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

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.

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.

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.

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?

14 C.f.r. § 65.31

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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!

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.

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

From another Thread ...

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? ;)

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.

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!!!

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

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

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?

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.

Storm in a tea cup!
 

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: