment above: Total supervision - no problem. However, someone is in serious sh1t. They'll be standing on their heads with it up to their ankles - and no tea-breaks :sad:

[Low Flier]

Great idea. A small child in the Tower.

Just like the even better idea a Russian Airbus pilot had of putting a 15 year old boy in the pilot's seat.

Of course, the pilots who accepted clearances from the child knew that it wasn't some kid who had found the PTT tit on a grownup's transceiver.:ugh:

Aaasome jahb. What could possibly go wrong?!:ouch:

[M.Mouse]

I have just one question for all those advocating that the incident was harmless and a good recruiting tool, etc.

Where would you draw the line at a child being allowed to help transmitting instructions to aircraft?

[MathFox]

Mr. Mouse, it was clear that the boy was supervised by one of JFK's regulars who apparently controlled 13 years without certificate... sorry that's another thread ready to intervene. The controller was in control of the situation.

[Checkboard]

Rogue transmissions on ATC frequencies are immediately countermanded by the person who knows it is a rogue transmission. :rolleyes: (i.e. the person who is being impersonated, whether pilot or ATC.)

Am I to judge the voice on the radio each time, and if I don't recognise it aske for a licence number? It was obvious from the context (to any professional) what was going on. None of the professionals involved were worried about it.

Where would I draw the line? If the child was slowing down the process by stumbling on the radio calls. If it wasn't obviously supervised, perhaps. I wouldn't have worried about this incident. :hmm:

[Dont Hang Up]

Where would you draw the line at a child being allowed to help transmitting instructions to aircraft?


Decision making.

And I'm sure even the disapprovers don't believe for a moment the kid decided what to say.

[Max Angle]

You can here one of the pilots say "sure wish I could take my kid to work", a sentiment shared by many and now unfortunately impossible for most airline pilots.

[punk666]

This just shows what hypocrites the yanks are...they are soo tight on aviation with TSA and visa's to train etc etc yet they let a child on the radio telling planes what to do ??????

I think it was pretty cool and have no problem with it as it was supervised but still the yanks have a cheek to criticise other countries security.

[purplehelmet]

glad im not the only one that thinks this is wrong.
how many of you would accept a take off clearance order from a child no questions asked if faced with the same situation?
it smacks of the kid in the cockpit scenario wasnt a problem until a problem arose.
what a differant story this would have made if things had of gone t.u.
this lack of professionalism has no doubt cost daddy his job.

[PAXboy]

If the child was in the tower because the appropriate authority had granted permission = Fine. If just 'got in' = Not Fine.

If the child was in with permission but NOT given permission to make tx - however 'supervised' - then the jump will be high.

The reason that us regular folks don't think it's 'nothing' is because - what other regulations are these people going to think don't apply to them? If they want to take their kids to work, then find a Sunday afternoon GA club.

By the way, make sure that no one with a duplicate name of a 'suspect' comes within 100 miles of our borders. Howsoever it came about, this was VERY stupid.

[Mark in CA]

About 50 years ago when I was a cub scout, a neighbor who was a controller at JFK (then Idylwild) took some of us to the airport to show us around the tower and then the larger facility off the airport grounds that handled a wider area. I still can vividly remember the large, dark room with these huge round radar screens set flat like tables, and the small clear plastic "boats" the controllers used to identify the blips for each plane they were handling. Very low tech compared to today. I can't recall whether any of the kids were allowed to communicate with any aircraft, though in those days I doubt it would have been a big deal. But I can say I was thrilled by the experience.

It's apparent from the recording, that none of the parties involved felt disturbed by this event, and in fact all seemed to enjoy it. As far as where the line would be on this type of activity, I think what transpired here was nowhere near wherever that might be. But I'm sure the anal authorities will probably come down hard on the offending party, if for no other reason than to discourage any future copycats.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

As a lonnnnnng time ATCO, I see two sides to this.

1. The controller should have announced the fact that the kid was going to do a bit of RT, so that the Captains knew what was happening. [Did that bit get missed?]. Is that suitable for a major airport? NO!!

2. It's a dumb thing to do anyway. Period. Who knows what scenario is going to arise in an instant? I know you can instant switch the headset, but that's not the point. At a lightly-loaded airport, perhaps - with pre-briefing of the flight crews.

Sorry for the guy who is going to lose his job. Nice PR, bad skills. Sorry, not much sympathy here. I don't think I would have let that happen in my Tower.

[Avman]

The u-tube transcript is obviously edited (note the short time spacing between transmissions pertaining to the same a/c). I can't confirm it, but I'm sure by the responses from the a/c concerned that they appeared to be aware of the situation (may have been warned on ground frequency). If my memory serves me right I don't believe any landing clearances were given by junior. Those of you still condemning this are New World Retards.

[Avman]

As for the Aeroflot A310 accident, there were two kids. The boy in the left seat and his sister in the right seat! Thus no qualified pilot at all at the controls. That was criminal. Remember folks that hundreds of kids have learned to fly long before being old enough to take their PPL exam. That's because they are under instruction from a qualified pilot in the right (or left) seat.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<Rogue transmissions on ATC frequencies are immediately countermanded by the person who knows it is a rogue transmission. (i.e. the person who is being impersonated, whether pilot or ATC.)>>

An interesting statement. It happened to me and I never heard the person on the ground because he was out of range of our receivers. All I knew was an aircraft suddenly read back a speed reduction which I had not given. It resulted in a loss of separation and I don't believe they located the "pirate controller". Sadly, this sort of thing happens... because anyone can buy an air band transceiver, no questions asked..

[purplehelmet]

avman.
the faa states that only licensed controllers are supposed to communicate with aircraft, this behavior is not acceptable and is not professional.
when i go flying i expect to be flown by professional pilots and controlled by professional atc not by children.
i guess this makes me and the faa a load of new world retards.

[Chronus]

It was 36 years ago on 23rd March 1974 when Aeroflot flight 593, an A310 having performed a few aerobatics, crashed killing all on board. The pilot had allowed his daughter, followed by his 15year old son to sit at the controls. What followed is history and ofcourse sterile cockpits. High time now to clean up the act in the Control Tower.

[eklawyer]

Personally, I think this is just more politically correct BS. I spent many hours in the flight deck with my old man, made many a radio call, all supervised and I have no doubt if anything happened I would have been off the radio and sent back to the cabin by him, like the pro he was.

For gods sake get a life, I'd like nothing more than to take my kid into the flight deck more often, and yes I have done so before and bugger the rules made by hysterical civil service morons who have no idea of the life of the pilot or what it is to command an aircraft.

My kid maybe 8, but sure as hell he handles himself better in the flight deck than our supposedly trained cabin crew who don't know an arse from an elbow and are a danger to themselves and the pax.

Having said that he is 8 and could pull a knife on me any time, tell me to take the plane to FAO Schwartz - or I'm getting it.

He loves making tents, maybe he's Al Queada?, should I call the TSA ?

[purplehelmet]

tkazaz.
ahem think you will find flight 593 accident was 23 march 1994 16 years ago:ok:

[Avman]

tkazaz, they were both at the controls at the same time whilst dad and the f/o were standing talking to the f/e behind them. Big big difference.

purplehelmet, are you sure that trainee controllers are licenced? Better stop flying now!

eklawyer, a refreshing post.

[purplehelmet]

avman.
i dont want to split hairs over this but trainee controllers are trainee controllers not young school kids with a day off to watch daddy work.

[Avman]

I do want to split hairs because, with all due respect, you're full of BS. Perhaps you do indeed qualify as an NWR ;)

And, by the way, the kid was NOT controlling anything. The qualified ATCO next to him was. Get your facts right.

[purplehelmet]

ok if there is no problem with this why dont all atc take their kids to work and let them play at controllers for a day.
if its no problem then why has the faa suspended the guy.

[Global Warrior]

OFF sake.......can someone please show me which terminal has flights back to planet earth????

[MathFox]

purplehelmet, :( we all know the authorities are always right :=:=:=


(For the impaired: the message is intentionally sarcastic towards cynical.)

[Chronus]

Avman thank you it is indeed a big big difference very much like one kid in the visual tower and so long as the other is not in radar at the same time, all will be as they say at the other end of the pond, just dandy or if you prefer swell.

[act700]

We all know that this probably wasn't the most kosher thing to do! We also all know what is (probably) going to happen to the ones involved.

But some of you should really go rub one off!! It's great, I promise, and it will take off a lot of pressure, and release a lot of pent up energy!
Maybe then you'll see the funny side of this!

Btw, this kid was way more intelligible than Paris controllers.

[Checkboard]

It seems the only ones worried by this are the non-pilots!

I think everyone else understands that:
The young lad wasn't controlling anything - he was simply repeating, "parrot fashion" the instrucitons the controller sitting next to him was saying.
The controller was plugged into a dual headset, and there was never a time when they couldn't have overridden the child, had that child suddenly said something "unexpected".
:rolleyes:

Regards the Russian accident - the FO was in the right hand seat, the left seat had the captain's son. (The captain's daughter had been in that seat previously.)

The really criminal bit was that the FO had the seat cranked back, and was too short to reach the controls from that position, and no one was monitoring what the young lad was doing with the controls, or was able to diagnose that the pressure the young boy had applied to the control wheel had dropped the autopilot into control wheel steering.

[His dudeness]

i guess this makes me and the faa a load of new world retards.

Yes it does.

Just forbid flying and having fun, then we are done with it and can turn to other things.

There was NOTHING dangerous taking place. This kid had some fun, so what!

Non event.

My father took me to work often. He was an ATCO, I partly grew up in the tower. I issued my first clearance probably at an age of 5 years.


why has the faa suspended the guy

Because some idiot made it public. They now have to react.
And knowing the usual kneejerk reactions of the US authorities, they won´t stop before the father is out of a job and the kid morally going through hell because he had part in his fathers demise.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<My father took me to work often. He was an ATCO, I partly grew up in the tower. I issued my first clearance probably at an age of 5 years>>

Then your father should have been sacked.... and then hung, drawn and quartered. I took my young son into the tower where I worked and he had specific instructions to sit and watch - from a distance. It's complete, lunatic, totally unprofessional stupidity to let a child on the R/T.

[Avman]

Oh my dear HD, you are so perfect. Go and tell them in the ATC forum where there's a thread running too.

[alfaman]

I wouldn't want to see those involved pilloried for what was effectively a lapse of judgement, we can all fall pray to that - but that is what it was. If nothing else, the advent of Youtube makes anything like this likely to hit the public domain very quickly, with all that entails.
I don't doubt the kid was monitored very carefully & at no time was anyone in any specific danger. But that's not the point: the people paying for those aircraft to be in the air expect more than that.

[Low Flier]

I partly grew up in the tower. I issued my first clearance probably at an age of 5 years.

Words, for once, fail me.

[M.Mouse]

Just forbid flying and having fun, then we are done with it and can turn to other things.

I'm sorry I didn't realise ATC and civil air transport was entertainment.

Complete and utter lack of judgement.

[Doors to Automatic]

"Blue" 171 didn't seem to have an issue and duly contacted Departures! :p

[His dudeness]

HD, "It's complete, lunatic, totally unprofessional stupidity to let a child on the R/T. "

You´d be right if I - or the kid in question here - would have done that regularly, without being watched etcetc. The kid said what his Dad told him.
A few words in a - supposedly - calm traffic situation. Having a - say german - PPL student working the radio in english the first time sounds usually way worse than the lad in that youtube video.
Rest assured my father did allow me that only in special circiumstances. (low traffic, to traffic he knew) Usually I sat there quiet and watched, as your son did.

I'm sorry I didn't realise ATC and civil air transport was entertainment.

And I didn´t realise I said it was. Complete and utter lack of reading capabilities.

Look guys, regardless of what we think and write, this guy will be - to use HDs words - sacked.... and then hung, drawn and quartered. For letting his son see his workplace AND use the radio under his supervision. With other controllers present. With no harm done.
I feel sorry for him.

Now get your pick at me.

[Max Angle]

It's complete, lunatic, totally unprofessional stupidity to let a child on the R/T.

Pretty stupid as it turns out because its going to cost him his job but the kid didn't seem to be having much trouble getting the words out did he? I can't see how safety was compromised, the pilots sounded like they knew exactly what was going on and the dad could have jumped in at any point.

As someone else has said it is quite interesting that the only people who don't seem to have a problem are the pilots (at JFK and on this board). Why I wonder, are we all too laid back or do we just not understand? Does it actually matter in what form the clearance was issued if you know it's authentic? If we were still using lights and verey (very?) pistols to issue take-off clearances would it be a problem if the kid had been allowed to switch on the light or pull the trigger?

It's the reaction that lunatic.

[D O Guerrero]

I wonder how the pax would feel knowing that an 8 year old or whatever was issuing safety critical clearances to their aircraft?
It clearly wasn't dangerous in this instance - just an extremely poor lapse of judgement on behalf of the controller. Not being dangerous doesn't make it right...

[fchan]

Single biggest blow to ATCO pay ever. If a child can do it why do we need expensive ATCOs, especially in Spain? Not what I believe but maybe Jo Public might.

[themidge]

Just seen the report on BBC news, I think it's fantastic. They guy who says it's one of the biggest cock ups ever needs to lighten up a bit.

[Just Browsing]

It's as simple as this, cretins, how do you know the father is listening? How do you know he is ready to jump in to correct a mistake? How do you know he is feeding each transmission to his son? How do you know the father isn't answering the phone? How do you know he isn't reaching over to take a strip from the next desk? How do you know he isn't liaising with the next sector when the child makes a call. How do you know the child is a bright and responsible individual? How do you know he wouldn't transmit whilst his father is distracted? You don't, that's why you don't take instructions from a child.

[Hedge36]

Oh for chrissake... and I thought the FAA were a bunch of ninnies.

[Flight Safety]

Just out of curiosity, what regulations did the ATC violate, if any?

[Hedge36]

FS: Apparently, the one about inciting the riot of public opinion.

The SLF crying foul over this here in the states generally tend to be the same ones who expressed disbelief that a private aircraft owner could fly 20 minutes from his home base (WITHOUT A FLIGHT PLAN, THE HORROR!) before stuffing said aircraft into an office building.

This is a PR debacle more than a safety concern, as Joe Public is becoming increasingly convinced that mad hooligans have pirated away this country's skies.

[criss]

Flight Safety: so what's the point of having licence?

[finfly1]

My reactions on hearing at least one version of the tape.

The kid obviously enjoyed it.

The pilots on the tape definitely enjoyed it.

By no stretch of my imagination can I see how safety or 'security' was compromised. My visual has an adult whispering in the kids ear and standing by with finger on a spare mike button if needed.

Kid was easier to understand than some of the 'real' controllers I've had to work with here and there.

My opinion - total non-issue. If the FAA were the exact opposite of my opinion of the way they actually are, they would suppress a smile and tell him "don't do it again without permission'.

Then they could go focus on stuff like kids who commute from California to fly from Newark in the winter with a pilot who flunked numerous check rides and spent the entire flight blabbing to her about everything except how to recover from a stall.

[Lou Scannon]

As a pilot who operated into JFK for a few years and was actually based there for three with an American outfit the recording really made my day.

I knew many of the controllers from visiting the tower and having the odd pizza in The Owl. They were, and still are... great guys.

Let's lighten up on this. They allowed a young kid to read out a simple sentence to the amusement of the pilots on frequency.

It caused no problems and gave people something to smile about so don't let any suits try to make a big issue out of this.

[Hedge36]

God forbid the boys (and girls) in the tower say "Merry Christmas" in the coming holiday season.

