Planes wait while controller takes potty break
04-11-2007, 07:53 PM
#1
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 35
Planes wait while controller takes potty break
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Two airliners had to circle for 18 minutes and a plane ferrying human lungs for transplant was briefly delayed Friday while an airport's lone air traffic controller took a bathroom break, the controller's union said.
The union on Tuesday cited the Friday incident at the Manchester, New Hampshire, airport as evidence that air traffic control facilities are understaffed.
"There should never be one person in the tower, because it's not safe," said Doug Church, spokesman for the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. "It's just added proof that the system is stretched to its limits, and these are the type of things that are happening."
Federal Aviation Administration officials responded that staffing is sufficient, that the bathroom break was handled in accordance with policy, and that travelers were not endangered or unduly inconvenienced.
While drawing vastly different conclusions about the significance of the event, the FAA and the union gave details that generally matched.
Both said the controller, whom neither named, had been on duty at Manchester-Boston Regional Airport about two hours and 40 minutes Friday when he had to take a bathroom break.
Because the only other employee in the tower was not certified to handle takeoffs and landings, the controller notified FAA's Boston consolidated terminal radar approach control, or TRACON, that he was taking the unscheduled break.
FAA spokesman Jim Peters said the controller, who had handled 60 aircraft during the first three hours of his shift, acted responsibly by waiting until a slow period before taking his bathroom break. Boston TRACON assumed responsibility for the airspace and placed two aircraft in a holding pattern until the controller returned.
Peters said the break lasted 12 minutes, but said a few additional minutes may have lapsed as the planes were realigned to land.
"It's the FAA's position that the staffing that was present at Manchester was sufficient to safely handle arrivals and departures at that time of the evening," Peters said. "He was only gone for 12 minutes, so while there may have been a slight delay in the aircraft landing, certainly the controller did what he had to do."
Union spokesman Church said Southwest Flights 1187 and 2379 were delayed 18 minutes. He provided CNN with an FAA "traffic management log" indicating an 18-minute lapse during a "bathroom break."
Passengers on the aircraft were probably not informed of the reason for the delay, Church said, adding, "They'd probably be angry."
During the controller's break, a Lifeguard flight pilot radioed the tower and spoke to a trainee, who was not certified to conduct controller operations. The trainee told the pilot he would have to wait 10 minutes for the controller to return.
The pilot replied that he had "lungs on board," Church said.
Peters acknowledged that the Lifeguard flight was told it had to wait 10 minutes, but said there was no indication from the pilot that the delay would cause problems.
The FAA and the controllers' union have skirmished repeatedly in recent months about staffing levels at airports.
The union says controllers are often forced to work overtime, contributing to fatigue, which results in safety lapses. But the FAA says most overtime is voluntary and said instances of involuntary overtime are rare.
The union on Tuesday cited the Friday incident at the Manchester, New Hampshire, airport as evidence that air traffic control facilities are understaffed.
"There should never be one person in the tower, because it's not safe," said Doug Church, spokesman for the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. "It's just added proof that the system is stretched to its limits, and these are the type of things that are happening."
Federal Aviation Administration officials responded that staffing is sufficient, that the bathroom break was handled in accordance with policy, and that travelers were not endangered or unduly inconvenienced.
While drawing vastly different conclusions about the significance of the event, the FAA and the union gave details that generally matched.
Both said the controller, whom neither named, had been on duty at Manchester-Boston Regional Airport about two hours and 40 minutes Friday when he had to take a bathroom break.
Because the only other employee in the tower was not certified to handle takeoffs and landings, the controller notified FAA's Boston consolidated terminal radar approach control, or TRACON, that he was taking the unscheduled break.
FAA spokesman Jim Peters said the controller, who had handled 60 aircraft during the first three hours of his shift, acted responsibly by waiting until a slow period before taking his bathroom break. Boston TRACON assumed responsibility for the airspace and placed two aircraft in a holding pattern until the controller returned.
Peters said the break lasted 12 minutes, but said a few additional minutes may have lapsed as the planes were realigned to land.
"It's the FAA's position that the staffing that was present at Manchester was sufficient to safely handle arrivals and departures at that time of the evening," Peters said. "He was only gone for 12 minutes, so while there may have been a slight delay in the aircraft landing, certainly the controller did what he had to do."
Union spokesman Church said Southwest Flights 1187 and 2379 were delayed 18 minutes. He provided CNN with an FAA "traffic management log" indicating an 18-minute lapse during a "bathroom break."
Passengers on the aircraft were probably not informed of the reason for the delay, Church said, adding, "They'd probably be angry."
During the controller's break, a Lifeguard flight pilot radioed the tower and spoke to a trainee, who was not certified to conduct controller operations. The trainee told the pilot he would have to wait 10 minutes for the controller to return.
