Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

JFK ATC in the news...

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

JFK ATC in the news...

Old 3rd Mar 2010, 15:56
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That kid must have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night
blackbaron is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 16:00
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nr.EGHI, UK
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BBC News(?) have picked it up - BBC News - New York airport jets 'directed by child'

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
Sgt.Slabber is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 16:30
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Forest of Caledon
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.

Aaasome jahb. What could possibly go wrong?!
Low Flier is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 16:31
  #24 (permalink)  

Controversial, moi?
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,606
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
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?
M.Mouse is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 16:46
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Isle Dordt
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mr. Mouse, it was clear that the boy was supervised by one of JFK's regulars [strike]who apparently controlled 13 years without certificate... sorry that's another thread[/strike] ready to intervene. The controller was in control of the situation.
MathFox is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 16:51
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Ex-pat Aussie in the UK
Posts: 5,791
Received 112 Likes on 54 Posts
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.)

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.
Checkboard is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 16:52
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Malvern, UK
Posts: 425
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
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.
Dont Hang Up is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 16:57
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London,England
Posts: 1,388
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
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.
Max Angle is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 17:00
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Above & Beyond
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
punk666 is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 17:02
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: stockport uk
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
purplehelmet is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 17:05
  #31 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 67
Posts: 10,143
Received 62 Likes on 50 Posts
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.
PAXboy is online now  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 17:08
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: US/EU
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Mark in CA is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 17:39
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the EU on a small Island
Age: 79
Posts: 529
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Two-Tone-Blue is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 17:48
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Limbricht
Posts: 2,193
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
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 is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 18:00
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Limbricht
Posts: 2,193
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
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.
Avman is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 18:02
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
<<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..
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 18:14
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: stockport uk
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
purplehelmet is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 18:15
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Kid in the Tower the sequel to Kid in the Cockpit

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.
Chronus is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 18:27
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NZ
Age: 63
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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 ?
eklawyer is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2010, 18:28
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: stockport uk
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
tkazaz.
ahem think you will find flight 593 accident was 23 march 1994 16 years ago
purplehelmet is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.