[LEGAL TENDER]

This is a non event that gets blown out of proportion by the media as usual.
The clearance itself issued by the kid, or the frequency change... that's nothing to do with the safety of those actions. The safety comes from the thinking behind the clearance. And that was obviously done by the father. A synthesised voice could issue the clearance for that matter.

The problem is just one of professionalism and "etiquette". Not of safety. Also bear in mind that the father was probably plugged in via a mentor socket which automatically overrides the "trainee" one, if anything went wrong.

You could compare this to turning up at Borders and Immigration. A kid takes your passport, passes it on to his dad standing behind, he checks it and gives it back to the kid who hands it to you and lets you through.
Not a safety issue, but most people still would find this unprofessional.
Same kind of thing here at JFK I would say.

[Checkboard]

It's as simple as this, cretins, how do you know the father is listening? How do you know he is ready to jump in to correct a mistake? How do you know he is feeding each transmission to his son? How do you know the father isn't answering the phone? How do you know he isn't reaching over to take a strip from the next desk? How do you know he isn't liaising with the next sector when the child makes a call. How do you know the child is a bright and responsible individual? How do you know he wouldn't transmit whilst his father is distracted? You don't, that's why you don't take instructions from a child.

"cretins" ?? Really ?? With a logon ID of "Just Browsing", I'm thinking you know nothing of the industry. Nothing of how the ATC interface works, nothing of how the ATC headsets plug in ...

How do I know? If you have to ask - you only show that you DON'T know, and thus aren't qualified to comment.

[chode1984]

This was great! I really feel sorry for the controller if he loses his job over this. Like others have said, he was in control the whole time and at no point was there a safety issue.

May have even made the day of a pilot having an otherwise sh*t day.

Getting so sick of damn do-gooders in this world. Be it the ones who feel its their duty to ban "offensive" ads on behalf of the rest of us by picking up their typewriters and typing a "Dear Sir", or the old farts on here getting their knickers in a knot over a bit of harmless fun. :ugh:

[Artificial Horizon]

Wow, talk about over-reaction, I can't see any problem with this at all. He was supervised, it was obviously quiet and I bet he got a real buzz out of it. Plus in my experience when the 'normal' ATC chatter breaks down every now and then often someone will make a 'whitty' comment over the radio that gives everyone a bit of a break and a giggle. We need it every now and then!! I have had cabin crew on the flight deck and allowed them to make radio transmissions if they really want too, one ATC at Heathrow got quite a shock when his 'girlfriend' replied to a frequency change instruction, it made his day, made her day and no harm done. Everyone needs to chill out.:ugh:

[Avman]

Just Browsing, you show a remarkable lack of aviation knowledge. So much so that I seriously doubt you hold an ATPL and that you are an A319 captain. Well, at least not here on Earth.

[WhatsaLizad?]

avman.
the faa states that only licensed controllers are supposed to communicate with aircraft, this behavior is not acceptable and is not professional.
when i go flying i expect to be flown by professional pilots and controlled by professional atc not by children.
i guess this makes me and the faa a load of new world retards.


Not the FAA, just the likes of you mate.

None of those flights were controlled or flown by children. The kid actually did a better job than many worthless affirmative action trainees that were passed off as "qualified" and worked without supervision.

This is a perfect case where outsiders should be told to F$%* O#$, stay out of our world.

[anengineer]

Initially I felt that it was an overreaction to a non-event, but as someone else said earlier in the thread, 'how would you feel if this was the guy's spouse / brother / friend instead of his child ?' That's a good point.

Whilst I sympathise with the ATCO who is going to get the bullet, I have to say that he brought it on himself. You have to have rules, and rules have to be followed - moreso in safety critical areas like aviation. They can't do anything but come down hard on him. If the incident passed without repercussion, it's logical to assume it would be repeated - if not by this particular chap. Allowing anyone other than qualified ATCOs to issue instructions to aircrews cannot be tolerated - not because of the risk, or lack of, in individual scenarios, but because of the need for a clearly defined policy that everyone understands and no-one breaks.

I believe this chap isn't guilty of putting any flights at risk by allowing his kid on the RT, but he is guilty of being an idiot for thinking nobody would raise an eyebrow.

[blambert]

The problem is that even if the kid had started joking around over the radio, the pilot is forced to do exactly what he says. Besides, it's not like the father who was sitting right next to him could do anything at all. What was he gonna do? Overpower a child? That's impossible. He couldn't have radioed the plane again either, since the signal terminates after the pilot's gotten his orders, so basically all the passengers survived solely because the kid didn't say anything stupid like "crash into a building".

[Checkboard]

They can't do anything but come down hard on him. If the incident passed without repercussion, it's logical to assume it would be repeated - if not by this particular chap.

Rubbish.

You don't trash an expensively licensed person for something like this. Well YOU might (which is why you aren't a manager! :rolleyes: )

The investigation will (in all probability) read "Operator suspended during investigation. (Normal, and good safety practice as the person under investigation is always under stress. Suspending them from duty removes the organisation from suspicion of forcing a controller to operate under stress, and makes them available for interview without delaying the investigation.) Investigation determined operations never occurred without a licensed ATC operator online. An unlicensed person made five radio transmissions, while supervised, which was in accordance with training practices. (although this instance was outside of the training programme, and was unauthorised in this instance.) Operators have been briefed on correct practices. Case Closed. Operators re-instated."

The problem is that even if the kid had started joking around over the radio, the pilot is forced to do exactly what he says.

http://www.abfnet.com/forum/images/smilies/rofl3.gif

... if any proof were needed that trolls are on PPRuNe! ..

[Married a Canadian]

He couldn't have radioed the plane again either, since the signal terminates after the pilot's gotten his orders

Love it!..the orders were to contact the next sector so no wonder he can't radio the plane again. Nice hysterical reaction though. I am hazarding a guess that not many pilots would "crash into a building" if you told them to. Given my experience in YYZ the response would be "Sorry could you say that again I didn't catch it!"

[wozzo]

... if any proof were needed that trolls are on PPRuNe! ..

I think blambert wanted to be ironic/funny.

[Landroger]

so basically all the passengers survived solely because the kid didn't say anything stupid like "crash into a building".

Some people would drink sulphuric acid, if it came in a gin bottle. :rolleyes:

Roger.

[Hedge36]

...the pilot is forced to do exactly what he says.

Please, for the love of all things I hold dear, tell me you've never been and have no intention of ever being in control of an aircraft.

[fury]

I hope they give him a medal. We're humans, not machines.

[birrddog]

If there is an online petition to save this guys job, let me know and I'm in.

It was harmless (with the exception of dads career) and a little levity goes a long way in relieving stress of operating in busy airspace.

How many of us set the auto-pilot course on aircraft as kids when you could still visit the cockpit.... Shock horror.

[AeroMad]

I'll be more than happy to sign that petition :ok:
The controller was very brave letting his son do some R/T in the tower, it's just a shame we're in a world full of health & safety, and where common sense is a thing of the past :ugh:

Regards
AeroMad

[etrang]

The danger in this case wasn't the instructions given, it was the fact that the controller decided that the rules didn't apply to him. He will now find out the hard way that they do.

[Robert Campbell]

Sorry fellas --

You must all be pooped! Anybody for a cuppa coffee?

Robert's wife. Ex TWA 707

[Check Airman]

The kid actually did a better job than many worthless affirmative action trainees that were passed off as "qualified" and worked without supervision.

I take it you have some sort of problem with "affirmative action trainees"? Please be reminded that all controllers are held to the same standard, and that the 3 worst controllers I have to deal with regularly are certainly not the ones hired under affirmative action.

On to the matter at hand though...

People crying bloody murder need to get a life and cultivate some common sense. Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4s2irdJpEk)'s an edited version of the "incident":

JBU171, cleared for takeoff
JBU171 contact departure
403, cleared for takeoff
AMX403, contact departure, adios
Contact departure, adios amigos

The child only made 5 transmissions that consisted of simple takeoff clearances and instructions to contact the pre-assigned departure frequency. Nohing needed to be said about wake turbulence etc. His father made all the other more involved and difficult transmissions. No harm, no foul, and the pilots certainly enjoyed it. Give him a slap on the wrist and send him back to work.

[islandhopper]

Fair play to the man for letting his son have a go -people have to get a life , it was safe and fun.
It's bad enough when you can't let anyone in the flightdeck this industry used to be FUN but not anymore cause of all the do gooders:ugh:

[Dushan]

I spent many a summer days at the tower with my uncle who was an ATC. Admittedly I never made any transmissions, but if I could speak English then, they probably would have let me.

And after we walked onto the apron and walked around the parked aircraft:eek:
Thursdays was the best, when the PanAm 707 came:ok:

[6000PIC]

I`m siding with the controller on this one.
" How to make your kid popular at school , and still get time off to go fishing with him." Well done Dad... At least it`ll make for good humour in the future.

For all the idiots that think safety was compromised at ANY time , you obviously haven`t a clue what you`re talking about , and therefore your opinion doesn`t count. So much taken out of context ... as usual.

[Jerricho]

it was the fact that the controller decided that the rules didn't apply to him

Bingo.

As a kid, the old man (now retired ATC) had Plazbot and I in the tower to watch what was going on countless times (airshows were the best). We loved it.........but were told strictly not to touch a damn thing (especially that big red button with "CCC" on it that we knew if something crashed, you would press it and all them green fire trucks would come out to play).

People are asking where's the foul? Do you need an Air/Ground Radio Operators certificate in the US? Sheeet, when I moved here to Canada as a licenced controller I couldn't talk to traffic until I sat the Certificate exam.

[ATCO1962]

It's all very sad. If the kid had wanted to be an ATCO before, I doubt if he wants to be one now:sad:

[ricardian]

Perhaps the controller was following an ancient tradition (http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/4750862.Boy_Bishop_chosen/)... :8

[Bomber Harris]

ricardian, this artical is shocking!!!! The bishops son will be dressed as a bishop and say prayers and give blessings. If I was one of the unlucky parishoners I could have a dodgey blessing which mean that I may not get to heaven, well not all the way at least. He will say the words his father should say in the prayers....but that's not right. If the bishops lips don't say them, well, it's not right, i'm not sure why and i'm stuggling to argue the point but i'm sure it's wrong. Lets suspend the bishop, abuse his son and put the video on the internet. Or maybe we should ask the FAA what to do?

[JanetFlight]

Wow...Tanx God All of us are living in a World where no big problems occur each day such as murder, rapes, abuse, violation, war, famine, corruption, sex traffic, child exploitation, etc, and we and Media can only worry about a "Stupid" controller who let her "Pseudo-Terrorist" kid doing some verrryyyyyy dangerous and misguided infos to those danger-unaware crews...!!!:ugh:
Ok...now serious...can anyone really enlighten me the potential danger of this situation...???
Kid AFAIK only repeated some simple things, not even orders but simple freq.changes or similar, or a mere CFTO, and for sure with attentious Dad by his shoulder...So, whats the real deal here..???:zzz:
Im in for a petition to save his **s if necessary, guys...:ok:

[Loose rivets]

I think someone back there missed the irony.:rolleyes:


The problem is that even if the kid had started joking around over the radio, the pilot is forced to do exactly what he says.


"Simon says, take off and climb into the sky. Simon says, Turn left." Tee hee. "Simon says, Turn right." Giggle "Simon says, Touch your nose." Tee hee. "Stand on your head. Hahahahaha Gotcha!"



While flying as a F.O on a shiny new jet, I had the future fleet managers 9 year old in the left...He was quite good really...better than the then fleet manager's 'secretary', an almost mute bloke supposedly with an SCPL.

While decending into Munich with the training skipper down the back, the bloke waits until I'm looking up at a failing air system and pulls against the auto pilot to slow the decent. Spring detector kicks the AP out and he lets go. The straps hit my shoulders. Nothing but green fields filling the windscreen. Level at 2,000 feet after about 2g pull. The most incredible thing is that the skipper didn't come forward to see what was happening.

Bring in the kids, they do a better job.

[Ditchdigger]

...it was the fact that the controller decided that the rules didn't apply to him.


Any controller that's ever said "good day" on frequency has decided that the rules don't apply to them either. At least by US standards, that's a non-essential transmission, and therefore "against the rules". Let's fire them all.


You don't trash an expensively licensed person for something like this. Well YOU might (which is why you aren't a manager! :rolleyes:


You haven't dealt with FAA management much, have you?

[Robin Pilot]

Blambert - don't worry most of us got it. :ok:This sarcasm business is lost on some.

To anyone who didn't get Blambert's post - please stay away from anything that even remotely resembles heavy machinery - especially if it flies.

[etrang]

Any controller that's ever said "good day" on frequency has decided that the rules don't apply to them either. At least by US standards, that's a non-essential transmission, and therefore "against the rules". Let's fire them all.

The saying "Rules are for the guidance of wise men, and the blind obedience of fools" is rather popular amongst PPruners. Fine, but if you do decide to ignore the rules then you should expect to take responsibility for your actions. This controller will soon be looking for a new job - I hope they feel it was worth it.

[cwatters]

It didn't sound dangerous to me. Child was clearly supervised.

Last night the BBC reported that both the controller and his supervisor had been suspended. Would there also have been a security man on the door or someone issuing passes or can anyone take guests in?

[10W]

I don't believe there was any risk to safety whatsoever, but in today's world of anal security + health + safety rules, it was ill advised and unprofessional.

Personally, when I attended my local airport as a 15 year old kid for a week of 'work experience', I was allowed to make similar transmissions under guidance and following a 'script' from the controller looking after me. Some might say they were the best transmissions I have ever made ;)

[max nightstop]

I'm afraid this incident is going to lead to the end of aviation as we know it.

Pilots are happily following the instructions of a small child on the radio, what reaction would they have to someone "hijacking" the frequency and giving all sorts of plausible instructions, all designed to make them crash into each other? There is no way to verify the authenticity of ATC instructions, the potential consequences are horrific.

The only solution as I see it is to get the instructions written down, with an authentication code, sealed in an envelope and then couriered to the aircraft. The pilots check the authentication code and then comply with the instruction. It's going to be tough, but what other choice do we have?

I'm sure that the same company that provide the security search staff could provide a large stock of intelligent, reasonable, reliable couriers.

Max

[anotherthing]

Avman

I've read this thread and seen several posts of your where you tell people to get their facts right and to get real.

Maybe you should take a note of your own advice, as in your very first post you write: Trainee ATCOs have no licenceWrong.

May I suggest you get your facts right, irespective of whatever your views are on the subject of the original post.

[look you]

Why the big fuss? This happens all the time in France. I have long ago lost count of the number of times I have been controlled by a young french schoolgirl, pig tails, short skirt, sweet innocent voice.....never heard any complaints about them.

[helimutt]

We all know that there will be a controller sat plugged in right next to the kid. Not as if the controller just says 'can you just take care of these couple planes for me whilst I go take a p**s?'
Lighten up.

Courier the instructions to aircraft? You on drugs? Jeez. Any pilot who just accepts a clearance without giving it just a bit of thought might not be the best person to be flying an aircraft.

IMHO, this is blown out of proportion. We get trainee controllers who come on and give us instructions, and the guy training them jumps straight in when the trainee makes a mistake. We know he's made a mistake, but the Trainer isn't just gonna sit back and see what happens is he??
Actually, maybe some kids might be better than some of the controllers we have! :E;)

[anengineer]

They can't do anything but come down hard on him. If the incident passed without repercussion, it's logical to assume it would be repeated - if not by this particular chap.
Rubbish.

You don't trash an expensively licensed person for something like this. Well YOU might (which is why you aren't a manager! )

First, it's not rubbish. If you could drive at 120mph, get pulled over by the police, then let off, you'd do it again. Human nature.

