84 replies to this topic

[TheBigTurkey]

Alex - MetroAir, on Mar 4 2010, 11:05 PM, said:

tropicalfish, on Mar 4 2010, 02:22 AM, said:

The FAA is overreacting to a simple event of a parent bringing their child in to work. And if you look at it from the father's point of view... the child was off from school. He's 7. He cannot stay home alone. Additionally, at 7 years old, the child will be BORED. The father was simply letting the child see what the father does at work and allowed him to repeat (not give, not "create," not plan... REPEAT) a few commands over the radio.

Alex - MetroAir, on Mar 3 2010, 07:29 PM, said:

No, but nowadays this industry is built off of professionalism and a serious image to the public.  They don't want to know that a 7 year old was directing their plane.  The general public would be freaking out.

An accurate public image does not exist with the media.

1) Oh jeez, well why didn't the dad say so?  If he was bored then that makes it okay.   If a justification for something like this is boredom, the world would be an interesting place.  In fact, E-Trade would actually be run by those funny babies.

2) It doesn't matter if they have an accurate image of the industry or not...their image won't change.  The FAA has to conform to their image or else you've got a system under fire from the public.

George Bush, on Mar 4 2010, 05:54 AM, said:

The reason the FAA are angry is because it does not portray a picture of competence and extreme care for safety factors that is what 'drives the aviation world forward'. So they say.

And they say it correctly.  Policies are in place for specific reasons...they wouldn't be there if they didn't care if you broke them.

Pedro, on Mar 4 2010, 10:58 AM, said:

Okay I must say that this is ridiculous.
I understand the need for protocol, I understand the need to be serious. But suspend a controller and his supervisor for letting his kid talk a few ''coached'' sentences ? Geez, I personally think the FAA that are in charge of this case are idiots (and I know I'm going to get flamed for that comment) but I really think that they're killing the aviation spirit in that kid.

I can't even possibly imagine how that family is suffering right now just for that small action that didn't cause the slightest problem. I just hope that this issue will be resolved and that the FAA dosen't go even further in cancelling ALL visits to control towers, because god knows other governments will follow.

Just my 10 cents,

Salutations from Mexico City,

Pedro.

Poor kid. What a stupid FAA.  Why do they care about policy, professionalism and safety when they could be caring about fostering aviation spirit in a young 8 year old?

(Just in case.../sarcasm)

Family suffering?  He was making enough money to be out of work for a while...I do feel bad for the spotlight they are probably getting but you can blame the father for that one.  Lack of common sense and good judgment will do this to ya'.

Towelie, on Mar 4 2010, 11:02 AM, said:

Alex - MetroAir, on Mar 3 2010, 07:43 PM, said:

Towelie, on Mar 3 2010, 08:45 PM, said:

Uh, you probably don't realize that the parent of the kid was probably telling him what to say.

I doubt a kid that young could process all that information.

Uh, everyone already knew that.   

Then there shouldn't be a real problem.

I guess we will agree to disagree then.

Rileyturkey, on Mar 4 2010, 03:22 PM, said:

LOL,When I heard the passenger women saying he should be fired I wanted to stab her in the face....

I thought everyone here knew by now that the general public knows crap about aviation.  It is just the way it is.  Much like they know crap about government, law, and a whole host of other topics.  But is it necessary to say you want to stab them in the face?  My goodness...

anonymous, on Mar 4 2010, 08:42 PM, said:

Yeah, the FAA did their job. They don't want their image to be one that says anyone can do whatever they want. If they had let this slide, this would now be happening all over the country. So in the end,  I can understand their overreaction. Everyone got home safe and sound, and the kid only repeated dad's instructions. This is safe, and is fine IMO. This is the equivalent to bringing your son to work and telling him what you do everyday, giving him a little hands-on experience. It's not like this child worked a full shift. He did a couple, then dad took over.

I'd argue that there aren't any other jobs out there like this.  I guess you could compare law enforcement to it due to the stress of the job and the impact on countless lives.  But to reinforce my point...many law enforcement agencies won't allow ride alongs anymore, especially when it involves a minor.

Yes,yes it is.

[_NW_]

I don't think the FAA really would have cared if the media didn't get so bent out of shape...

What are the cons of this?

Hmm..  I can't think of anything.

Even when new controllers start they have an observer plugged in to the same position looking over shoulder of the new controller, this is no different.  A person can take flight lessons at any age as long as they can reach all the controls, and they can only fly when an instructor is in the right seat.  The media, being as clueless as they are always are, should see this is as a way for ATC reaching out to kids, just like firefighters and police men do.

[Anonymous]

Alex - MetroAir, on Mar 4 2010, 11:05 PM, said:

anonymous, on Mar 4 2010, 08:42 PM, said:

Yeah, the FAA did their job. They don't want their image to be one that says anyone can do whatever they want. If they had let this slide, this would now be happening all over the country. So in the end,  I can understand their overreaction. Everyone got home safe and sound, and the kid only repeated dad's instructions. This is safe, and is fine IMO. This is the equivalent to bringing your son to work and telling him what you do everyday, giving him a little hands-on experience. It's not like this child worked a full shift. He did a couple, then dad took over.

