Landing NORDO at KDCA
My research revealed that a KTEB tower controller, alone on midnight shift, locked himself out of the cab. He called the TRACON, informed them of the situation, the NY TRACON took control of the airspace and three planes landed under "CTAF" procedures. All a non-event, as expected when the media and high politicians are uninvolved.
It happened during construction on the tower, the incident occurred on July 5, 2009 and was termed "inconvenient" by FAA spokesman Jim Peters.
Other than the cellphone coordination, exactly on point, in my view.
It happened during construction on the tower, the incident occurred on July 5, 2009 and was termed "inconvenient" by FAA spokesman Jim Peters.
Other than the cellphone coordination, exactly on point, in my view.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lord Spandex Masher:
They also reflect a lot of light off the runway, especially a concrete runway as at LAX. LAX was my home base for most of my career. I am almost certain that tragic accident would not have happened had the commuter bird had its landing lights on while waiting in position.
Yes, but landing lights point forward, if you are landing on the same runway as someone taking off then all you'll see are some nav lights...maybe.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Had to get to my den computer to also say if the landing lights are on the runway is lit up so chances of getting landed on are pretty slim. As I said before at least 95% of US pilots would have landed when it was declared uncontrolled. I guess you think our major airline landing in Puerto Rico at the uncontrolled old B52 base was cowboy flying. My airline was disgustingly conservative and non of our pilots thought landing there without an operating control tower was risky. I guess we have a different culture and we just prefer ours. Hope you never have a situation that isn't covered by one of your rules because on this side of the pond we do what makes sense and deal with it on the ground.
I just ask "What would Bob Hoover do". Stole that from one of my born again religious friends. Sorry. His idol started with J. I see Hoover every year at the Reno Air Races.
I just ask "What would Bob Hoover do". Stole that from one of my born again religious friends. Sorry. His idol started with J. I see Hoover every year at the Reno Air Races.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It will be interesting to read the NTSB report on this incident, to see what they have to say about the actions taken, assuming that the FAA lets things rest for now by suspending the tower controller.
It doesn't take an over-active imagination to see how a controller asleep at the switch might create an unsafe situation for a landing aircraft; otherwise, why have a controller on duty in the first place?
At a major airport you may have some sort of maintenance vehicles operating on their own frequency, one not immediately known to aircraft crews. It is easy to envision a situation where a maintenance crew has been cleared onto an active runway, when they would not be aware of a landing aircraft, nor vice-versa, if the tower controller had quietly nodded off.
If you were landing on a ten-thousand foot runway, could you be 100% sure of spotting a small truck a long way down it in the roll-out zone? You know how we see what we expect to see, not something like one blinking yellow light out there among all the other runway lights. I think one could make the same argument for a departing aircraft sat there "on the numbers" as you come in for a landing. Should you be able to understand what those extra lights mean when your mind is set to "I am cleared to land with the runway in sight?" Hopefully, yes, but I would not want to have to count on that!
At an uncontrolled airport one advantage is that everyone should be on the same advisory frequency; you shouldn't have to wonder if there is someone out on your landing runway who is effectively un-notified to you and out of radio contact with you through no fault of his own.
I just hope that the FAA takes this as a wake-up (Hah!) call; we got "two for free" but let's do something so that it doesn't happen the same way again with a not-so-good result.
It doesn't take an over-active imagination to see how a controller asleep at the switch might create an unsafe situation for a landing aircraft; otherwise, why have a controller on duty in the first place?
At a major airport you may have some sort of maintenance vehicles operating on their own frequency, one not immediately known to aircraft crews. It is easy to envision a situation where a maintenance crew has been cleared onto an active runway, when they would not be aware of a landing aircraft, nor vice-versa, if the tower controller had quietly nodded off.
If you were landing on a ten-thousand foot runway, could you be 100% sure of spotting a small truck a long way down it in the roll-out zone? You know how we see what we expect to see, not something like one blinking yellow light out there among all the other runway lights. I think one could make the same argument for a departing aircraft sat there "on the numbers" as you come in for a landing. Should you be able to understand what those extra lights mean when your mind is set to "I am cleared to land with the runway in sight?" Hopefully, yes, but I would not want to have to count on that!
At an uncontrolled airport one advantage is that everyone should be on the same advisory frequency; you shouldn't have to wonder if there is someone out on your landing runway who is effectively un-notified to you and out of radio contact with you through no fault of his own.
I just hope that the FAA takes this as a wake-up (Hah!) call; we got "two for free" but let's do something so that it doesn't happen the same way again with a not-so-good result.