Second, you falling for blambert's obviously sarcastic post speaks volumes. :rolleyes:

I'm not saying he should get fired. I never did. I'm presenting a counter-viewpoint to all those trying to say he should suffer no consequences etc.
As someone else said just now, it's all about the fact that this guy felt the rules didn't apply to him. In isolation, I don't really see how his actions were dangerous in a practical sense. They were dangerous however in the 'setting a precedent' sense. All those advocating no repercussions for allowing a child in the arena would undoubtedly have been saying the same thing about the Aeroflot flight - if it wasn't for the minor hiccup that it crashed.

[Basil]

I believe max nightstop was demonstrating facetious irony. :)

[Mr A Tis]

Well, it's the first time I've been able to understand US ATC transmissions. Keep him on.

Everyone knew what was going on & the situation was always under control. Gross media hysteria (as usual).

Nobody is allowed to use their professional judgement these days about anything whatsoever.
Sorry mate, the rules say can't....not allowed..... that's all you ever hear.:zzz::zzz:

[Jetjock330]

When learning to fly for 10 years below the age of 17, back then, meant talking on the radio in the circuit pattern without a student license or a radio license, but under the guidance of my flying instructor. Only after the 17th birthday was I sent solo and again without a radio license, but now holding a student pilot license at least. The radio license was required for the PPL which came a little later. It is therefore possible to talk on the R/T without a license, but for obvious reasons.

This JFK matter is no big deal, although quite laugh at least, but where do you draw a line as to when someone can speak on the radio, as you can do it at 15 or 16 when learning to fly? And that is without a student pilot license, in fact still too young for any license.

No doubt there was no loss of control at all. As an experienced JFK heavy driver now, the kid was actually quite clear and calm on the radio, which is much more pleasant from the normal fast slang that is said on that frequency.

"Awesome job dude":}

[Avman]

Anotherthing, I was generalising. it was certainly the case (and in many countries, continues to be the case) for more years than I care to remember. It may well be that in these more recent & bureaucratic times some authorities have begun to introduce a form of training licence or certificate. Bottom line though is that the coach takes full responsibility for the trainees action. The kid was not controlling for God's sake. He said a few (prompted) words on the r/t, that's all. There was never a safety issue. The true culprit in all this are todays live ATC streams available to the public on the web and the advent of U-tube. What is the legality of recording an ATC transmission and airing it on a public site? No one has questioned that.

[Jetjock330]

I read a bit more, the ATC let the little sister age 9 chat the next day. (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/03/03/2010-03-03_jfk_air_traffic_controller_let_not_one_but_two_kids_direc t_planes_officials.html)

An air-traffic controller put passengers in double jeopardy by letting his 9-year-old son direct planes at JFK - and repeating the stunt with the boy's twin sister the next day, probers said Wednesday night.
Controller Glenn Duffy was already in trouble for allowing his son to give instructions to pilots preparing for take-off on Feb. 16.
The Federal Aviation Administration (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Federal+Aviation+Administration) then discovered Duffy (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Glenn+Duffy) pulled the boneheaded move again with the boy's twin sister, sources said.
The 48-year-old Long Island (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Long+Island) dad and a supervisor have been suspended and will likely lose their jobs, sources told the Daily News.
"This lapse in judgment not only violated FAA's own policies, but common sense standards for professional conduct," FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Randy+Babbitt) said.
"These kinds of distractions are totally unacceptable."
Duffy apparently brought his pint-sized wingmen to work during the recent winter school break - and then let them chat with pilots at the nation's sixth-busiest airport.
About 8 p.m. on Feb. 16, his elementary-school-aged son spoke five times to pilots operating four separate planes.
"JetBlue (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/JetBlue+Airways+Corporation) 171 cleared for takeoff," the boy says in his first call.
His dad then gives more detailed instructions to the pilot and announces: "Here's 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 replies: "Over to departure JetBlue 171, awesome job!"
Regulators weren't so amused. They said the move endangered hundreds of passengers.
The FAA said the supervisor on duty on Feb. 17 - when Duffy brought another child to work - has not been disciplined. The investigation is ongoing.
No one was home last night at Duffy's home on a private road in Stony Brook, L.I. He could not be reached for comment.
News that Duffy - a former president of the Newark (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Newark+%28New+Jersey%29) chapter of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/National+Air+Traffic+Controllers+Association) - was on the verge of getting fired was met by disgust by retired pilots.
"I can assure you that at no time was the safety of the public compromised," said Ross (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Ross) (Rusty) Aimer, 65, a former United Airlines (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/UAL+Corporation) pilot with nearly 40 years of experience.
"This was really a non-event. It's almost like putting your child in your lap in an empty parking lot for the first time and letting him hold onto the wheel. The air-traffic controller was in command the whole time."
Travelers at Kennedy Airport (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/John+F.+Kennedy+International+Airport) offered a vastly different view.
"Even if there were professionals around, it seems a bit irresponsible," said Maura Kilfeather (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Maura+Kilfeather), a 26-year-old flight attendant. "I could see him coming to observe, but a kid talking to pilots? Anything could go wrong."

Read more: JFK air traffic controller let not one, but TWO kids direct planes: officials (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/03/03/2010-03-03_jfk_air_traffic_controller_let_not_one_but_two_kids_direc t_planes_officials.html#ixzz0hCR3k5f2)
JFK air traffic controller let not one, but TWO kids direct planes: officials (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/03/03/2010-03-03_jfk_air_traffic_controller_let_not_one_but_two_kids_direc t_planes_officials.html)

[oceancrosser]

This lapse in judgment not only violated FAA's own policies, but common sense standards for professional conduct," FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt said.

US authorities, not least the FAA threw common sense out of aviation a long time ago. Talk about throwing stones from a glasshouse.

I find the number of idiots writing on this thread appalling. Can the SLF know-it-alls stay away please?

[Checkboard]

OK, I've changed my mind on this one. Now that a "26 year old flight attendant" has the last word over a pilot with 40 years experience. :hmm:

[anengineer]

Can the SLF know-it-alls stay away please?

Jeez... the arrogance is beyond belief !

Do you really think that only pilots are qualified to comment on this matter ?
It's nothing technical and requires no knowledge of ATC procedures. It's a matter of principle and of observing regulations put there for a reason.

Oh, forgive me, I forgot my place there for a moment. I'm not entitled to have an opinion, being just a lowly serf. Forgive my impudence Lord Oceancrosser.

From my perspective, I find the number of pilots (thankfully not all !) who are happy to endorse regulation infringement (however minor), 'appalling'. You either play by the rules or you don't. There is no 'bending of'.

[HS125]

Ok, So in the eyes of the bed wetters on here, at 12 when I began taking flying lessons and had control of the aircraft sat next to an instructor who could intervene must also have been dangerous and irresponsible etc, as where the occasions when I used the radio during the course of such flights.

In the event that you hold that view, keep it to yourself. I shall not lower myself by responding to the pot-shots.

The real problem we have here is that this industry is being destroyed in a two pronged attack:

On the one hand we have the kind of knee-jerk reaction that leads to totally pointless regulation for regulations sake. That at best removes our discretion as professionals and at worst makes it impossible to operate.

On the other hand we get the kind of reaction like this, and cockpit doors where we'll end up with the industry in the proverbial scrapyard because we failed to inspire a generation.

One thing thats been asked for and not provided here is the letter of the law that has been broken. Given that I am a Pilot and not a Controller, I'm not overly familiar which is why I trust their judgement as professionals in their own right.

Bring on that petition.

[Ditchdigger]

An air-traffic controller put passengers in double jeopardy by letting his 9-year-old son direct planes at JFK - and repeating the stunt with the boy's twin sister the next day, probers said Wednesday night.
Controller Glenn Duffy was already in trouble for allowing his son to give instructions to pilots preparing for take-off on Feb. 16.

I have a problem with the phraseology there. (Besides the presumption that passengers were in jeopardy.) He might've already made the first error that got him in trouble, but he wasn't "in trouble" until the story broke two weeks later.

The saying "Rules are for the guidance of wise men, and the blind obedience of fools" is rather popular amongst PPruners.

Wow. Great saying, and it really cuts to the heart of the issue of the "rules violation" aspect of this. (I don't spend a whole lot of time here, but I'm married to an ATCO, and these kind of stories always draw me here to see what the professional aviation community is thinking.)

Fine, but if you do decide to ignore the rules then you should expect to take responsibility for your actions. This controller will soon be looking for a new job - I hope they feel it was worth it.

I assume you mean that you should expect to take responsibility for the consequences arising from your actions. I don't disagree, but the fact of the matter is that, had the media not gotten wind of this, the consequences would have been nil. Controller Duffy may well lose his job, but that will come as a result of the media frenzy over this, and nothing else.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Please guys, lighten up and grow up. Donkeys years ago there used to be a TV series here called Jim'll Fix-It. Anybody could write in with a dream they'd like to fulfil. One was a 12 year old girl who wanted to be a controller. They showed it, prime time on a Saturday night as she "controlled" Speedbird 1 (Concorde) from it's arrival in London airspace until the hand off to the approach director.

All this is just a typical, media hyped over-reaction.

[anotherthing]

The biggest issue to me is tha fact that a qualified controller judged it acceptable to break FAA, and therefore federal laws, by allowing an unlicensed person to transmit on RT.

RT which is recorded and stored as a legal requirement (as any ATCO or pilot knows).

So not only was it ill advised, but very poor judgement from someone who has to use judgment every day.

Not exactly professional nor clever, irrespective of your individual thoughts on the rules. Sounds like he was asking for trouble.

[blista1989]

Hi all,
I'm an Undergraduate Aero Engineer so apologies for this possibly obvious question:

When training to become an ATC what qualifications are required before you first transmit "live" on a ground/tower etc. frequency?

The reason I ask is that in the UK you must have a licence to operate almost any VHF equipment (for example Marine Band or Amateur Radio) however for training purposes you may, under the supervision of someone who holds a current valid qualification (not necessarily an instructors certificate) make transmissions of 3-5 sentences.
Is this true in the world of ATC of do you have to have a "trainee qualification" before you utter a syllable?

Cheers
Alistair

[4X-AXG]

Wow, never would have thought an event like this would trigger so many (and so highly emotional) reactions ;)

I personally think people should not be so surprised by this..this kind of stuff happens every day.

A few years ago I was an assistant ATCO at ATC The Netherlands (without an R/T license) when the ATCO next to me went for a smoke and casually asked me if I could clear the Easyjet that was bound to make contact to climb to FL240. So when the pilot called ATC I simply cleared him to FL240 and that was it! I was nervous like hell but it was a great experience.

I really hope this guy does not lose his job over this..he should maybe be reprimanded or something like that, but to be fired of this would not benefit anyone.

[Dont Hang Up]

You either play by the rules or you don't. There is no 'bending of'.


If we have to go down the "zero tolerance" route then I suggest that anyone who has ever broken a motor vehicle speed limit has placed lives in greater danger than this controller did on this day.

"Zero tolerance" is a dangerous weapon in a supposedly free society. I know it is fashionable these days, as it is seen as tough and uncompromising. In reality it should be reserved for situations where law and order has completly broken down (the situation for which the phrase was originally coined). In all other situations, response should be measured, considered, and fair. All qualitiies that require personal judgement and so these days seem in very short supply.

[d747]

Ok I am not a pilot and nor do I work in the industry.
Years ago I use to go to work with my dad during school holidays and I am now doing a similar job to him.
I really hope this kid enjoyed his time in ATC and if he liked it what better motivation to go back to school and get good grades and hopefully follow in his farthers footsteps.
I really feel for kids today, in my industry no kids are allowed to visit us on work experince becasue of stupid H&S rules.

If this poor farther looses his job I will be the first to put cash into a collection for him.

Please can some common sence be brought back to our poor world.

I can see both sides of the argument but common sence must shine thru here.

[Dream Land]

Before I began xmitting, I had an FAA issued CTO certificate, looked similar to a pilot certificate, received after general ATC training and testing.

[Tigger_Too]

A long time ago, we were encouraged to pay familiarization visits to the tower from time to time. Some 'pilot style' controlling was the norm, and doing the occasional PAR talkdown was positively encouraged. The only proviso was that the qualified controller would ask the pilot whether he was prepared to accept a talkdown from a 'controller' under training.

Illegal? Probably.

Safe? Yes.

In turn, we used to occassionally take the controllers flying. Sometimes, heavens above, we even let them handle the controls.

So where do we draw the line? I much prefer the common sense approach that I grew up with then to the blame culture that we live with now. People used to exercise their judgement, and they were then prepared (and expected) to justify their actions. Do we live in a safer world today? I don't think so.

[S76Heavy]

Zero tolerance is all about protecting managements a**e, nothing else.

It does zilch for true safety, it just provides the company litterally with a "get out of jail"card by allowing them to point the finger at the employee who must have broken one of the thousands of rules and regulations issued by management for the incident/accident to occur.

We seem to have it all backwards nowadays; something is seen as dangerous when an arbitrary rule gets broken, because professionals are no longer trusted to use training, experience and good judgement to arrive at decisions. Everything nowadays had to be according to a set format, so no thinking and especially no critcal thinking is either required nor allowed.

:yuk:

There was no danger, the situations were fully under control. But to save face a few experienced professionals will get into trouble because nobody dares to explain to the public that real people take real decisions that affect real lives, hundreds and thousands of times a day, to make everything happen in this world. And sometimes there are different ways of doing things that are equally safe but simply different.

Where do I sign the petition?

[justpics]

I am guessing most of those who say it was just harmless fun have kids of their own who they want/need to babysit while at work in cockpit or in tower. Or those who fondly remember when their dads took them to work.

It is understandable one wants to defend his own position but it still does not make it right :)

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<Please can some common sence be brought back to our poor world.>

D747. I presume you mean "sense"? It is NOT commonsense to play with peoples' lives. Air Traffic Controllers are trained and licenced to an extremely high standard, just like pilots.

Heaven forbid that you should ever need major surgery, but would you have the same attitude if a surgeon took his child to work and let him get on with using the knives and forks? Sometime ago a pilot let his son fly the airliner.. with resulting considerable loss of life.

There are a lot of fools on this thread. I just hope that none of them, be they pilots or controllers, ever, ever have my life in their hands...

[Dimitris]

If they are suspending the ATCO, why not suspend the pilots of JetBlue that flowed the instructions ('cleared for takeoff') knowing that it was not the ATCO speaking. If this is an 'incident' that worth the job of the ATCO it sure worth the job of the Jetblue pilots. It is obvious the pilots knew they were not talking to the ATCO.

What do you think?

[M.Mouse]

Heathrow Director brings me back to my point I made a few pages back, where do you draw the line?

Can all controllers bring their offspring to work? How much controlling, under supervision of course, should they be allowed to do? Can I let my child fly in my co-pilot's seat, only while it is quiet of course? If the weather is nice can I let him land the aeroplane using autoland, after all I am there to supervise should things get difficult?

Can a barrister allow his/her child to ask a witness the simple questions? Or a surgeon allow their child to do the simple stitches after an operation?

Was the whole point of what the controller did to massage the controller's ego and demonstrate how brilliant his offspring are? What was the objective?

Dangerous, probably not. Complete lack of commonsense, I think so. Lack of sound judgement, I think so again.

If he is told that all is fine, it was a great idea and ignore the storm of protest can we then look forward to a rash of similar incidents, until of course something dangerous happens and then we can all wring our hands in horror that such a thing was ever allowed in the first place.

[TrafficPilot]

Wow. Lighten up again Heathrow Director. Remember even you were young once:)

I used to listen to you (Bren?) on 120.4 when I was an 11 year old boy sitting in my parents garden in Fulham watching aircraft approaching overhead our house on the way into Heathrow. You and your colleagues were one of the inspirations for me wanting to enter aviation as a career which I have now done.