I'd argue that there aren't any other jobs out there like this.  I guess you could compare law enforcement to it due to the stress of the job and the impact on countless lives.  But to reinforce my point...many law enforcement agencies won't allow ride alongs anymore, especially when it involves a minor.

You missed my point.

I meant that's exactly what the dad did. Not saying it's okay because many other dad's would have done it; Air Traffic Controllers are a lot more time-consumed and pressured than most other parent's careers. Again, the FAA did their job. It's not so much of the threat and danger of the job that the child took over, but more the fact that the FAA doesn't want unemployed employees doing jobs they're not qualified and trained for, just as most of us aren't.

[LA_PHX]

NWilkinson, on Mar 5 2010, 04:01 AM, said:

I don't think the FAA really would have cared if the media didn't get so bent out of shape...

What are the cons of this?

Hmm..  I can't think of anything.

Even when new controllers start they have an observer plugged in to the same position looking over shoulder of the new controller, this is no different.  A person can take flight lessons at any age as long as they can reach all the controls, and they can only fly when an instructor is in the right seat.  The media, being as clueless as they are always are, should see this is as a way for ATC reaching out to kids, just like firefighters and police men do.

EXACTLY!  The media unfortunately sees this as dangerous...I wouldn't necessarily call this case dangerous.  It is just that the guy broke policy.  No matter where you work, you are going to disagree with certain rules and regs, but that doesn't mean you should blatantly ignore them.  Poor judgment on his part...let him serve a suspension, return to work and do the fine job he was doing before he the lapse of judgment.

[LA_PHX]

Like most people here, I thought it looked as if the FAA was just punishing them as damage control...but perhaps that isn't so.

Quote

New York (CNN) -- "Unauthorized and unprofessional" is how an internal memo describes the conduct of an air traffic controller, who allegedly allowed his two young children to speak with pilots on an air traffic control frequency, and his supervisor, who allegedly allowed it to happen.

The memo, dated February 25, was written after the facilities manager for the air traffic control tower at New York's John F. Kennedy Airport learned about the incident, a source familiar with the investigation told CNN.

"The display of professionalism in the past by the control personnel at this facility has been exemplary," the memo said. "However, a lapse in judgment for what may seem a minor transgression diminishes our credibility and slights the high standards of professionalism."

It was not immediately clear what prompted the manager to write the memo or how he found out about the incident, the source said.

The incidents occurred on succeeding days last month at JFK, the Federal Aviation Administration said this week, and the controller and the supervisor have been placed on paid administrative leave.

"We have an incredible team of professionals who safely control our nation's skies every single day. This kind of behavior does not reflect the true caliber of our workforce," FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt said in the statement Wednesday.

Babbitt was referring to the February 16 incident involving the controller's young son, who is heard in a recording -- posted on liveatc.net -- clearing a JetBlue flight for takeoff and later speaking to an apparent Aeromexico flight.

Later, an FAA official, who asked not to be identified because of the ongoing investigation, said the controller brought his daughter into the same tower the following day, and the child was allowed to talk with pilots of two planes.

A separate source said the supervisor "should be making sure that things like this don't happen."

Yet another source familiar with the investigation said the two children are twins.

The controller who brought the children to work later reported that he had done so, the source said. The controller and supervisor involved are veteran employees, the official said.

Dave Pascoe owner of the Web site where the recording of the air traffic communications is posted, told CNN he thinks the attention the incident has drawn is "ridiculous" and it has been "blown out of proportion."

In the recording, a child says, "JetBlue 171, cleared for takeoff."

A man then tells the plane, "Here's what you get, guys, when the kids are out of school."

The pilot chuckles and says, "Wish I could bring my kid to work." The same pilot later tells the child, "Awesome job."

During the recording, which is dated February 17, the child also speaks to an apparent Aeromexico flight. A recording from the following day, when the daughter was reportedly in the tower, also was posted on the Web site.

FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown later said the incident took place about 7:30 p.m. February 16.

Pascoe said most people "in the aviation community felt like this was (not) anything more than a noble thing, that a father would take his kid to work."

"It was one incident where a kid was up in the control tower," he said. "If you know anything about aviation, you know that the air traffic control towers are highly supervised. ... A father was taking a child to work and let the kid clear planes for takeoff and now the world thinks it's an unsafe place."

The FAA has suspended all unofficial visits to air traffic control operational areas during its investigation into the incident. Babbitt has directed a team to review air traffic control policies and procedures related to facility visitors.

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association, the union representing controllers, issued a statement, saying its members "do not condone this type of behavior in any way."

http://www.cnn.com/2...hild/index.html

Looks like they might have been looking at some sort of punishment whether or not the media found out, although it is probably harsher now.