Controller Was on Phone During Crash

[Heidi]

Source: New York Times

Published: August 14, 2009
Filed at 3:30 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A personal phone call during last week's collision over New York's Hudson River has led to two air traffic controllers being removed from duty, although officials said the conversation probably had no impact on the tragedy.

The Federal Aviation Administration said in a statement Thursday that a controller at Teterboro Airport in New Jersey and his supervisor have been placed on administrative leave because the controller was involved in ''apparently inappropriate conversations'' at the time of the crash between a small plane and a tour helicopter that killed nine people.

The agency said while there was no reason to believe thus far that the employees' actions contributed to the accident, such ''conduct is unacceptable.'' The controller had handed off the monitoring of the small plane involved in the collision to another airport shortly before the plane collided with a tour helicopter.

The two employees, who were not identified, were placed on administrative leave with pay. The FAA said it has begun disciplinary proceedings against the pair. Three members of a Pennsylvania family on the plane and five Italian tourists and a pilot on the helicopter were killed when the two stricken aircraft plunged into the river.

The FAA said the supervisor also was not in the building at the time, as required.


Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/08/14/us/politics/AP-Mid-Air-Collision.html

---

Earlier related Latest Breaking News threads:
Helicopter crashes in the Hudson - after collision with small plane (Sat Aug-08-09)
DOT report warned about lax safety oversight (Sun Aug-09-09)
Army Corps pulls helicopter wreckage from Hudson (Mon Aug-10-09)

[RandomThoughts]

1. The article said they knew about this for a week,

National Transportation Safety Board and FAA investigators learned of the telephone conversation earlier this week while examining recordings of telephone calls on a landline phone in the tower that controllers use to communicate with other parts of the Teterboro Airport.

Then they post the story with a time stamp of 3:30 AM anyone else see that as weird?

[Heidi]

2. I think this is probably the new part: "two air traffic controllers being removed from duty."

Good morning, RT! :hi:

[MercutioATC]

3. Just to be clear, the controller wasn't talking to the plane at the time of the crash.

The plane had already been switched to another facility.

I'm not excusing his making a personal telephone call while on position, but it had absolutely no bearing on the crash.

[enlightenment]

6. Accepted, but the controller shouldn't have been on the phone

chatting up his GF (or whatever he was doing). If he can't stay focused on the job for his shift, he needs to find another line of work.

[MercutioATC]

12. I'm not suggesting that action shouldn't be taken.

I'm saying that the violation of regulations did not cause the crash.

It's like investigating a murder and discovering a joint in an ashtray while questioning one of the witnesses. There's evidence that the witness has done something wrong, but it has nothing to do with the original case.

[panzerfaust]

8. And having the sup *out of the building* at the time is also SOP?

Agreed, no evidence that either of these actions affected the outcome: But if this ATC faculty were actually being staffed by professionals ...

[MercutioATC]

11. Probably not, and that should also be investigated.

...but it didn't have anything to do with the crash, either.

[panzerfaust]

9. But perhaps he should have been?

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/08/14/new.york.plane.crash/index.html

At the time of the radar handoff, "there were several aircraft detected by radar in the area immediately ahead of the airplane, including the accident helicopter," the NTSB said. "The Teterboro tower controller, who was engaged in a phone call at the time, did not advise the pilot of the potential traffic conflicts."

So ... Maybe so, Maybe no.

Yep, it is always the pilot's duty to see-and-avoid, but it would not hurt to have had the controller paying attention to his scope, as opposed to chatting ("Sources close to the investigation said the controller was talking to his girlfriend.") on the phone apparently at the time of the handoff. Had he not been engaged on the phone, he might have taken the time to advise of the traffic ahead.

But, as NTSB makes clear, this is all preliminary.

My feeling, as a pilot, is that no matter who is officially 'at fault' (without question it is both of the pilots for their failure to see-and-avoid in VFR) ATC's neglect may well have been a contributing factor. Behavior such as allowing non-mission phone calls, and supervising controllers leaving the building while on-shift point to a lack of a culture of safety in the Teterboro cab.

[MercutioATC]

10. It seems that the helicopter's target may not have even been displayed

until 7 seconds after the handoff...

We shall see.

[panzerfaust]

13. May well have been too low initially?

From the TAC chart (http://skyvector.com/?icao=teterborough&metars=on) it looks as though a transponder would be required & so radar shadowing should not have been a factor.

It is possible that you are correct and that the converging tracks may not have been identified until the plane was in the window of loss of communications that can occur whilst switching freqs. That is why, in high traffic areas, when switching I try to do so by switching radios (vs using the freq toggle on one radio) so that I can continue to monitor the old freq until established on the new. ATC might just have something interesting to say on the old one(!) - as seems to be the case here as it does appear that com attempts were made on the old freq, while the fixed-wing was reporting up on the new.

VFR collision avoidance is NOT the responsibility of ATC! No controller was responsible for this accident: But, when a word might save lives, it is nice to think that ATC is keeping an eye on things, rather than chatting on the telephone.

[MercutioATC]

14. Good radio procedure.

I also agree that giving VFR advisories takes precedence over chatting on the phone.

Without seeing the radar/voice tapes, I can't positively conclude what happened, but the media hung this controller out to dry when it looks as if he may not have had anything to do with the crash.


...and I certainly don't defend his being on the phone. We ARE watching out for you. That's our job, and most of us take our job personally.

[FarCenter]

4. He'd handed the plane off to EWR before the crash

"While still on the phone, the controller handed off the Piper to the control tower at Newark Liberty International Airport, which monitors low-flying air traffic over the Hudson but doesn't actively try to keep aircraft separated, they said. The controller was still on the phone when the accident occurred. This sequence of events lasted only a few minutes."

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. Correct, and it is always the pilot(s) responsibility to see and avoid

[Heidi]

7. UPDATE | CNN: Hudson air crash probe focuses on controller; union cries foul

updated 7 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Investigators probing last weekend's fatal aircraft collision over New York's Hudson River focused Friday on an air traffic controller, though union leaders angrily said the controller could have done nothing to prevent the crash.

In a report, the National Transportation Safety Board said that the controller at New Jersey's Teterboro airport did not advise a pilot of potential traffic when he handed off radar monitoring of the plane to the tower at Newark airport at 11:52:20 a.m. Saturday.

But, union leaders said, the helicopter was not visible on radar scopes until 11:52:27, seven seconds after the transfer.

Union leaders said the NTSB's statement that the controller could see the helicopter on his radar screen, and its implication that he could have provided a warning, is wrong.

Read more