Three german ATCOs degraded to office work
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Three german ATCOs degraded to office work
Three german ATCOs were degraded to office work only. They were on night shift together, and two of them were sleeping while one was working. During that period a runway incursion happened, with one aircraft taking off from a taxiway that was blocked on the far end by another aircraft. So it was rather a taxiway incursion. Nothing happened, but all three controllers were degraded, because one who was sleeping was entered in the position log. All three of them will never work as ATCOs in Germany again.
In my opinion a very hard punishment for falsification of documents. What do you think?
In my opinion a very hard punishment for falsification of documents. What do you think?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During that period a runway incursion happened, with one aircraft taking off from a taxiway that was blocked on the far end by another aircraft. So it was rather a taxiway incursion.Nothing happened,
Using taxiways as runways when the proper procedures are in place is not that unusual, but allowing an aircraft to take off from a taxiway which was blocked by another aircraft at the far end would be grounds enough on it's own for taking severe disciplinary action against the ATCO who authorised the take off.
All three controllers were degraded, because one who was sleeping was entered in the position log. All three of them will never work as ATCOs in Germany again.
Not only "falsification of documents" but also what appears to be gross negligence and possible collusion between the guilty partys to get their story straight.
Whether they all deserved to be sacked is debatable, but certainly the ATCO who authorised the taxiway take off should have at least lost their unit endorsements and be made to retrain at the unit from scratch.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Germany
Age: 46
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this is just a simplified summary
of the event.
I also learnt about this incident around a couple of corners. As far as I know the taxiway was not blocked on the far end but quite close to where the departing aircraft began its takeoff roll.
According to my information the aircraft took the taxiway by mistake.
I also learnt about this incident around a couple of corners. As far as I know the taxiway was not blocked on the far end but quite close to where the departing aircraft began its takeoff roll.
According to my information the aircraft took the taxiway by mistake.
Last edited by eagleflyer; 31st Jul 2009 at 22:27.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: EU
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well couple of things which concerns me:
1.whether airport was equipped with ground movement surveillance? since incident happened night time,it might be that without radar controller wasn't able to clearly see if acft was on taxiway or on the runway.
2. and why atco who wasn't logged in also was demoted
if he supposed to have break,can't he take a quick nap?
1.whether airport was equipped with ground movement surveillance? since incident happened night time,it might be that without radar controller wasn't able to clearly see if acft was on taxiway or on the runway.
2. and why atco who wasn't logged in also was demoted
if he supposed to have break,can't he take a quick nap?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In fact the take-off from the taxiway was NOT cleared by the controller. The pilot was cleared for a normal take-off from the runway, and read back the clearance correctly. He took the taxiway for the runway by his own mistake. The controller did not realize the pilots mistake in time to avoid it. That is the only mistake he can be blamed for.
The airport is equipped with ground surveillance radar using Mode S, but I have no information about the serviceability of the equipment at the time if the incident.
The interesting point is, that DFS is not taking action because of the incident, and is not asking whether the presence of two or three people in the tower would have helped to avoid it, but is only taking disciplinary action because of falsification of documents. And therefore I think, removing some 30 year old-controller completely from duty is a bit hard. The other two are 40 and 44 year old. They loose parts of their income (1,5 Million Euro for the 30-year old, calucualted to end of controllers career), parts of their company pension, maybe their houses or whatever. Still think this is fair for people who did a good job for years, and now are caught for falsification of documents?
The airport is equipped with ground surveillance radar using Mode S, but I have no information about the serviceability of the equipment at the time if the incident.
The interesting point is, that DFS is not taking action because of the incident, and is not asking whether the presence of two or three people in the tower would have helped to avoid it, but is only taking disciplinary action because of falsification of documents. And therefore I think, removing some 30 year old-controller completely from duty is a bit hard. The other two are 40 and 44 year old. They loose parts of their income (1,5 Million Euro for the 30-year old, calucualted to end of controllers career), parts of their company pension, maybe their houses or whatever. Still think this is fair for people who did a good job for years, and now are caught for falsification of documents?
Still think this is fair for people who did a good job for years, and now are caught for falsification of documents?
(I have no comment on the incident in question, the alleged offences, or the magnitude of the penalties.)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the UK, under certain circumstances, "falsification of documents" is a breach of the Air Navgation Order and consequently a breach of the law.
I don't know how NATS would handle it, but I know of a few non NATS ATCOs who've been involved in this kind of thing and, with the exception of one (who was dismissed) they were given pay in lieu of contractual notice with the promise of a basic employers reference and told to leave immediately.
None appealed.
These guys in Germany screwed but it doesn't mean they'll never work as ATCOs again.
After, we used to send our criminals to Oz and it didn't do them any harm....
I don't know how NATS would handle it, but I know of a few non NATS ATCOs who've been involved in this kind of thing and, with the exception of one (who was dismissed) they were given pay in lieu of contractual notice with the promise of a basic employers reference and told to leave immediately.
None appealed.
These guys in Germany screwed but it doesn't mean they'll never work as ATCOs again.
After, we used to send our criminals to Oz and it didn't do them any harm....
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
making a mistake is one thing, such as not noticing in time that an aircraft is attempting to take off from a taxiway (though (without knowing the ergonomis of the airport) I fail to see how this could happen unless weather was poor, equipment was U/S).
Falsifying documents (if indeed they did) is another matter all together and the guys who did so deserve everything that gets thrown at them.
Falsifying documents (if indeed they did) is another matter all together and the guys who did so deserve everything that gets thrown at them.