Last edited by chuks; 30th Mar 2011 at 23:56.
I give up, Chuks, how would a napping ATCO create an unsafe situation? He was on duty because no one at the FAA would allow KDCA to be a designated uncontrolled airport at night. Hell, KLGA was uncontrolled at night at one time, but not KDCA. Something about no-good politicians assume they deserve controllers.
GF
GF
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aterpster, I won't deny that landing lights are reflected from the runway surface, afterall that is how they work. However, the runway itself has it's own lights and the ambient light they produce can do a good job of masking any, some or all of the reflected light. That is my own personal experience. The most obvious lights you see from another aircraft on the runway are the nav lights and even then they ain't that easy to spot.
Bubbers,
Nope, not at all. If you look back at my posts you will see that I learnt to fly at an uncontrolled airport. I still occasionally operate to an uncontrolled airport. You will also see I have stated that there is nothing inherently dangerous about operating at an uncontrolled airport. Clear enough this time?
Why? Have I ever stated a need or a desire to have a rule that covers every eventuality? No, I haven't. What I have done is ask for clarification about this situation. I've been told there is no rule that allows it but no rule that prohibits it. So, therefore, it's ok. Do you not see the contradiction there? It was then that I asked to see the relevant regulation. That is all.
GF,
Do you think that it would be safer for DCA to be uncontrolled at night, obviously bearing in mind what has just happened? At least then everybody would expect it and be prepared for it.
Bubbers,
I guess you think our major airline landing in Puerto Rico at the uncontrolled old B52 base was cowboy flying. My airline was disgustingly conservative and non of our pilots thought landing there without an operating control tower was risky. I guess we have a different culture and we just prefer ours.
Hope you never have a situation that isn't covered by one of your rules because on this side of the pond we do what makes sense and deal with it on the ground.
GF,
He was on duty because no one at the FAA would allow KDCA to be a designated uncontrolled airport at night
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point is that having a controller fall asleep is far less safe than having no controller at all! There is one set of assumptions for an uncontrolled airport but a far different set for a controlled airport.
For instance, I once had my trusty Beech BE-95 Travel Air crap out on me over at the main terminal of Miami International in the middle of the night. (This was back when I was a starving air taxi pilot saving up for my ATP.) We got hold of our ramp guy who came across with the van and the tow bar, when we got clearance from the Tower to tow the Travel Air back to the Butler ramp on the north side of the airport. So far, so good.
Of course, just pulling onto 09L the towbar went PING! so that we coasted to a gentle halt toward its middle with a very large set of landing lights now bearing down from a couple of miles off, plus the miserable battery, the cause of the original problem, now went completely dead and took the radio and the beacon with it.
Russ the ramp guy, not the sharpest tool in the box at 2 a.m., had carried on a bit in the van with the good radio, not immediately noticing that the towbar had broken; it took a minute to get him back so that we could report to the tower that, umm, we were sort of parked in the middle of 09L for a few minutes! Then we set a new record for two guys pushing a Travel Air up across the steep crown of the runway and then down the other side clear of it.
Isn't aviation sort of like that? It was the middle of the night, nothing had happened for hours, we needed to tow an aircraft, the towbar broke just pulling onto the runway, we lost the beacon and the aircraft radio, plus the bright strobe on the van headed off into the middle distance for a bit, and just then the only arrival since forever showed up!
Who could imagine a controller going to sleep, yet that happened, didn't it? Let's imagine that guy on final just assuming that the runway he was cleared for a visual approach to was clear for landing with not a peep out of the tower, especially since about 50% of it really was! Who could have come up with this clownish scenario as something plausible?
For instance, I once had my trusty Beech BE-95 Travel Air crap out on me over at the main terminal of Miami International in the middle of the night. (This was back when I was a starving air taxi pilot saving up for my ATP.) We got hold of our ramp guy who came across with the van and the tow bar, when we got clearance from the Tower to tow the Travel Air back to the Butler ramp on the north side of the airport. So far, so good.
Of course, just pulling onto 09L the towbar went PING! so that we coasted to a gentle halt toward its middle with a very large set of landing lights now bearing down from a couple of miles off, plus the miserable battery, the cause of the original problem, now went completely dead and took the radio and the beacon with it.
Russ the ramp guy, not the sharpest tool in the box at 2 a.m., had carried on a bit in the van with the good radio, not immediately noticing that the towbar had broken; it took a minute to get him back so that we could report to the tower that, umm, we were sort of parked in the middle of 09L for a few minutes! Then we set a new record for two guys pushing a Travel Air up across the steep crown of the runway and then down the other side clear of it.