I have had Pilot friends of mine saying hello to me over the radio after departure from Heathrow (luckily not on 120.4..I hate to think what would have happened!). I've also heard overflying airline captains allowing their kids to make calls over the RT to ATC. OK - it isn't totally professional but it WAS a bit of fun. It made everyone involved smile, no one got hurt and it was most likely a memory that stuck in those kids heads for a long time. It may have even encouraged them to want a career in aviation when they were older!

I really hope this guy just gets a ticking off and nothing more serious.

[LEGAL TENDER]

Heaven forbid that you should ever need major surgery, but would you have the same attitude if a surgeon took his child to work and let him get on with using the knives and forks? Sometime ago a pilot let his son fly the airliner.. with resulting considerable loss of life.

HD your analogies are completely out of context.
To compare the actions of the JKF ATCO to those of a surgeon who lets his son operate... It's like implying that the JFK child was operating unsupervised making his own decisions.
If you really want to draw an analogy, you could maybe say that the surgeon's child was passing the tools to his father, who would then operate. Slightly different isn't it?

And also.. the analogy of the Aeroflot accident. That is one case of God knows how many thousand times a visitor to the flight deck turned the heading bug, entered a frequency in the comms box, or even the cabin crew sitting in while the Captain's gone to the loo, tapping into the FMC to check the latest estimate for arrival.
Sure. If the kids hadn't been in the cockpit that accident would have never happened, but it's not the child's fault if it happened. It's down to complacency and poor supervision. Every training/mentoring/instructing session is a potential risk. That's why there are specific instructor ratings.

Analogies are a powerful way to put a point across, but I think you are not using yours in a correct way.

[protectthehornet]

it obviously was a "slow" time at JFK

the actual controller was right there, prompting the kid

the clearances made sense so the airline pilots didn't make a big deal about it (other false transmissions, like near Miami were obviously non standard clearances)

The FAA is so short handed on controllers that they shouldn't fire the controller or his boss. But they must promise to never do it again.

I can only imagine that things like this have happened before.

The FAA is guilty of many more sins than this incident.

[50west]

good grief!

can someone explain to me exactly who has been harmed or could have been harmed?

A couple of well supervised transmissions during a V quiet time at JFK when all in the loop knew exactly what was going on.

The pilots knew it was the controller's child and they were not issued with airways or taxy instructions.

My understanding is that the a/c was lined up and got the intsructions to trundle down an empty runway and take off into an empty departure cone.

really scary

[infrequentflyer789]

HD your analogies are completely out of context.
To compare the actions of the JKF ATCO to those of a surgeon who lets his son operate... It's like implying that the JFK child was operating unsupervised making his own decisions.


It is precisely like the surgeon handing the kid the scalpel and saying "cut here, this long this deep". The surgeon is making the decision and supervising and standing ready to attempt to patch things up when the kid nicks a major artery.

I still don't want to be the patient, and yes I would expect the surgeon to be struck off.


If you really want to draw an analogy, you could maybe say that the surgeon's child was passing the tools to his father, who would then operate. Slightly different isn't it?


Different (see above), but I still wouldn't expect it to happen.


Every training/mentoring/instructing session is a potential risk. That's why there are specific instructor ratings.


And sims. And medical training for years before you get anywhere near cutting into living breathing humans, even under instruction.


KLM: "we're now at takeoff"
Tower: "ok"

What could possibly go wrong...

[d747]

Heathrow Director you need to take a chill pill.
The controller was silly but no lives at risk.
The flight you talk about was in my opinion dangerous as both kids were at the controls and as a passinger I would be unhappy about this. As others have said pre 9/11 flight deck visits were common place and even allowed kids to sit in the pilots seat.
I even think from hearing the audio the pilots found this ammunsing and probably made a dull day just a little more fun.
If you are to liken this to surgery it would bit like the kid passing the surgeon the knife to do the operation.....

When I had my first flying lesson I found ATC to be very difficult to understand this young chap was fairly clear. I also would like to maybe visit the tower at my local airport but I guess that too will be banned.

[lomapaseo]

I am amazed at the amount of emotion on this thread from all sides. It must be the judgemental internet that brings this out :confused:

I suppose that there can be some black and white about rules. But there should never be black and white about punishments (corrective actions)

If there were no consequences to rules then there would be no need to follow rules.

But give a thought to the negative and positive attitudes of applying punishment or reinforcement of the need to follow rules.

Assuming the rule breaker can provide value to the community then the object is to provide corrective action that salvages the good while reinforcing the need not to overcome this with even more bad.

That process should not be left to the public internet to decide since emotion without facts can not weigh the balances.

So the majority can talk about the rule breaking facts but add little to the weighing of consequences on either side of the argument.

[barrelroll4separation]

Having listened to the tape, I must admit I have heard much worse, and dangerous for that matter, RT over continental Europe! Do you hear the news agencies picking up on that?! By the way I am not condoning the actions of the controller, which no matter how well intentioned, probably not the best decision - hope everything turns out ok for him though as I have the highest respect for any of the controllers working the busiest airspace in the world.

[DC10RealMan]

I think that the replies to this thread show that there may be quite a few egos at stake here. I would suggest that the responsible individuals both airline pilots and atc staff saw no threat to safety and were quite happy with the situation, however commonsense may not be the deciding factor particularly with the press involved.

[M.Mouse]

WIll all those saying it was fine please also answer the question where do you draw the line and how?

Thanks.

[Checkboard]

Mr Mouse, no one is saying "Hey! This is fine! Let's have every controller bring their kids in to talk on the radio!"

There are RULES and rules. This was a broken rule - deserves a slap on the wrist, not the destruction of a career. :rolleyes:

[EGLLBenji]

Not sure whether this is the same event being discussed?!!

Login | LiveATC.net (http://www.liveatc.net/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7254.0;attach=3389)

[M.Mouse]

.....not the destruction of a career.

I didn't realise that was what had happened.

[Avman]

M Mouse, I understand your point. But that question always existed. The difference between this generation and past generations is that common sense and discretion were applied then, whereas now we live in a nanny generation where we have to have warnings on peanut packets that they may contain peanuts! We also got away with a great deal more because there wasn't the kind of media circus that we have now. I too do not suggest all controllers bring their kids to work and use the r/t. I just don't think that the guy should be sacked. He should receive a slap on the wrist and an "official" warning. End of story.

[JW411]

How in God's name do we get youngsters interested in aviation nowadays?

When I was a kid, my local airport had a public enclosure and we could get within 100 feet of airliners. Tell me where, at airfields such as Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted that youngsters can get near aircraft nowadays?

When I was a kid, my father took me round the hangars and taught me to respect aeroplanes. From as long as I can remember, I was allowed to sit in flight decks and kind people took me around showing me how things worked and why they were there. Tell me where you can do that nowadays?

When I was a kid, I was taken flying in aeroplanes from gliders to airliners by kind people whenever I was in the right place at the right time. Tell me where you can do that nowadays?

When I was a kid, I was allowed to get really dirty washing cowlings, changing tyres, exhaust gaskets and God knows what else. Tell me where you can do that nowadays?

When I was a kid, I invariably was allowed to visit the flight deck when we went on holiday and I already knew how to behave whilst there. Tell me where you can do that nowadays?

When I was a kid, we visited control towers, ATC centres, airfield fire stations etc etc. Tell me where you can do that nowadays?

The po-faced, never-done-anything, elfin safety, so-called security experts, politically correct and generally cowardly pratts have completely ruined aviation for the younger generation (and for those of us who are still in it). They have taken their young adventurous ambitions away from them and they should rot in hell for that.

God how I pray for a serious outbreak of common sense, for you humourless pillocks out there depress the hell out of me.

Rant over.

[JFD58]

It's amazing to read all the support for the controller from pro's and supposed pro's. I had presumed as a group they generally would have understood WHY this is a serious judgement error.
HD and others with the management experience knows why it is a serious indication of poor judgement. The fact that no birds fell out of the sky in this occasion is irrelevant.
The issue is that the guy determined on his own the parameters by which it was/is OK for him to operate and perform his sworn duties. NoNoNo. Don't work that way when the duty and responsibility is to protect mult millions$ of hardware, multi millions$ potential liabilties in event of bent and broken and burning stuff, and the general well being of hundreds of PAYING passengers. The PAYING passengers presume when buying your services that you will maintain your sworn commitment to your job duty. Laxness is for giving your kid the stick in your sport plane and if you both auger in...oh well you went together dong what you love.
The FAA is obligated to enforce because it IS an enforcement agency...get it? A law enforcement agency. The F-up here is really an issue of insubordination, and one of no established limitations and directives for what is OK and what is not if it is allowed that a controller and his local supervisor are given leeway to bring 10yo's into the tower at their discretion. If that is OK, then where is the limit line? There are thousands of controllers. How then will YOU who feel this a nanny-state overcontrol problem KNOW that one of those controllers will not evr give theier kid vector instructions to relay, get up for a cup of coffe, kid relays an error, pilot laughs, turns for 025 instead of 250 and ...oops. 400die, 2 big birds down, a billion$ oopsy. Keep it to your small venue for having fun.
On the other hand, why didn't the guy ask to calnder a 'bring our kid to work' day. That would be great. We all love that. Uhg.

[Nom De Guerre]

JFD58: stop being ridiculous.

[protectthehornet]

jfd58

I took no oath to be an airline pilot. I took one to be a soldier in the United States Army and was very , very proud to make that oath.

I think passengers presume way too much. There is no airline pilot oath, like a doctor's hypocratic oath.

The FAA has made many more mistakes than just letting a kid repeat, like a parrot, a clearance for takeoff.

IF the PASSENGERS want us to take an oath...fine...I am all for it...but you as passengers will have to pay more for your ticket as that oath comes with a price.

Pay for an upper middle class lifestyle for me and my small family within 1 hour driving time of my domicile/base airport parking lot.

A promise that I will have an honorable retirement for me and my family when I hit a lawfully mandated retirement age.

That the airline I fly for maintains the planes with proper mechanics in the USA

And that the airlines hire really good looking girls to be FA's.

the last one is optional I suppose, the others are not!

[GarageYears]

To those equating this to a surgeon allowing their kid to make a cut you are all idiots. It is clearly not the same since, if the cut was made incorrectly, it cannot be unmade or corrected in any way whatsoever. The cut exists.

But in this case, no matter what the radio call, it can be immediately countermanded or corrected, and no foul done. Let's be honest here - has every single radio call any one of us made always been 100% correct? I hear corrections broadcast all the time.

This is a case of internet hype blowing a fool-hardy act out of all proportion. 10 years ago this would have gone unnoticed by all. Doesn't mean it was a good idea. But Jet Blue 171 made it through this experience, right? The difference unfortunately now is that we live in an age where you can't fart in public without permission from the p-c police or reading some regulation and signing a waiver.

Sure, the controller needs a good bollocking and a written warning, don't do it again ever, or you're out, etc... but the only reason to fire the guy is to protect the up chain management who now look like they have no control over their staff and have 3 months of paper work to fill out in triplicate before the weekend.

- GY

[Dysag]

Shame on you, the PC brigade will be along with their hornet spray...

... 'cos they also want some really good looking pretty boys as FAs.

[Stop Stop Stop]

What a shame it has come to this- the nanny state wins again.

Just a few years ago, we would all have smiled at this. Then the internet came along and internet forums spoiled any fun anyone in this industry ever had. Everyone's sense of humour removed forever. Now, the smallest mistake is aired for all- there is nowhere to hide!

I have had ATCO's on my flight deck- I let one call his unit with our initial call inbound- dangerous, no- did it break the rules, of course, but we all smiled when the ATCO answering guessed it was his colleague making the call.

Along with constant QAR monitoring, sterile cockpits, locked doors this industry is going the wrong way. Does it make for a safer sky? I'm not so sure.

OK, so the controller was clearly given permission to bring his kid to the tower for the day- he wouldn't be there alone- most towers at large international airports have minimum 5 or 6 people in the tower so all there would be guilty by association. It probably made everyone's day! He has been caught out this time- guilty by internet- and he just deserves a slap on the wrist and don't do it again!

Hands up who would recommend that their kids come into this business now!

[garp]

Harmless, probably. Stupid, certainly.
At the same time I wonder if people here are serious when they want to have the fellow thrown out? As been said before, a good bollocking is in order although I guess that he has learned his lesson by now. Being the father of two boys, age 10 and 12, I really feel sorry for the kid. How the hell is he supposed to deal with this ****storm?

[Stop Stop Stop]

Has anyone heard the whole tape, not just the 'cut and paste' bits played on the BBC news? It may well be that the ATCO previously told the pilots that the clearance was going to come from his son. Nobody seemed surprised after all!

[purplehelmet]

i dont think its been mentioned on here yet that the same controller brought his daughter to work the day after this happened and let her make two calls to aircraft!
i think the big issue for most people on here is the WHAT IF something went wrong,we all know nothing did but just suppose it did, just say dad got distracted like in the areoflot accident or the controller who was joking on the phone when one of his aircraft dropped out of radio contact just before it hit a helicopter.
if an accident had of happened would it still of all been just a bit of fun?

[stepwilk]

"WIll all those saying it was fine please also answer the question where do you draw the line and how?"

It's been answered before on this thread, but for those not reading much of it, the dividing line is between controlling and simply speaking a line that his father fed him. Did the kid check intersecting taxiways, estimate the time-to-touchdown of the aircraft on half-mile final, ensure clearance from the previous departure and then tell JetBlue to go? No. He spoke the words his daddy told him to speak, and he may not even have known what they meant.

His sole responsibility was to enunciate clearly (and if he hadn't, "Say again?" would have worked just fine). Any responsibility beyond that crosses the line you wish drawn.

[birrddog]

If you listen to the clip from LiveATC (http://www.liveatc.net/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7176.0;attach=3316) (login needed), you'll here the father doing most of the talking, particularly for "complex" instructions.

He was clearly there, on top of the situation, able to jump in and explained to the pilots his kid was there.

Though I doubt that will do anything to hold back the "Kid breaks into JFK Tower, holds ATC hostage and causes mayhem in the skies whilst dad is having a beer, fag and a kip outside" brigade.

[protectthehornet]

I think this should bring to light something else...many times, passengers might be on a plane in which the ''new'' pilot may have never actually flown that type of plane before...certainly there has been simulator training and there is a ''check'' pilot up front too...but the first time he is really PILOTING THE PLANE is with PAYING PASSENGERS onboard.

now that should make headlines too

[Avman]

Half time score:

Kid says a few prompted words on the r/t: 8 pages

F/O flies 13 years without licence: 3 pages

Says it all for me!

Goodnight :zzz:

[zed3]

Unfortunately this whole situation is a reflection of modern life from politicians down to the so-called managers.The guy should be called into an office and told the whole thing was a decidedly wrong move and he should not do it again, end of story. To be sacked is in my view just wrong, and a waste of money, somebody has to be trained to replace him ... and experience costs time...years. The press as an entity are to blame here - what do they know about aviation? They just have to sell news- as everybody keeps complaining about on these hallowed pages. The whole world needs a slap in the face and for commonsense, respect and a sense of humour to return. This is but one example. End of rant.
Tin hat on and away.

[visibility3miles]

I thought it was cool. If it was such a life-or-death situation, for a kid to repeat dad saying cleared for departure, why did it take two weeks and a YouTube video for the media or anyone else to notice?

The kid was not clearing planes to avoid traffic, land, or taxi, and even JFK can have slow times. None of the pilots seemed confused about the instructions.

Yes, bad judgement for ATC not knowing the media would turn it into a circus.

This was February 16th. Let's see... Much of the Mid-Atlantic region of the US was shut down due to record snowfalls, which with the flight cancellations presumably slowed flights into and out of JFK considerably, and the Winter Olympics had started, so the news media had far more important and popular things to worry about.

Tempest in a teapot, unless driving enthusiastic youngsters out of the field of aviation is the goal.

[etrang]

The press as an entity are to blame here - what do they know about aviation?

The press is to blame? Rediculous. The controller is responsible for his actions, his supervisors are responsible for theirs and their response to this. The regulating authority is responsible for their response.

To blame the press is idiotic, you might as well blame the inventor of whatever recording device was used to record the sounds, or blame Al Gore for inventing the internet and allowing this message board to exist and publicise the story.

[rottenray]

infrequentflyer789 writes:

It is precisely like the surgeon handing the kid the scalpel and saying "cut here, this long this deep". The surgeon is making the decision and supervising and standing ready to attempt to patch things up when the kid nicks a major artery.Oh, for pete's sake!

This same tired and inaccurate analogy has been fluttered around all the forums.

It is NOT the same thing.

This is comparing a physical action which would cause an instant physical reaction to a communication between humans which could be corrected before being acted upon.

Apples to sardines.

Nicking an artery would IMMEDIATELY let blood out, and would require a lot of physical work to fix.

You can't tell an artery "disregard, here is the correct incision."

The boy wasn't issuing heading changes / altitude changes.

Planes don't immediately leap into the air upon being given clearance for takeoff. A lot of posts try to make it seem like an aircraft cleared would reach V1 before ATC had the next opportunity to communicate with it. Possible, I suppose, but unlikely.

Dad was obviously in control.

Had the boy started to say the wrong thing or say it at the wrong time, he would have been IMMEDIATELY over-ridden.

Did dad make a bad guess re: the sh*t storm it would create? No doubt. This is a purely "made for FOX" event with lots of potential for all the dire words and all the calls for heads to roll.

Could all the "holes in the cheese" have lined up just-so to create an incident? Perhaps. If either of the guy's kids had undiagnosed Tourette's Syndrome, who knows what could have happened!

But I think it's prolly better having a doting father / son (or doting father / daughter) combo doing this than having a controller who is doing it merely to impress a girlfriend into giving him a knobjob later...:rolleyes:

At least the dad / kid duo won't be as fundamentally distracted by "non-aviation" considerations.


Also, I've read more than a few posts regarding "pirate" transmissions possible using hand-held VHF.

The bulk of these posts seem to excoriate the pilots in New York for not rejecting the kid's tx out-of-hand for simply being a different voice, hence, possibly a "pirate" transmission.

I'm fairly familiar with comm in general. In most cases, it's pretty easy to tell a different voice in the same location from a different voice in a different location, although I don't think this 100% universal or error-proof. Certainly, it depends upon the background noise in all three locations.

But I would think that the sonic quality of the mics and transmitters and the acoustic environment in a control tower would be quite different from those of a hand-held unit outside or in a car.

A question I'd like to ask "the drivers" is this: How hard would it be for you to tell the difference between the real controller you've been talking to and a spoof?

Note, it's merely curiosity, and perhaps it will spark some interesting debate.


I'd also like to thank a few posters for their ribald sarcasm - fire the dad, burn the house, pilots will fly planes into the ground if ATC tells them to, et cetera. I've gotten a few laughs from y'all, keep up the good work!:ok:

[wozzo]

I read that sometimes John F. Kennedy let his kids sit at the desk in the Oval Office. Can you imagine? A kid controlled ALL THOSE NUCLEAR WEAPONS!

[Pugilistic Animus]

Finally I( could get into this!!!!

computer troubles!

listen the faa does nothing about pilots talking on spacebook about honoring the muppet who purposely crashed into irs building ---this is the downside of reagan,...and the world has reached a new level of mindless muppetry:*:eek::uhoh::yuk:

[Pugilistic Animus]

and...pilots are smarter than docs,...because most docs, ...forget most of what they learn,.....pilots keep almost 100% of their training at the top of the head,....
......then learn 1% more each day and we never forget to learn,...same goes for controllers............ let the real experts have some fun transporting for peanuts loudmouth ground people
Lester:E

[rottenray]

from Mouse:

WIll all those saying it was fine please also answer the question where do you draw the line and how?I wrote in another post that I think it's prolly better having a doting father / son (or doting father / daughter) combo doing this than having a controller who is doing it merely to impress a girlfriend into giving him a knobjob later...:rolleyes:It's not the first time a "guest speaker" has talked to a pilot via tower equipment, and most likely won't be the last.

Also, I'm not saying it's fine. Had I been a passenger on one of the flights, I would have had to take a "Zen Moment" after seeing it on the news.

But having kept up with it, and having read approx 50 news articles and 500 posts here and there, I find it's not the end of the world, not even the beginning of it.

A few people have mentioned the constructive side of this, either here or on the "blue website with all the great photos."

What if it inspires one of the kids to become a controller, and become an excellent one who can be credited with saving lives? Isn't the tiny increase in risk NOW worth that in the future?

Also, what if all the coverage and rabid tongue-wagging surrounding this event un-inspires a controller who is not as adept at his job from doing the very thing I mentioned above? Could that potentially save lives?


I realize this is a hot issue, and never will the outlier sides agree. Some feel it's fine, some feel a head or two should roll.

But I think more can be learned if we all keep it in perspective.

It could have been a disaster if all the players involved were complete idiots.

Apparently, the guy's kids are well spoken and articulate clearly, and apparently he has a wonderful relationship with them.

Apparently, he chose his times well and conducted things well enough so there were no incidents, no complaints, and no noise until FOX picked it up.

Someone suggested he should have done exactly what he did - but at a G/A airport somewhere on a Sunday, and I agree with this.


But to answer your "draw the line" question...

Somewhere "south" of this brou-ha-ha, I would say.

It was a less-than-smart thing to do, but in keeping up with this topic I've read posts from controllers who had co-workers who read newspapers/magazines while maintaining space, posts from pilots who claimed to have recognized audio from TV programs and porn movies in the background while talking to ATC.

That, I think, is where you need to go drawing your line.

At least dad and kids were fully concentrating on the task.

Certainly not in keeping with best policies or regulations (?) but also certainly not the worst-ever transgression.

There are far more important things to worry about.



In reply to
The press as an entity are to blame here - what do they know about aviation? etrang writes:
The press is to blame? Rediculous. The controller is responsible for his actions, his supervisors are responsible for theirs and their response to this. The regulating authority is responsible for their response.Although it seems impossible, both are right.

Almost nobody would have known about the situation if it hadn't made FOX in New York. I don't think the aviation buffs who log in to liveATC had much of an issue with it either.

And, the controller is indeed responsible - he hasn't denied it. His supers haven't either, and have taken the appropriate steps. The FAA is taking the appropriate steps as well.


Aviation is filled with near-misses, and those represent the best learning tools.

One thing I respect is the disciplined approach to find the best balance between flying and dying.

If you do the former, you might also experience the latter; sheer statistics say it's so.

I've heard traffic control described as an art. I've heard it described as a discipline. I tend to think it's both.

And it's not the easiest career to attract great whopping numbers of the best and brightest to - it is perceived as being a very stressful avocation.


Maybe we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater here. Given all the emotion this event has stirred up, perhaps it would be good to look at it as a learning event, something to model recruitment from.

Don't go copying and pasting and quoting and shooting down just yet.

This guy obviously loves his job. He obviously loves his kids. If he didn't, he wouldn't have mixed the two together, be-damned the outcome.

Could the situation be turned into a "positive" thing to appeal to parents just like him, to possibly entice getting more "2nd generation" controllers into the mix?

Just a thought...

[Pugilistic Animus]

and this is just fine http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/404449-65-000-maintenance-problems-have-taken-off-anyway-post5497374.html#post5497374:

{::\:zzz:

[rottenray]

pug writes:

peanuts loudmouth ground peopleOuch! If you won't kiss me first, at least buy me a drink! :eek:

As far as pilots vs. doctors, well, I have naturally good health.

I fly more often than I get sick.

Therefore, my fat butt has been entrusted to more pilots than doctors.

So far, so good.

But speaking from a purely statistical perspective, I'm more apt to be let down by a pilot than a doctor.

I use pilots more frequently, and I cannot go to the same one for 25 years.

Ain't that a hoot?!


and pug also writes:

and this is just fine http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/4...l#post5497374: (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/404449-65-000-maintenance-problems-have-taken-off-anyway-post5497374.html#post5497374:) I read the whole thread some time back.

The whole problem is that it is hard for folks who have never worked on a large mil or civ airframe (C-5, C-141, which I worked on, and the C-17 which always gives me a morning crescent, and certainly all the commercial birds) to determine exactly WHAT makes an airframe dangerous to operate.

Folks including a lot of the FAA folks. Almost of FAA know their stuff and love aviation, but there are just enough paper-pushers in the loop to confugulate things.

That's because every condition has implications which affect the entire flight. In commercial transit, things get even more complex and folks who don't love and understand aviation may miss true problems as well as being triggered by insignificant ones.

Perfect World: Everything is working, everyone in MX likes to see his reflection from the paint, every rivet is inspected before each flight, and there are puppy dogs holding flowers as runway signage.
Real World: Most stuff breaks after a certain amount of time, some stuff isn't absolutely necessary, we have missions/schedules to attain, and a few (not most) maintenance folks don't like to be bothered.

Of the 65k, there are prolly only a handful of real killer issues.

But the lack of regard for procedures and doc is troubling indeed - aviation is certainly mostly intuitive, but it is also a hard taskmaster when it comes to documenting everything. So that future issues can be prevented.


Commercial air transit- to me - represents one of the highest points of human endeavor.

The physical engineering is incredible - durable enough to fly for 20 - 40 years, yet light enough to operate economically. (Natch there are exclusions, but we'll leave them alone for now.)

The application engineering is incredible as well. Develop routes, and market/operate them safely and profitably. (Again, exclusions, yadda-yadda...)


I yuttered something about "perfect world" a few lines back.

Let me add that in a perfect world, everyone connected with air travel would be deeply in love with it. I'm not in the biz, but I still have a great love for the aircraft and the folks who make them possible.

I'm not cut to be a commercial pilot - frankly, I lack the sheer discipline it takes. I could not do what y'all do day in and day out. I started but never followed-through on a PPL, because I became too busy with family. Once I fully retire, if I'm able to get the 100 acres I'm lusting after, I might try an ultralight. (I'm thinking of a Mitchell wing (http://www.ultralightnews.com/ssulbg/mitchellwing-a10.htm). Looks damn demanding to learn, with lots of performance lurking behind.)

I could not survive the stress of being ATC. It's a job I think I could do for a few weeks, but would eventually stop showing up for due to lack of sleep.

So all of you have my deepest respect - truly.


But don't vote the dad and kids off the island, m'kay?

[sequ]

It will be sad to hear the voice of that controller go. The JFK controllers have a reputation for sure, but they have amazing and extensive experience.

He will be missed, for such a stupid thing blown out of proportion.

Very sad indeed.

SEQU

[Pugilistic Animus]

Sorry, my excitement got to me:E pilots and controllers keep the muppety ground people safe,...and further the FAA has basically started a WAR between pilots and controllers,...decreasing safety for all,........ lovely:rolleyes:


Great commentary,...RottenRay:}:ok:

PA:)






































be careful to certain folks posting nonsense here,..... my anthem to ground people YouTube - CHER - JUST LIKE JESSE JAMES (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siJmE75-xA0) ;):E:zzz:
Lester:E

[skyeuropecapt]

Who was never given instructions(headings,speed) by a controller in Europe after some background voices,was given different instructions by another voice?YES training personnel whose decision wasnt the best at the moment.
Would that require a safety discussion?I don't think so.

So for a child to REPEAT instructions given by his father I doubt the controler should be let go for that but given a blame yes.

What I am intrigued about is how easily the pilots accepted and executed such instructions without a sign of doubt.
It has happened that children(england) used some devices to listen and transmit over atc frequencies..So if i ever hear a child giving me instructions in the air and especially on the ground i would enquire into the message given to me..contacting the ATC on 121.5 as a start...

If the FAA blames the ATC, well the pilots too should get one:8

[SDFlyer]

Stepwilk: "It's been answered before on this thread, but for those not reading much of it, the dividing line is between controlling and simply speaking a line that his father fed him. Did the kid check intersecting taxiways, estimate the time-to-touchdown of the aircraft on half-mile final, ensure clearance from the previous departure and then tell JetBlue to go? No. He spoke the words his daddy told him to speak, and he may not even have known what they meant."
---------------
And how about the distraction of having little johnny in the tower, talking on the mike and doing this, that and the other thing? Not to mention little jane.

The cheesy holes were starting to line up nicely ......:ugh:

Then again, maybe controllers are being paid waaaay too much, if so little concentration is required to get the job done.
:p

[rottenray]

skyeuropecapt writes:

What I am intrigued about is how easily the pilots accepted and executed such instructions without a sign of doubt.
It has happened that children(england) used some devices to listen and transmit over atc frequencies..So if i ever hear a child giving me instructions in the air and especially on the ground i would enquire into the message given to me..contacting the ATC on 121.5 as a start...Thanks.

This explains a lot of the outrage over this event.

In the US, it's easy to purchase a VHF transceiver which includes air bands. But our much-hated FCC (Federal Communications Commission) is rather good at tracking down unauthorized spectrum use. We also have a large amateur radio community which also help serve as watchdogs.

Without doubt, this kind of "spoofing" has happened here but I don't think it's been a big problem.


My question is, wouldn't this be sorted out rather quickly?


Using a hand-held, one would have to be fairly close to the tower in order to hear and interfere with ATC direction. A dozen miles at most, or else curvature of the earth cuts in. VHF. Line of sight.

Being able to hear the tower would also mean the tower would certainly be able to hear them - better, more sensitive equipment than a hand-held costing $300.

Even in a fluke instance where geography shielded the spoofer's tx from the tower, wouldn't the read-backs give things away?


?

[Pugilistic Animus]

and once a real controller 'cleared me' :hmm:to taxi in front of a landing gulfstream:)

but I didn't take the bait:E

[The_Steed]

SLF perspective here...

After listening to the tape, it was actually easier to understand what the kid was saying as opposed to the real ATCO whowasrattlingofftheclearanceinonebreath...

I guess it was lucky that Air China wasn't on the go though...

YouTube - ATC@JFK - Air China 981 (by aldo benitez) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWDEIvjwaFU)

;)

[RobShan]

My view as a passenger - you know, the one of the people who sit up back and pay for the fuel and stuff - is that it wasn't a particularly concerning incident. I feel the that the controller had lapse of judgement but didn't endanger operations. The fact he did it shows a sense of family that is hopefully keeping him on the safe side of stress problems.

The JFK audio was less concerning than listening to the ATC/pilot comms at our local airport. Listening when a B737 after being offered landing runway on RWY 30 as RWY 23 had a significant cross-wind; the pilot (the only one to land on 23 in about a fifteen minute period) replied "We'll take our chances on 23". I'll tske the JFK scenario over that reply.

[beamer]

Sorry guys but its gash and unacceptable. However, I would accept that the controller made a mistake and I would not hang him for it - a kick up the a**e and a clear message to all US controllers that it is not to happen again.

2 further thoughts - what would be the reaction if I allowed a young child onto the flight deck and allow he/she to transmit to US ATC as I approached New York airspace - I'll bet an F16 would be on my wing in a couple of minutes !

Secondly, it is quite true to say that the kiddie in question was a lot clearer on the radio than the average US controller !!!

[Global Warrior]

The media aren't to blame for this incident but they are to blame for the publicity surrounding it.