The pilot replied that he had "lungs on board," Church said.
Peters acknowledged that the Lifeguard flight was told it had to wait 10 minutes, but said there was no indication from the pilot that the delay would cause problems.
The FAA and the controllers' union have skirmished repeatedly in recent months about staffing levels at airports.
The union says controllers are often forced to work overtime, contributing to fatigue, which results in safety lapses. But the FAA says most overtime is voluntary and said instances of involuntary overtime are rare.
04-12-2007, 02:20 PM
#3
APC co-founder
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B777
Posts: 5,853
The union on Tuesday cited the Friday incident at the Manchester, New Hampshire, airport as evidence that air traffic control facilities are understaffed.
"There should never be one person in the tower, because it's not safe," said Doug Church, spokesman for the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. "It's just added proof that the system is stretched to its limits, and these are the type of things that are happening."
"There should never be one person in the tower, because it's not safe," said Doug Church, spokesman for the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. "It's just added proof that the system is stretched to its limits, and these are the type of things that are happening."
04-13-2007, 06:36 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: 737 Left
Posts: 202
I live about 30 miles from MHT and this non-story has been the top of the news all week. It still amazes me how ignorant the news media is about what we do (but I suppose it shouldn't). The guy has to go to the head. What's the big deal. Three flights were mildly inconvenienced. It's not like they shut down EWR at noon. To quote my favorite movie: "the man has got to go".
Maybe little 'ole MHT should invest in some of those NASA diapers. Problem solved. Besides, that's gotta be cheaper than putting another controller on, regardless if it makes sense....
Maybe little 'ole MHT should invest in some of those NASA diapers. Problem solved. Besides, that's gotta be cheaper than putting another controller on, regardless if it makes sense....
04-13-2007, 06:46 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: B-777 Captain
Posts: 943
I think that controller should use about 12' of rubber tubbing and some duct tape and attach it to his you no what. That way he can watch and direct traffic and relieve himself all at the same time. ............
04-13-2007, 07:00 PM
#6
Administrator
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: C-172
Posts: 8,024
Do we know definitively what he was doing in the can for 12 minutes?
This is a perspective from the legal world. When I was practicing, judges usually did not allow breaks for hearings lasting 3 hours or less. I once even requested it, but was denied. Now that I am one, I allow breaks .... only when I need it.
Those NASA diapers work for non-liquid stuff, too?
This is a perspective from the legal world. When I was practicing, judges usually did not allow breaks for hearings lasting 3 hours or less. I once even requested it, but was denied. Now that I am one, I allow breaks .... only when I need it.
Those NASA diapers work for non-liquid stuff, too?
04-13-2007, 07:01 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: RC-3 Seabee. Skipper of the A21 cutter.
Posts: 897
LOL! But I'll tell you, sometimes it's not a laughing matter. I personally have taken a ride on the "porcelain bus" for almost a half hour. Serious business if you eat something rancid! I've heard stories of pilots having to leave their seat while on final, otherwise they would have blew massive amounts of ****** in their trousers! Oddly enough, I believe there is an FAR that protects pilots for situations like this:
FAR Part 91.105 paragraph (a).
(a) During takeoff and landing, and while enroute, each required flight crewmember shall -
(1) Be at the crew member station unless the absence is necessary to perform duties in connection with the operation of the aircraft or in connection with physiological needs.
I hope there's an FAR like this for ATC as well. That poor ATC controller.
FAR Part 91.105 paragraph (a).
(a) During takeoff and landing, and while enroute, each required flight crewmember shall -
(1) Be at the crew member station unless the absence is necessary to perform duties in connection with the operation of the aircraft or in connection with physiological needs.
I hope there's an FAR like this for ATC as well. That poor ATC controller.
04-13-2007, 07:07 PM
#10
Chief Jeppesen Updater
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Executive Transport Driver
Posts: 3,080
I for one am glad about all the press this incident is getting. It shows that contrary to what the FAA talking heads might be saying, there are some significant staffing issues out there.
Combine this article with the recent NTSB release about the Comair accident at LEX and it highlights the FAA short coming even more.
I have heard plenty of stories about management run amok at the FAA, particularly within the ATC ranks. I know at least 5 controllers that have or are counting down the days until they can take early retirement (one just retired at my base airport).
It's only going to get worse unless there's some sort of high level intervention, and soon.
Combine this article with the recent NTSB release about the Comair accident at LEX and it highlights the FAA short coming even more.
I have heard plenty of stories about management run amok at the FAA, particularly within the ATC ranks. I know at least 5 controllers that have or are counting down the days until they can take early retirement (one just retired at my base airport).
It's only going to get worse unless there's some sort of high level intervention, and soon.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