Isn't aviation sort of like that? It was the middle of the night, nothing had happened for hours, we needed to tow an aircraft, the towbar broke just pulling onto the runway, we lost the beacon and the aircraft radio, plus the bright strobe on the van headed off into the middle distance for a bit, and just then the only arrival since forever showed up!
Who could imagine a controller going to sleep, yet that happened, didn't it? Let's imagine that guy on final just assuming that the runway he was cleared for a visual approach to was clear for landing with not a peep out of the tower, especially since about 50% of it really was! Who could have come up with this clownish scenario as something plausible?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spandex - what happens in the real world is folks that can't, or won't, fly day in day out, for whatever reason, get to sit in their offices, at the perfect temperature, in perfect lighting, for days, while calling everyone they can think off, to figure out - "what would I have done?"
If it's too dark they don't work on the problem. If it's too cold they don't work on the problem. If it's too late they don't work on the problem. If it's too early they don't work on the problem. If their cell phone dies they don't work on the problem. If their wife calls them they don't work on the problem, etc, etc, etc. Why put any time contraint on answering the question, they've got as long as they think they need.
It's pretty funny to see some of them actually performing in a simulator. Reality is a lot different from pretending.
Misd-agin's first law of aviation - "a plane in motion MUST stay in motion", sometimes requires decisions to be made fairly quickly. IMO the guys did fine.
If it's too dark they don't work on the problem. If it's too cold they don't work on the problem. If it's too late they don't work on the problem. If it's too early they don't work on the problem. If their cell phone dies they don't work on the problem. If their wife calls them they don't work on the problem, etc, etc, etc. Why put any time contraint on answering the question, they've got as long as they think they need.
It's pretty funny to see some of them actually performing in a simulator. Reality is a lot different from pretending.
Misd-agin's first law of aviation - "a plane in motion MUST stay in motion", sometimes requires decisions to be made fairly quickly. IMO the guys did fine.
LSM
Given the normal overnight traffic count at KDCA (and most airports, world-wide), I don't think it matters much, controlled or uncontrolled. Granted LVP, the possibility of really adverse weather might weigh things in favor of having a controller, but VFR night like the one in question, could go either way.
Look at the history of jet mid-air collisions, most occurred in controlled airspace.
USAF training bases are all uncontrolled, except for procedures to separate traffic--works fine without any controller input. There is 20 or more planes in the air, all uncontrolled with students! KLGA without controllers never seemed to compromise safety. OTOH, the "frequency separation" practiced by PATCO did very much compromise safety. Overhead JFK at FL200, given a new frequency where I was greeted by, "NxxxHA, if you are on frequency, TURN IMMEDIATELY TO 090, OPPOSITE DIRECTION TRAFFIC". A DC-9 sped by, co-altitude. It was called a "deal", in PATCO speak.
On the whole, I'd rather have ACAS and no controllers than controllers and no ACAS. But then again, I feel safer at home because I and 50% of my town's residents have weapons at home than I do because of the local police.
I do fly with lots of pilots who would have it otherwise--flying is a reflection of personality. I don't think you are wrong, just that you have a different view of things.
GF
Given the normal overnight traffic count at KDCA (and most airports, world-wide), I don't think it matters much, controlled or uncontrolled. Granted LVP, the possibility of really adverse weather might weigh things in favor of having a controller, but VFR night like the one in question, could go either way.
Look at the history of jet mid-air collisions, most occurred in controlled airspace.
USAF training bases are all uncontrolled, except for procedures to separate traffic--works fine without any controller input. There is 20 or more planes in the air, all uncontrolled with students! KLGA without controllers never seemed to compromise safety. OTOH, the "frequency separation" practiced by PATCO did very much compromise safety. Overhead JFK at FL200, given a new frequency where I was greeted by, "NxxxHA, if you are on frequency, TURN IMMEDIATELY TO 090, OPPOSITE DIRECTION TRAFFIC". A DC-9 sped by, co-altitude. It was called a "deal", in PATCO speak.
On the whole, I'd rather have ACAS and no controllers than controllers and no ACAS. But then again, I feel safer at home because I and 50% of my town's residents have weapons at home than I do because of the local police.
I do fly with lots of pilots who would have it otherwise--flying is a reflection of personality. I don't think you are wrong, just that you have a different view of things.
GF
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
misd-
I think I understand. You think I sit in an office with no comprehension of reality. You think I don't fly for a living and haven't for more than a decade and a half. You think I can't solve problems and you think I think that the 'guys' didn't do fine.