IMHO He did nothing wrong, bit of fun, let it be. Its definitely not worth him losing his job over. What actually started out as a bit of fun for one family, has probably now, because of the media storm, ruined that family. The attention this has now drawn will probably require that someone has to get fired and the media, to give them a follow up story, will be hoping that does happen and then somehow will champion themselves as purveyors of increased aviation safety.

Some posters have criticised the pilots for accepting the clearance........... but then, to be critical, you have to make the assumption that the pilots didn't know that it was the ATCO's kid talking and so far the evidence suggests that the pilots knew exactly what was going on.

I would suggest that FOX news go to some of the places on the planet where safety is compromised daily by inept controllers that are actually licenced by their countries regulating authority, so in essence, have permission to be inept. Thats far more dangerous than a controllers kid, saying exactly what he is being told to say by Dad, a qualified ATCO at JFK.

I have heard on a daily basis at LHR controllers instructing one aircraft to follow the minibus ahead!!! Would that be the small people carrying automobile that has the cleaning crew on board? Of course it bloody isnt but it doesnt detract from the professionalism of the controller one iota.

What about the guy that does the ATIS? If the information happens to be information Echo, he says "Echo, Echo Echo Echo Echo" I think its amusing and again, i wouldnt begin to questions his/her professionalism just because they were not sticking directly to the letter of the law and just saying information Echo.

Ive heard stories about a controller passing a can of beans to his colleague rather than the ATC Strip, because it added some light relief. Its fun. Just like taking your kids to work because they probably have a real interest in the cool job that Dad has.

Its the publicity surrounding this that is out of proportion. Not the event itself, but sadly, the punishment will probably be totally out of proportion because if he has his ticket pulled, he will have to find a new career, not just a new job.

Fly Safe

GW

[anengineer]

There seems to be two different arguments going on here; 1) Whether the guy should be fired or just given a roasting and 2) Whether the guy did anything wrong at all.

I don't think he should be fired, I do think he needs to be given a roasting and that used as a warning to anyone else contemplating such a poor sense of judgement.

As for argument 2) - maybe I've misunderstood some of the replies here, but is anyone actually saying that they feel the guy did nothing wrong, and should not even be disciplined for it ?

[visibility3miles]

He is getting a roasting and I think he'll never do it again.

I do not think he should be fired, but that's not my call.

Yes, he was wrong to let a person not training to be a controller broadcast instructions to departing aircraft.

Give them a break. I'll bet the kid knows far more about what dad does for a living than most of the media. And relieving stress IS A GOOD THING.

I'll repeat my previous comment. Not one pilot seemed confused by the instructions.

Then again, in New York, they let all kinds of people ring the opening bell at the New York Stock Exchange, where billions of dollars and peoples' livelihoods are at stake. Perhaps the media should jump on that ill advised behavior too. Oh wait, they do already, whenever a new IPO trades with executives competent enough to ring a bell, it's featured on CNBC.

Never mind.

[Checkboard]

Memo blasts air traffic controller and supervisor over 'kids' incident - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/03/05/air.traffic.child/index.html?dsq=38148830#comment-38148830)

Later, an FAA official, who asked not to be identified because of the ongoing investigation, said the controller brought his daughter into the same tower the following day, and the child was allowed to talk with pilots of two planes.

A separate source said the supervisor "should be making sure that things like this don't happen."

Yet another source familiar with the investigation said the two children are twins.

So an FAA Official is releasing sensitive information about an ongoing investigation, and KNOWS it (as he asked not to be identified), and this "unprofessional behaviour" isn't a problem with the FAA?

[protectthehornet]

did anyone every let you drive a car before you had a learner's permit? you know, in a parking lot without other cars?

BAM...shoot the guy

Did you ever let someone, who wasn't a pilot, take the controls of your airplane and you were not a CFI or an airplane salesman demonstrating a new plane?

Bam...shoot the guy

Did you ever have intercourse...with someone you were not married to?

BAM...send him straight to hell.

Now, believe me...if this incident had lead to disaster in the sky, I would say put the guy in jail...but it lead to nothing more than a public relations problem for the FAA.

let us put things in perspective , shall we???????

by the way, a Pan Am 707 crew had a visitor to the cockpit one time. And the captain had the nerve to let the visitor sit in the left seat and actually fly the plane.

Oh, the visitor was a member of the board of directors and his name was Charles Lindbergh...do you have a problem with that??????? He trimeed the plane up better and got 5 more knots of speed with no increase in power.

[SDFlyer]

And an Aeroflot pilot once let his daughter, and then his son, sit in left seat of an Airbus in cruise flight over Siberia once. The consequence of this piece of irresponsible and unprofessional behavior is aviation history.

[metrosmoker]

For crying out loud guys!
Im sitting here laughing at the You Tube video too.
We are all sitting here laughing because nothing happened.
What if something went wrong?
Supervised or not. We are suppose to be professionals in a highly professional and technical industry, battling for creditbility and pay and conditions that reflect the training and money invested in ourselves.
This is not a place for kids having a day off school. And we are not talking about a small country airstrip either.
Unless the child was authorised to make the transmission, then................Next time I hear a child clear me to Take Off, do I assume he is being supervised in the tower or a malicious transmission? Like the warning in Jepps about malicious transmissions flying into Narita?

Yes he should be fired. But the U.S have enough unemployment problems as it is, so in the name of compassion...............

[Checkboard]

What if something went wrong?
OK - What could possibly have gone wrong? :confused:

[SOPS]

FIX news has this thing out of control......but what is new

[JanetFlight]

Answering your question...absolutely nothing!

By the way...the AFL Airbus accident was caused by an airline and senior pilot not knowing the systems of his aircraft and NOT by a child in the cockpit!
It happened the same few weeks before on a TAROM flight and it didnt crash only by miracle...recorded on Video and Pics too, near Paris!
And with no Child interference to mess up...:hmm:

And is FAA also checking this DRAMATIC accident here?»»»
YouTube - Underage Air Traffic Controller (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STMqFjWd9iU)
I think they really should...:}

[protectthehornet]

janetflight

r u in vegas? how does area 51 look, close up?

or am I mistaken??????

[Piltdown Man]

What is the problem? A voice gives you a clearance (don't forget, we don't have the full tape) so you follow it. I really don't care what age the voice is, as long as the clearance is genuine. Given the clearances issued, each could be undone very quickly or were of little consequence if given in error. The high horse brigade need to get a life. There was no problem. The Feds would be better off spending their time working on the T's & C's of entry level pilots. That is where the real threat is. People sleeping in crew rooms, positioning for hours before duty, having two or three jobs to pay off debts - this is the real threat to US aviation - unscrupulous employers! Not switched on controllers taking their kids to work.

PM

[ei-flyer]

Wow, what a load of tosh!

A lot of you are forgetting one important fact - you ATCers do not control the aircraft, we do.

I'm sure the weather was CAVOK, in which case take-off or no take-off clearance, it's down to us whether we pile on the coals and rumble off down the runway or not.

The other morning I was cleared to land at TRF while a Dash 8 was touching down... I had to correct the controller and the whole episode resulted in a missed approach...

I wasn't impressed.

[Blockla]

I like this Don Browns blog on the topic... Daddy let me drive.

Search for gettheflick; tried to insert link but PPRUNE thinks it's a rude word...

[MPN11]

A long time ago, we were encouraged to pay familiarization visits to the tower from time to time. Some 'pilot style' controlling was the norm, and doing the occasional PAR talkdown was positively encouraged. The only proviso was that the qualified controller would ask the pilot whether he was prepared to accept a talkdown from a 'controller' under training.

That sounds remarkably like a certain RAF station 'East of Suez" in the late 60s :) It worked if the "Duty Pilot" actually came to the Tower, of course, which is why it was sometimes called the "Approach Roome".

However, one helluva difference between the pre-briefed scenario you accurately described [on a Mil airfield, VMC, with guys from the sqn 'controlling' their colleagues] and doing it with a child at an International airport.

Anyway, Lightning pilots were always looking up for the runway, and kicking of the drift so carefully applied ... the best visibility measuring device I've ever known :)

[SDFlyer]

ei-flyer: "The other morning I was cleared to land at TRF while a Dash 8 was touching down... I had to correct the controller and the whole episode resulted in a missed approach..."

Are you sure it was a controller, and not a girlfriend/boyfriend/grandson/first cousin twice removed?

From now on, listening to Channel 9, I'll be wondering ......
:rolleyes:.. :)

[MPN11]

New thread ... "Sandefjord in the News"

"Stray moose issues landing clearance ... " :)

[Gargleblaster]

I'm skipping a lot of replies here, but at 0:52, the poor child seems to be clearing an aircraft for takeoff. The callsign is unintelligible.

Anybody recall Tenerife where 500+ people died ?

[OA32]

Isn't the feed from over the internet, so it isn't going to have the same quality as a proper recording no doubt certain parts will have been missed. It does seem to have been edited anyway.


Beside that, the guy should get a roasting but nothing more. As usual the media have blown it out of all proportion, the child was merely repeating what he was told to say and at no point could it be construed as controlling traffic.

[boguing]

I'm going to contribute to this thread in the hope that the Authorities read it before taking any action vis the controller.

At the age of 8 I had the nous to arrange a school wide collection for the Aberfan disaster. We raised more than any other school. Didn't occur to the adults.

At 11 I was driving the winch, towing gliders into the air - unattended.

At 12 driving Dad's car around the airfield and towing to/from the hangar.

I read pretty well too.

I would suggest (as a parent) that a child knows what's what after about 6. And because they are soaked in the local discipline (one that I remember is to look around the field before crossing. If I see an approaching glider - Stand Still).

I flew launch to landing at 14. Dad in the back.

Any bright child (an atco's child will be at least 50% bright) will know when to say "Daddy, what do I do now?"

I'd certainly trust my youngest to clear me for t/o over anybody else.

[Married a Canadian]

I have already posted my opinion in the ATC forum..and it basically is the guy made a mistake but safety was not compromised.
I also do not believe he was unprofessional in the way people seem to think was and that we should look at ourselves first.

The one question that no one seems to want to answer, of all the people saying sack him, it was wrong, dangerous, irresponsible, safety critical etc etc...

What was going to go wrong that would cause the carnage and mayhem intimated? What seconds from disaster event was this child going to cause through parrot fashion repeating a clearance given by a valid, experienced controller.

Tenerife?? Please...count the holes in the cheese in the accident report before comparing to this scenario...plus remind yourself as you read it that these poor souls were all "professional"
Aeroflot? Different scenario and panning out. No one noticed what had happened in the cockpit till too late and has been pointed out the pilots were not fully aware of the equipment ( ie they could have let go of the stick but didn't). What would the father not notice or hear in the control tower?

To all you other valid atcos out there who think safety was compromised.
What actions could the child have done that would have caused a DIRECT danger to any flight. No far fetched scenarios either given that the father was plugged in next to him and can overide any transmission. What if- what if -what if -doesn't work when you consider the few facts we know.

Kid transmits instructions told to him by father
Father broadcasts telling the aircraft (in a joking way) what is going on, which means he was plugged in at the time.

Those two facts put together limit the potential for any safety related errors. If the father can't overide the transmissions then it means controllers at JFK can't overide their trainees. Highly unlikely I am sure.

When the media does the speculating about "far fetched" scenarios related to ATC or flying we get up in arms about it.
So to all you professionals out there who think this was dangerous. Tell me how in way that wouldn't seem like reading it in the paper or seeing it on FOX news.

[On the beach]

Please...count the holes in the cheese

ONE - and one that could have and should have been eliminated.

On the beach

[411A]

Kid transmits instructions told to him by father
Father broadcasts telling the aircraft (in a joking way) what is going on, which means he was plugged in at the time.


Ergo, father was an idiot.
Show him the door...pronto.

[cactusbusdrvr]

I have been flying in and out of JFK for over 20 years, as I'm sure many of you have as well. Do you really think that the supervising controller was out of the loop on this? Do you really believe the local controller was not plugged in and ready to handle any possible contingency? I can tell you that the JFK controllers are expert at what they do. They move a lot of metal with speed and safety. Yes, they talk too fast for most of us but they know their jobs.

The kid was doing fine. There was no compromise of safety here. Instead of grooming a future controller, or pilot, the media have now jumped all over a nonstory and probably traumatized the kids for life, not to mention running down a fine controller.

I used to let the kids fly with me when they were young, hell, I used to let the F/As fly on empty legs. With proper supervision these are all non events. Some of you need to relax and chill out a little and take that ramrod out of your arse.

[rottenray]

global warrior writes:

I would suggest that FOX news go to some of the places on the planet where safety is compromised daily by inept controllers that are actually licenced by their countries regulating authority...Exactly. This issue under discussion is really a non-event, but it's perfect for getting folks (especially couch-taters who like to view things which make them feel outrage) all up-in-arms.

Dad should have thought-through things, but even so, he conducted things well.


sdflyer writes:

And an Aeroflot pilot once let his daughter, and then his son, sit in left seat of an Airbus in cruise flight over Siberia once. The consequence of this piece of irresponsible and unprofessional behavior is aviation history.Again, no comparison whatsoever.

Apples to beluga.

Well-behaved and well-articulated kids under the direction of their doting dad, repeating what he tells them to, speaking to aircraft on the ground, after the situation has been explained to pilots involved.

Versus letting a child sit at the controls of a revenue flight without adequate supervision and a lack of attention paid to the flight of the aircraft.

IIRC, the flight crew didn't notice that the A/P had been kicked off-line by pressure put against the controls.

Not the children's fault at all - and nothing would have happened if the crew had been ahead of the airplane instead of behind it.

Not comparable at all. In no way. Completely unspinnable. Joe Sixpack won't buy the comparison, neither will working pros.

So stop peddling it. Or, become a FOX news aviation consultant.

And really, aren't there more appropriate examples to use?

Can someone dig up a relevant comparison in which a "guest controller" actually caused some REAL issue?


Big kudos to ei-flyer for this:

A lot of you are forgetting one important fact - you ATCers do not control the aircraft, we do.Worded perhaps a little aggressively, but true.

I certainly hope any flight I board is controlled through a good pilot / ATC relationship - but if I had to pick one or the other, I'll always go with the dudes / dudettes up in the pointy end. Yoke/stick and thrust levers in hand, their lives in the balance as well, windscreens to see out of, yadda-yadda.



MPN11 writes:

New thread ... "Sandefjord in the News"

"Stray moose issues landing clearance ... " http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/smile.gifMuch needed levity, thanks. This won't happen in Alaska, as all the moose are too busy running through little towns scaring people. Another source of fine yellow-journalism fodder.


Valuable:
boguing writes:

I'm going to contribute to this thread in the hope that the Authorities read it before taking any action vis the controller.

At the age of 8 I had the nous to arrange a school wide collection for the Aberfan disaster. We raised more than any other school. Didn't occur to the adults.

At 11 I was driving the winch, towing gliders into the air - unattended.

At 12 driving Dad's car around the airfield and towing to/from the hangar.

I read pretty well too.

I would suggest (as a parent) that a child knows what's what after about 6. And because they are soaked in the local discipline (one that I remember is to look around the field before crossing. If I see an approaching glider - Stand Still).

I flew launch to landing at 14. Dad in the back.

Any bright child (an atco's child will be at least 50% bright) will know when to say "Daddy, what do I do now?"

I'd certainly trust my youngest to clear me for t/o over anybody else.I certainly hope the FAA reviews with this point of view.

It seems that the controller under fire is A) good at his job, and B) can trust his kids to do exactly what he tells them to do. This is refreshing, so many parents can't (or don't) have much influence over their children.

