JFK ATC in the news...
 

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

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

Pretty much covers it.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

so easy, a child can do it.

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.

A supervised child in the Tower seens a bit safer than an unsupervised one in the cockpit

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

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::=:=

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

"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.)

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.

Call yourself a Ppruner? :}

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?

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

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 :sad:

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:

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?

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.

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:

Decision making.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

<<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..

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.

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.

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 ?

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