Is that about right? One word - Wrong.
If that's not what you meant then I can make no other sense of your post.
Must try harder.
I think I understand. You think I sit in an office with no comprehension of reality. You think I don't fly for a living and haven't for more than a decade and a half. You think I can't solve problems and you think I think that the 'guys' didn't do fine.
Is that about right? One word - Wrong.
If that's not what you meant then I can make no other sense of your post.
Must try harder.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LSMGiven the normal overnight traffic count at KDCA (and most airports, world-wide), I don't think it matters much, controlled or uncontrolled. Granted LVP, the possibility of really adverse weather might weigh things in favor of having a controller, but VFR night like the one in question, could go either way.
I do fly with lots of pilots who would have it otherwise--flying is a reflection of personality. I don't think you are wrong, just that you have a different view of things.
I do fly with lots of pilots who would have it otherwise--flying is a reflection of personality. I don't think you are wrong, just that you have a different view of things.
Please don't take my interest in this situation and my questions as a sign of the decision that I would have made.
Last edited by Lord Spandex Masher; 31st Mar 2011 at 22:03.
LSM
I agree on having two controllers on duty at any one time. The FAA was supposed to alway schedule two on-duty after the KLEX crash. The crash was not charged to the FAA, but the NTSB stated that having had two controllers on duty might have prevented the accident when the accident crew mis-identified the active runway.
My office is making it a requirement that anyone working alone must have a "alarm pendant" (like senior citizens have) to give them quick access to emergency response. I am more shocked that the FAA lets workers be alone with a very tenuous means of emergency response. This is now TWO events and perhaps more, unreported or unknown.
GF
I agree on having two controllers on duty at any one time. The FAA was supposed to alway schedule two on-duty after the KLEX crash. The crash was not charged to the FAA, but the NTSB stated that having had two controllers on duty might have prevented the accident when the accident crew mis-identified the active runway.
My office is making it a requirement that anyone working alone must have a "alarm pendant" (like senior citizens have) to give them quick access to emergency response. I am more shocked that the FAA lets workers be alone with a very tenuous means of emergency response. This is now TWO events and perhaps more, unreported or unknown.
GF
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lord Spandex Masher:
Here is what you stated in Post #200:
So I replied (answered) to your "question" in my Post #204:
Then, in Post #209 you argue with my answer to your "question."
So, I ask: How many times have you landed at night as a captain or F/O on Runway 24R or 24L at LAX?
I have a few hundred times.
Here is what you stated in Post #200:
Yes, but landing lights point forward, if you are landing on the same runway as someone taking off then all you'll see are some nav lights...maybe.
I'm not stating any views, I'm asking questions. (emphasis added)
I'm not stating any views, I'm asking questions. (emphasis added)
They also reflect a lot of light off the runway, especially a concrete runway as at LAX. LAX was my home base for most of my career. I am almost certain that tragic accident would not have happened had the commuter bird had its landing lights on while waiting in position.
aterpster, I won't deny that landing lights are reflected from the runway surface, afterall that is how they work. However, the runway itself has it's own lights and the ambient light they produce can do a good job of masking any, some or all of the reflected light. That is my own personal experience. The most obvious lights you see from another aircraft on the runway are the nav lights and even then they ain't that easy to spot.
I have a few hundred times.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aterpster,
That isn't a question. It's a statement and until that point it's about the only one I've made.
That is not an argument as I'm quite clearly agreeing with you. I then stated that the reflected light can be masked to a greater or lesser extent by ambient light - in my experience. Unless my experience of aircraft lights is somehow less important than yours then I don't see how you have a problem with me stating a fact.
Zero. But unless the concrete you use at LAX has different reflective properties to the concrete used on runways in Europe I don't see how the airport is relevant. How many times have you landed on either runway at SZG, LBA or DUB at night?
Yes, but landing lights point forward, if you are landing on the same runway as someone taking off then all you'll see are some nav lights...maybe.
aterpster, I won't deny that landing lights are reflected from the runway surface, afterall that is how they work. However, the runway itself has it's own lights and the ambient light they produce can do a good job of masking any, some or all of the reflected light. That is my own personal experience. The most obvious lights you see from another aircraft on the runway are the nav lights and even then they ain't that easy to spot.
How many times have you landed at night as a captain or F/O on Runway 24R or 24L at LAX?
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, but landing lights point forward, if you are landing on the same runway as someone taking off then all you'll see are some nav lights...maybe.