Could some of the "heat" in this issue be because of that? Are some of the "roll the heads" posters perhaps a bit jealous of the dad / kid relationship demonstrated here?



married a canadian writes:

To all you other valid atcos out there who think safety was compromised.
What actions could the child have done that would have caused a DIRECT danger to any flight. No far fetched scenarios either given that the father was plugged in next to him and can overide any transmission. What if- what if -what if -doesn't work when you consider the few facts we know.Thank you very, very much. A much needed dose of sanity here.

So far, we've compared this to handing scalpels to kids in an operating room. We've compared it to letting kids sit unattended at the controls of a revenue flight. We've mentioned how some n'er-do-wells will "spoof" ATC comms with flights.

Frankly, FOX news was very successful in dragging this porkchop-on-a-string of a story past a pack of hungry dogs.


When I put my big butt on one of your planes, here is what concerns me:
-- Dead-tired pilots
-- Totally distracted ATC
-- "Unreasonably" stretched maintenance issues, like MD tailplane jackscrews
-- Unknown issues, like 777/RR thrust rollbacks, pitot icing across all makes, and issues like the 737 rudder PCU
-- Lunatics willing to light their happy parts afire for Allah
-- The general "snap factor" induced by the stressful environments surrounding commercial air transit, which causes people to try to access the cockpit, open doors, or assault cabin crew
-- The general lack of knowledge which sees a flight with an orthodox Jew as a security threat


Really, honestly, worrying about the issue at hand is pointless, as there are so many *real* issues to pursue and fix.


But it is fascinating to read all the different perspectives and try to understand them.


I'll ask this again - so far, it hasn't been answered.

What can be done to turn this into a "positive" for the industry?

Can we shake-off the urge to bicker long enough to be constructive?


RR

[SK8TRBOI]

Or, the PanAm Captain who, sometime in the early 70's, allowing a stewerdess to land the plane! :eek:(You heard correctly). Now that's avaition history. (And yes - it was still perfectly PC to call the pretty young things helping out in cabin "Stew" back in the day. But I digress...

Turns out the Stew was rated, if I recall, and really greased it on (a 727).

Anyway, where was I going with this?...Oh, yeah! Now I remember: Though the incidents differ obviously, the fact of the matter is that the Supervisor allowing a 9 year old to clear flights at JFK on the radio(!) and the Captain allowing a Stew to land his aircraft on a revenue flight both exhibited spectactulalry poor judgement. Judgement that I, personally, do not want to see in the cockpit - nor in the control tower.:=

My 2 centavos.

[garp]

Wow, what a load of tosh!

A lot of you are forgetting one important fact - you ATCers do not control the aircraft, we do.

I'm sure the weather was CAVOK, in which case take-off or no take-off clearance, it's down to us whether we pile on the coals and rumble off down the runway or not.

The other morning I was cleared to land at TRF while a Dash 8 was touching down... I had to correct the controller and the whole episode resulted in a missed approach...

I wasn't impressed.
That might work in some cases but how about IMC with 20 other planes on the freq in a complicated TMA? And please don't base your judgement on 'you ATCers' on a single incident.
Sorry for the thread drift.

[EFC 3 DAYS]

The JetBlue crew who accepted the takeoff clearance should at least be disciplined by the company for accepting a clearance that was obviously not from an ATC controller.
What if someone using a HAM radio had issued the clearance??? The JetBlue crew should at least have questioned the clearance rather than accepting it with a cowboy attitude!!!

[FEHERTO]

As being "old fashioned" from Europe and very conservative in respect to safety: I would like to see the reactions from US pilots, if this would happen in a similar busy airport in Europe like Frankfurt, Heathrow or so on. We would hear from terrorist attack over European dummies up to "we have to learn them flying".

It is, in legal terms talking, a criminal act of "endangering air transport", which can be sentenced in most European countries up to 5 years in prison.

Sorry folks, no excuses, no talking about "no danger had been at this moment"; the controller should be never ever allowed to enter a tower for the rest of his life. We have rules and we have to stick with them.

[S76Heavy]

A bit cynical to read someone from Vienna write about "having to stick by the rules". Last time the Austrians vehemently did so, the rules themselves were criminal and Europe is still showing the effects from that episode.

Rules are a means to an end, not an end in themselves. I would not trust anybody who advocates strict adherence to rules just because they happen to be the rules, to operate any safety critical machinery for their obvious lack of critical thinking capability.

As was said before, the ATCO was not operating in a vacuum so more than 1 experienced professional had looked at te situation and decided there was no risk to air safety, and it was allowed 2 days in a row, further reinforcing the fact that it was never deemed a problem or a risk by those operating and controling.

Tha fall out by making it public suddenly made it a PR risk so the guy will be held accountable for the egg on the FAA's face, in typical modern "management" style.

We are at risk of becoming incapable of seeing the real risks because we are blinded by perceived risks. Blind obedience never worked throughout history, and in the current mediacracy (rule by the media, feeding of mediocre intelligence and knowledge levels of the uninformed and uninterested public) facts are less important than appearances. Shame on us for allowing it to become this way.

Like has been said before, I sincerely hope my kids will choose any career as long as it is not in aviation. Everything that used to be exciting and interesting is increasingly being "sanitised" for the purpose of appearances and PR, not because it is the right thing to do. Safety has become a meaningless word, just like freedom is becoming..

Everybody was in the loop about what was going on, and was able to voice concerns if they had them. They did not and therefore felt safe and secure, and happy to make it a fun and safe day for everybody involved.
True, it was not according to the letter of the rules but it was certainly in the spirit of what used to make this a great industry and career.
Let the media storm blow over and let the guy get back to work. And his supervisor too.

[Pugilistic Animus]

DO YOU MEAN THE STEWARDESS WHO'S FLOWN SEVERAL TYPES AND EVEN TEST FLIGHTS and was an experienced DC-3 pilot,...ohhh maybe that was TWA didn't giver her a pilot job 'cuz she was just too cute:rolleyes:

Wonder what Betsy Coleman could have accomplished if her stick did not freeze ==Betsy Coleman Famous barnstormer:ok:,.......she was black too:zzz:

[ei-flyer]

garp,

Very true, which is why I made a point of assuming it was CAVOK when writing my post. I don't wish to give the wrong impression, that I have some sort of qualm with controllers, absolutely not.

My point was - ultimately we, as pilots, control the aeroplane(s). Surely the ATCO in question wouldn't have allowed this to happen if it were busy IMC. Therefore, good weather, quiet traffic, I don't see a problem, because at the end of the day, we will not accept a clearance if there's any chance it could endanger our aircraft, and that's a responsibility of all pilots.

Even if it was heavy IMC, that's when the radio fulfills it's secondary function - as a spatial orientation aid.

In my experience, most things in life sound or seem much worse when spoken (or written) about than when you're actually there and in control of the situation.

[FEHERTO]

To S76HEAVY:

I am not understanding, why you mix politics and aviation. Also, I would appreciate, if you not put all people from Austria on the side of a regime, which had been gone before, for example, I had been born. Leave this ****, otherwise I must remind that in the USA rassism had been legal upt o the 70's.

Lets stay on the aviation side and this is clearly breaking the rules. Nothing else.

[Hotel Tango]

What a load of tosh by a load of people who have no idea what they are talking about.

Ergo, father was an idiot.
Show him the door...pronto.

You're the idiot 411A. Shame on you. Even you have admited to making errors of judgement. It happens to us all. The reality is that there was never any danger whatsoever. Unfortunately in todays holy-than-thou Big Brother is watching world we live in, it was an unfortunate error of judgement. The guy does not deserve the sack. That is simply ridiculous. Too many perfect and sanctimonious posters on this thread.

[Global Warrior]

it was an unfortunate error of judgement. The guy does not deserve the sack. That is simply ridiculous. Too many perfect and sanctimonious posters on this thread.


Which is why i no longer believe in the concept of professional juries. I would much prefer to take my chances with the 12 men good and true!!!!

[S76Heavy]

FEHERTO: Since you don't know my nationality or residence, please refrain from jumping to conclusions.
I was merely calling attention to the attitude that was sadly adopted by millions of people at the time; that rules must be obeyed without questioning, either out of blind faith or fear of reprisals.
And since you give your location as being Vienna, I would have expected some knowledge of where such blind obedience can lead and how it comes into existence, even in good people.

Blind obedience begins by not questioning seemingly small issues of loss of control and power, and by allowing "authorities" to dictate the small stuff; after all it doesn't do any harm, does it?
And before you know it, all critical thought is considered hostile, unpatriotic and especially in our chosen profession, as "unsafe". Guilty until proven innocent, by the way.

I wear my 4 bars in the knowledge that when push comes to shove, I am the one who has to come up with answers that can and will be scrutinised by the deskjockeys and bean counters who demand blind obedience to their rules, even if there are no or no appliccable rules for a given situation. That means I need to practice my critical thinking and decisionmaking, and accept responsibility for them.
I make mistakes every working day and I do my utmost not to make the fatal one. I work on a basis of trust between my coworkers and me, and trust in their propfessionalism and capabilities as they trust in mine.
Blind obedience of rules has nothing to do with professionalism, capabilities and trust and everything with CYA.

To me, the "incident" which is being blown all out of proportion, happened because there was trust in capabilities and professionalism between ATCO and supervisor, and everybody else on that floor for that matter. And that includes the cockpit crews as well.

The disciplinary action is all about CYA.

You choose your side of the fence, I have chosen mine. And it has f*ck all to do with nationality.

[garp]

garp,

Very true, which is why I made a point of assuming it was CAVOK when writing my post. I don't wish to give the wrong impression, that I have some sort of qualm with controllers, absolutely not.

My point was - ultimately we, as pilots, control the aeroplane(s). Surely the ATCO in question wouldn't have allowed this to happen if it were busy IMC. Therefore, good weather, quiet traffic, I don't see a problem, because at the end of the day, we will not accept a clearance if there's any chance it could endanger our aircraft, and that's a responsibility of all pilots.

Even if it was heavy IMC, that's when the radio fulfills it's secondary function - as a spatial orientation aid.

In my experience, most things in life sound or seem much worse when spoken (or written) about than when you're actually there and in control of the situation.

Thanks for the explanation. All is well.

[Ditchdigger]

To approach from a different angle, the question of how this violated the rules...

Clearly, it is a violation for an unlicensed, uncertified individual to make an ATC radio transmission. It seems to me that the intent of that rule is to prevent an individual with dishonorable intentions from causing a catastrophe, and to prevent an individual with honorable intentions, but lacking the necessary abilities, from causing a catastrophe. I have to wonder whether an individual capably relaying a valid clearance from a qualified and attentive controller was considered much of a factor. Perhaps, perhaps not.

Certainly it won't end the debate, but it calls into question whether this violation of the letter of the law was in fact a violation of the intent of the law.

I'll ask this again - so far, it hasn't been answered.

What can be done to turn this into a "positive" for the industry?

For the FAA to react in a measured and appropriate manner, with respect to not just the letter of the law, but to its intent, and for the FAA to react to the impact this incident had on the "safe, orderly, and expiditious flow of air traffic", not to the impact of sensationalized media reportage, thus proving that those in charge have a firm grip on reality.

Probably ain't gonna happen though...

[Chronus]

Let`s not forget the July 2002 mid air Flights 2937 and DHL 611 over Swiss airspace. This loss was particularly tragic as it involved so many children victims. When the aerial office is covering the ground at 8miles every minute all involved, be it on the ground or in the air need to be 100% on the job and not entertaining kids. There is no room for error. The job of ATC is just as serious and critical as everyone involved in the industry. The bottom line is safety, nothing can be allowed to compromise it.

[John Boeman]

Ergo, father was an idiot.
Show him the door...pronto.
Completely agree with Hotel Tango here. I usually like 411A's bluntness even if, like one or two others, I do not always agree with what he has to say. That post, for me, was easily the most disappointing one I can remember him making.
S76Heavy (and many others in the same vein) I'm right beside you.
Large chunks of our world seem to have lost all common sense, sometimes I am very grateful to be the wrong side of fifty.

[Global Warrior]

[QUOTE]Let`s not forget the July 2002 mid air Flights 2937 and DHL 611 over Swiss airspace. This loss was particularly tragic as it involved so many children victims. When the aerial office is covering the ground at 8miles every minute all involved, be it on the ground or in the air need to be 100% on the job and not entertaining kids. There is no room for error. The job of ATC is just as serious and critical as everyone involved in the industry. The bottom line is safety, nothing can be allowed to compromise it./QUOTE]

I think the point is that its only a question of opinion as to whether "safety" was compromised. Those that believe it was was, want to hang the guy, no trial, just hang him 'cause he compromised safety and had exercised poor judgement.

OK Fine. So by the same token, it would appear that every TCAS RA should result in either the Pilot, the controller or both being fired because safety has been compromised possibly due to poor judgement on behalf of one or the other. Not how i want aviation to go but hey........ there are people with all sorts of opinions.

[mad_jock]

Is this not worthy of a Poll?

something along the lines.

ATPL/CPL holder: I have a problem with this situation.
ATPL/CPL holder: I have no problem with this situation.
ATCO: I have a problem with this situation
ATCO: I have no problem with this situation
All the rest: I have a problem with this situation
All the rest: I have no problem with this situation

[Married a Canadian]

What can be done to turn this into a "positive" for the industry?

If us atcos are as "professional" as we say we are then perhaps we should look at some of the things we do that if ever leaked to the media would create the same sensationalism as this event.
Or are we saying that there is nothing else to look at?

Why are people comparing this incident to some of the most tragic in aviation history...now Uberlingen gets brought out as an example! What does that have to do with a child transmitting on the frequency. Read the accident report again and count the errors leading to that collision....now how does that compare to JFK and again as I say what COULD happen. C'mon guys...what was going to happen?

Safety safety safety....no valid atco or pilot would seriously say it is not their number one priority. However the very nature of the job means there are occasions when a decision is made that in retrospect might not have been the best or the most correct.
We don't seem to throw each other to the fire when these decisions involve RAs, airmisses, go arounds and the like. Infact we get all protective of each other and list the mitigating circumstances.
In this instance the circumstances have been listed in defence of this controller....and yet some still aren't happy even though safety was not compromised and no losses of separation occured

it would appear that every TCAS RA should result in either the Pilot, the controller or both being fired because safety has been compromised possibly due to poor judgement on behalf of one or the other. Not how i want aviation to go but hey........ there are people with all sorts of opinions

Quite agree...what is the difference guys....you can say that we do not willfully attempt to endanger an aircraft.....but then you have to level that at the JFK controller aswell...which makes him guilty of no more than stupidity.
Try him by the same rules that you apply to yourself....and remember them next time you are sitting in an enquiry board.

[Ditchdigger]

...There is no room for error.

As Global Warrior points out, there's plenty of error, every day. I'm certainly not an advocate of error, but I think it's more realistic to think that there's room for all the error that there's room to correct. From there, it's a matter of how comfortable the margin is.

The job of ATC is just as serious and critical as everyone involved in the industry. The bottom line is safety, nothing can be allowed to compromise it.


I think part of the problem here is that there's plenty of hyperbole out there that paints the picture of ATC as moment by moment, split second, life or death, decision making. While there may be, at certain times, and in certain locations, some of that, on the whole it just isn't so. There's plenty that's routine, unto mundane. I think it does a grave disservice to those men and women who are capable of handling those extreme moments, to imply that they're a) incapable of telling the difference, and b) incapable of adding anything to the routine without overtaxing their ability to handle the extreme, should it suddenly arise.

[Flight Safety]

We're 12 pages into this topic now. I asked earlier if anyone can site an FAA regulation this ATC violated. I assume he (and the supervisor) will be judged by the regs they violated. Anyone?

[dvv]

14 C.f.r. § 65.31

[MosEisley]

This is amazing. After listening to the recording it is quite obvious there was no danger to any aircraft. I was based in NY for about 10 years and this would have been a welcome moment of levity. I have now flown all over the world and if passengers are actually distressed by this event, how would they respond to recordings of Mumbai or Mogadishu ATC? This is a NON EVENT. The only regrettable aspect of this whole thing is that a great controller (it is JFK after all) is going to lose his job.

[protectthehornet]

dvv

would that be chantilly, sterling, tysons corner?

OK...if the FAA fires everyone who broke a regulation, go ahead and fire the guy.

But everyone, who even is guilty of hypocricy must be fired including Randy Babbit (head of the faa)...who wants experience in the cockpit but doesn't want to pay for it.

[FEHERTO]

S76HEAVY: Just to mention this period of history is primitive in an aviation forum. Especially you also do not know my nationality. And just Vienna says nothing. You brought the political point in the disucssion, so you take it out. And you attacked every Austrian National, and this means also my grandparents, having been murdered in a KZ!

I am an aviation accident investigator for a very long period. I have seen to many people killed just be the fact that somebody thought he/she does the right thing. And not following the rules! Rules are sometimes not perfect and sure I have sometimes "interpreted" them in my way.

But would you accept that a seven year old child is driven a car in the streets of new York, even the father is sitting on the side ? Would you accept that a seven year old is regulating the traffic in a extrem busy intersection ?

And by the way: I wear also 4 bars for a long time, so I know the business and what the rules are.

Or why every shouted, when a eleven year old boy had been sitting in the Commander seat of an A310, supervised by the father (the Commander). did everybody cry, because the aircraft crashed. What would you say, when an aircraft would have had an incident/accident in the scene of NYC? The complete way these people in the tower worked is more than unprofessional and it must be questioned how they normally work. I can tell you clearly, in Europe they would be never ever able to work again in a tower.

[Rj111]

Wasn't very professional. Slap on the wrists to ensure it doesn't become commonplace and the standards don't slip across the board and leave it at that.

[Global Warrior]

But would you accept that a seven year old child is driven a car in the streets of new York, even the father is sitting on the side ? Would you accept that a seven year old is regulating the traffic in a extrem busy intersection ?

What If? What If? What If?

What if my auntie joan had a c**k? She would be my uncle jim!!!

Pushing a button and telling a crew, that by all accounts is fully aware of what is going on that, they are cleared for take off is COMPLETELY different to having a child driving a car around. And if you want to compare JFK to an extremely busy intersection, bear in mind that JFK has (20?) possibly more (i admit i dont know the total number but its more than 1) controllers in any shift and therefore a busy intersection with 20? controllers is a far safer place (assuming they all work together) than an intersection with 1 controller.

The safety of this situation was no more compromised by a 9 year old that was

A) Completely Supervised
B) Told Verbatim what to say
C) Did it with more clarity than some qualified people
D) The recipients were aware of it
E) It appears to have been at a quiet time of day

Than if a trainee had said it that then needed to be corrected for a honest mistake by his supervisor, just at the crew hit the TOGA button because the NHP was reading back the clearance whilst the HP, in a hurry stood em up and let em go!!!

Now i grant you this HAD there have been an incident and its causes were traced back to a 9 year old, then the guy is going to face criminal prosecution for negligence. BUT BUT BIG BUT

You have a professional controller, that was working his shift to the best of his ability. he is familiar with his surroundings and his colleagues jobs. They all link together to form one hell of a cohesive unit. The controller uses his judgement. he figures, ok its a really quiet time of day, theres not much going on due to various factors affecting US airspace that day, ahhhh, what the heck, no danger in briefing my kid and letting them issue a take off clearance. And he was right, there was no danger in it. There was no incident. There was no accident. So the what if brigade need to chill

But just to appease you, sure if there had been an incident............. but this guy did all in his professional capacity to ensure that there was no more danger as a result of his kid transmitting, than if he had issued the clearance himself. He's a professional. He's weighed up the odds......professionally.......S**t he didnt realise he would need a bloody publicist to handle the media storm but........ as a professional aviator, none of those 26??? exams i ever sat taught me to deal with the sodding media.

Had he have issued the clearance himself and then there was an incident, there would be an investigation and he may be suspended pending investigation, or may even take time off work due to stress but the investigation might find that the incident was due to and under pressurised tyre that deflated, tore itself off the rim, caused the crew to abandon the TO and blocked his runway. Something for which he can not be held accountable for. And neither could his kid.

But then again...... there was no incident, accident or reduction of safety. And by all accounts JFK was quieter than Hinton in the hedges...at night!!!!

GW

[nascargeek21]

In my opinion, even if it was against regulations, the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board have gone way overboard with their response. I mean, no, the dad should not have let the kids communicate on the radio with pilots. But in the controller's defense, the controller was right there telling the kids what to say, and he could have made a correction if the kids had said something wrong!

[FEHERTO]

Global Warrior: I am not saying that at this moment we had a risk or a close accident or similar. What I am saying is, he violated a rule in a way, which shows an absolute unprofessional accomplishment of his duties.

Just remember not a long time ago a video had been shown, where a Commander of Egypt Air let a child sitting in his seat and standing behind. the FO still in his seat at the controls. He whole world cried like a punch of wolfs, the Commander and the FO had been fired as quick as I can say "One" and Egypt Air got punished like crazy (which is not very public known). No danger in the situation at this moment, or I am wrong ?

Would you place a child in your left seat and stand behind. I believe, if you take your job serious, it will never happen. And the same is valid for a FAA approved controller.

Often I had to interview surviving crews after an accident and received answers like "Well I thought .....". Sometimes the thinking is required to avoid an accident, but sometimes it causes the accident.

I am saying nothing else, that he violated the rules and this is unacceptable.

[dvv]

GW, goddamn, I knew that. The cops shouldn't have busted me for busting a stop sign on a totally empty intersection at 3 in the morning.

[Flight Safety]

dvv, technically, the ATC did not violate 65.31 (and several other 65 subpart B regulations), his children did.

[MPN11]

From another Thread ...

We can discuss forever about "What If" ... that's not the point. Forget the detail, forget the trivia, it's simply not a good move at an International Airport. It makes the entire ATC operation look slack, and sloppy, and ... unprofessional.

With luck, the controller will have a job in a week's time.

Let's put it to bed, eh?

I subscribe to that view.

It was NOT a very good idea.
It was NOT the end of the world.

Are we all very bored today? ;)

[Panop]

The controller was still 'in control' and able to intervene instantly if anything somehow went wrong (different scenario altogether to placing a child in the 'driver's seat' and standing behind him or her). Therefore, risk of an incident was minimal to none.

The guy is probably excellent at his job or at least must be reasonably competent to be allowed to work there in the first place. If he loses his job all that ability and experience (and money spent on training him) is wasted.

However, he displayed a bizarre lack of common sense and foresight (as did his supervisor) by not seeing what was coming - it wasn't what he is trained to look out for but he should have seen it anyway. Air traffic controllers should have an awareness of risk factors after all.

JFK ATC does not live in a vacuum. Even if none of the other controllers or pilots who heard the transmissions ever made mention of it (either critically or as just a point of interest) there are plenty of other people who could be listening in either directly or online so it was going to become a subject of conversation at some point.

There was then no way in the world that someone in the media, somewhere, was not going to pick up the story and run amok with it. Newspapers and TV, let alone the Internet, are full of even less worthy stories than this that get the headline "shock, horror" treatment so it was going to happen and when it did the knee jerk reaction from the bosses was totally inevitable.

They have backsides to protect as well and didn't get where they are today by showing backbone and supporting their staff in the face of pressure from the media and 'public opinion' (whatever that is). You don't get to high places in bureaucratic bodies by displaying those sort of qualities!

My problem with the judgement skills of the guy at the centre of the storm isn't that he endangered anyone else but that he voluntarily put himself so firmly in the firing line. We all make bad judgement calls (I have made some beauties in my time and still do) but do it publicly (and, like it or not, JFK Tower is not exactly Top Secret) and you've got to expect the flak to find you. You are kidding yourself if you think it won't.

I hope wisdom prevails and after a serious chat about the perils of stirring the media and perhaps some training in personal risk assessment, he and his supervisor are allowed to continue their careers once the storm has died down.

I hope eventually his kids learn some useful lessons from the episode as well - but I'm not too confident that so far they have - and if Dad gets sacked then the (totally unjustified) feelings of guilt will be enormous - not healthy at all and something all the adults involved would do well to consider seriously.

[Global Warrior]

GW, goddamn, I knew that. The cops shouldn't have busted me for busting a stop sign on a totally empty intersection at 3 in the morning.

dvv, the security cameras would have caught you and sent you a ticket in the post man. One hopes you were speeding at the time as well. May as well make their night on duty worthwhile!!!


Wasn't very professional. Slap on the wrists to ensure it doesn't become commonplace and the standards don't slip across the board and leave it at that.

Most sensible post made here on this subject. My shouting with regards to this is about not being tried, found guilty and punished......... by the :mad: media :=:=:=

GW

[dvv]

Flight Safety, technically, the father and the supervisor were accomplices and, on two counts, contributed to the delinquency of a minor.

[Ditchdigger]

You know, it just occurred to me to ask--the fact that the supervisor has also been suspended would seem to indicate that permission to let the kid talk on frequency was sought and granted by the controller's immediate superior. I wonder if the supe isn't in worse trouble than the controller?

[p51guy]

Hopefully all the press and attention given to this unfortunate innocent incident will pass soon. Maybe we can spend this energy on something important next time and let these folks go back to work.

[cityfan]

Boy, oh boy! The world is screaming for some common sense!

Slap is wrist, make the point, move on!

Why is EVERYTHING THAT IS NOTHING so sensationalized these days, while serious, substantive issues get shuffled away because they are politically sensitive, like fatigue, rest rules, the gutting of employment contracts by use of bankruptcy laws, etc, etc, etc...

As ANYONE who heard the tapes can attest, NO-ONE, AT ANY TIME, showed ANY concern with what happened. NO-ONE!

Was it the pinnacle of professionalism? No. Did it hurt anyone? No. COULD it have hurt anyone? Only in the most ridiculous extrapolation of circumstances, and even then probably not. Should children be brought to work every day to direct air traffic? No.....but they are out flying around in those same traffic corridors (the busiest in the world, I might add) as FOs making £10,000 per year to start, if you are lucky enough to find a job!

I guess this is the pןɹoʍ in which we currently live! :ugh:

[patrickal]

In a society where we now take kindergarden kids out of school in handcuffs for brigning a pen knife or an asprin to school, why does this surprise us? Single point of cause ---Lawyers. :ugh:

[411A]

Single point of cause ---Lawyers.

Nope, not even close.
Air traffic control facilities are secure domains, and the concerned few individuals breached same.

Question:
Did the respective ATC guys have the approval of the facility chief?
IF not...they are in hot water, and likely to lose their job.
What a waste.

In other words...a dumb move on their part.
In addition, TRACON and FAA tower tours have now been suspended...I wonder...how many kids will now be denied the privilege of watching how air traffic control is done?

One bad apple...spoiles it for everyone else.
A shame.

[MarcK]

Clearly, it is a violation for an unlicensed, uncertified individual to make an ATC radio transmission
What is it a violation of? Not an FCC rule. Which FAA rule?

[Hotel Charlie]

Come on 411A ...

This is nothing but political correctness and it is total BS :yuk:

[bhirsh95]

in 1994, a dad let his kids fly the plane. his 15 year old son took control after his sister and the plane crashed killing 75. this isn't nearly as bad.

[stepwilk]

What particularly interests me about this whole incident--which, incidentally, has overstayed its leave and now, into double-digit pages needs to be dropped--is that if nothing else, it illustrates the innate overconfidence, if you can call it that, and arrogance of the skilled air-traffic controller.

Now believe me, I don't mean that in a negative way. Controllers are famously confident and assertive--call it arrogant, in a way--just as Marines are aggressive and in your face, and I wouldn't want it any other way. My 45 years of interrelationship with controllers here in the U. S. as a "commercial" but non-working pilot in everything from Stearmans to Citations has been, with very few exceptions, outstanding.

But it amuses me that lots of people say, "What was he thinking? How could he have thought he'd get away with that? Didn't he understand what the Internet would do?"

The answer, I think, is that he's a controller. "Controllers Tell Pilots Where To Go," as the once-popular bumper sticker used to have it. It never occurred to this guy, in a sense, that he couldn't do what he damned well decided, after briefly thinking about it, that he wanted to do.

And good for him. It's a trait fast disappearing.

[Bealzebub]

The problem here is that pilots and air traffic controllers work to a set of rules and standards. Those rules and standards form the basis by which we are required in all but the most unusual of circumstances to adhere to. Inevitably there will be rules and standards that we might as individuals view as unnecessary or interpretive, nevertheless we are required to comply with the norm. This type of event might have attracted little attention by way of a violation, in a historical gentler time, but only the most naive could believe that it would attract anything other than high profile and unwelcome attention in this day and age, and certainly when the "event" took place at a major international airport.

Whatever the perception of risk that might or might not have been occaisioned by this particular event, it undoubtably showed a severe lack of judgment and common sense on the part of those involved. That is obviously borne out by the fact that it is completely unrepresentative of the normal behaviour of other professional controllers in that or any other similar environment.

It is always easy to lend vicarious support to those who would rebel or display maverick tendancies, simply because the rules seem overly restrictive, or because we would wish to live in a different time, but there is little doubt that the parties involved in this incident, showed precious little awareness and perception as to the likely consequences.

[KRviator]

Now all we have to do is wait for the mee-dya to find out about all those other "Bring your kid to work" type people who let their kids have a go.

It's no different to someone here putting his kid at the controls of a 10,000 tonne coal train and telling him what to do, nor standing your young'un at the helm of a passenger ferry and giving them a steer.

The possibility of something going wrong isn't even worth working out, but we've now got a case of a bloke facing the prospect of losing his job for being a good parent, (another) case of the peckerheads in the media making a mountain out of a molehill, and the looming prospect of the inability to take your kids to work unless you're employed in a Call Centre - as long as you don't let them answer the phone when they're there...

I wish I was born 60 years ago... Living in a world of DC-3's and none of this bollocks...

[411A]

It is always easy to lend vicarious support to those who would rebel or display maverick tendancies, simply because the rules seem overly restrictive, or because we would wish to live in a different time, but there is little doubt that the parties involved in this incident, showed precious little awareness and perception as to the likely consequences.

Couldn't agree more...well said.

[Bealzebub]

Except that it isn't a requirement of being a "good parent" and neither is it a requirement that taking your kid to work means, where permitted, that necessarily means anything other than watching what it is mum or dad do. As a pilot if I take my kid to work, it means they sit in the cabin in flight with the prospect of seeing the business end on the ground. That is not as exciting as it used to be, but it is the reality of the current regime. Failure to comply with that regime would place my career in very real jeopardy, as well as possibly affecting the careers of my colleagues who I would otherwise place in a seriously invidious position.

There are occupations where the professionals concerned are expected to display a high level of maturity, awareness and sound judgment. That is certainly the case with these two professions, and the overwhelming majority of participants (who might regret the reality of the situation) comply absolutely with those requirements. That doesn't make them bad parents, in fact quite the opposite.

[SDFlyer]

It is interesting that those making excuses for and otherwise defending the controller in this thread are the ones, in much larger proportion than their opponents, making insulting personal remarks about other posters. Not in every case certainly, but the difference between groups is clear.

Perhaps I should run a contingency table analysis and come up with a Fisher's exact P value. :)

Don't get me wrong, it wouldn't bother me a bit if directed at me. But I'm curious .... why all the animus?