Child directs air traffic at JFK airport

[GrinningManiac]

WHY? Why would you push forward with condemning this fun little escapade?

I'm going to guess it's because something could have gone horribly wrong. The child could have potentially screwed something up. Of course he didn't, but that's not the point. Had something gone wrong, you guys would probably be mocking the father's foolish decision of having a child give instructions to the pilot. That's how the FAA probably views this; a foolish decision that they do not expect their employees to make when working, regardless of what the consequences are.

Then again, I doubt that they made it specifically clear that you can't ever do something like this. But that's probably because they expect their employees to know better. Think of how irresponsible they would look if something had happened.

Very true, but I abhor blaming people for hypothetical situations that never come about. I may as well scream at my brother whenever he puts away the dishes because he 'might' have dropped one of those dishes.

We might as well criticise Wellington for loosing the battle of Waterloo, or blame Bush for entering Iraq

 

[Orcus The Ultimate]

if a kid can do this job i wonder how much those guys are being paid...

 

[The Last Nomad]

I literally just saw this on RTÉ news, They even played the clip of the kids air-traffic-controlling... I thought it was hilarious

 

[Lullabye]

Because the FAA hate fun?
Of course, they are quite right when the talk of unprofessionalism.

Life is unprofessional, I don't know how these people deal with it.

He should get a aslap on the wrist nothing more, it's not like anything went wrong, it is a bit worrying that a 6 year old could have said something wrong and caused a disaster.

Let's just assume the father didn't leave the child alone in the room with the mic on and was supervising the child. I mean, from the sounds of it, the pilots knew that it was just a kid.

Yeah thats where i was coming from, if he was left on his own though, big no-no

Huh, how could that be a bad idea? [http://www.yourdailymedia.com/media/1154176424/Stewie_Does_Air_Traffic_Control]

 

[cuddly_tomato]

Because there are pressurised metal tubes full of people, thousands of feet in the air.

You don't fuck with the system, simple really.

This.

A few years ago there was an Aeroflot air crash which was caused when the pilot got his son up to have a go at the controls. The pilot put the autopilot on before his son took the controls, but didn't realise that when his son turned the yoke it would disengage the autopilot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_593

75 people died. You can't play lose with the rules and regulations were aviation safety is concerned. Nothing happened in this instance, but if it did a lot of the folks saying "this is just the FFA complaining" would be screaming for blood.

 

[Internet Kraken]

WHY? Why would you push forward with condemning this fun little escapade?

I'm going to guess it's because something could have gone horribly wrong. The child could have potentially screwed something up. Of course he didn't, but that's not the point. Had something gone wrong, you guys would probably be mocking the father's foolish decision of having a child give instructions to the pilot. That's how the FAA probably views this; a foolish decision that they do not expect their employees to make when working, regardless of what the consequences are.

Then again, I doubt that they made it specifically clear that you can't ever do something like this. But that's probably because they expect their employees to know better. Think of how irresponsible they would look if something had happened.

Very true, but I abhor blaming people for hypothetical situations that never come about. I may as well scream at my brother whenever he puts away the dishes because he 'might' have dropped one of those dishes.

Hardly the same thing. If your brother was just putting away dishes, then he was doing nothing wrong in the first place. He would have to being doing something wrong for it to be an accurate comparison, like throwing the dishes into the sink from across the room.

In this situation, the father was wrong from the start because he let the child give the pilots directions. You're not supposed to do that. So while nothing did go wrong, you still have to recognize the danger in it. When you let stuff like this slide it can easily come back to bite you in the ass later. Because when one of these dangerous hypothetical sit uations does occur, your company ends up looking incompetent for failing to enforce the rules.Nobody wants to end up in a situation like that, so it's a necessary precaution from a business standpoint.

-snip-

Or in other words, this.

 

[Cowabungaa]

I'm all for having fun at work, but hell, as an air traffic controller you have hundreds of lives in your hands. Better not toy around with that you know.

 

[Zer_]

I find the charges rather harsh, but I completely understand the FAA's stance on the situation.

 

[manaman]

Because everything going fine with this one incident does not mean that it will always go fine, and they probably see punishing the father for the unprofessional behavior as the best way to discourage future incidents like these.

I'm all for having fun at work, but hell, as an air traffic controller you have hundreds of lives in your hands. Better not toy around with that you know.

He is quite right, there is a lot of pressure on air traffic controllers, because they need to be constantly alert and focused. And if something had started to go wrong, it could have escalated in the time it took the controller to dump the kid and get back into action.

 

[Poomanchu745]

I am a pilot and I gotta say I think this is being blown out of proportion. I mean it was clear that the kid was being told exactly what to say beforehand. When the planes are getting ready to take off both the pilot and air traffic controller know exactly what will be said. They just tell them at a certain time so everything goes smoothly and nobody dies. It would definitely have been different had something unexpected happen and then at that point the dad would have taken over and directed the planes. This was a simple exchange that really did not effect anything.

 

[OpiateChicken]

future ATC here... I don't think I would let my kid talk to the pilots for real. I might pretend that he was talking to the pilots and let him believe that, but the consequences could be too costly and too tragic to risk it.

 

[Stranger of Sorts]

Awww that's cute. And the kid did good so who's to say he shouldn't carry on?

 

[Ciran]

In this situation, the father was wrong from the start because he let the child give the pilots directions. You're not supposed to do that. So while nothing did go wrong, you still have to recognize the danger in it. When you let stuff like this slide it can easily come back to bite you in the ass later. Because when one of these dangerous hypothetical situations does occur, your company ends up looking incompetent for failing to enforce the rules.Nobody wants to end up in a situation like that, so it's a necessary precaution from a business standpoint.

I have to agree, somewhat, but I also have to disagree. It may not have been the most responsible thing to do, but it also wasn't as potentially dangerous as everyone seems to be portraying it as. The article does not say, but it seems that the father did not leave the room, and would have been able to correct anything immediately that the child had said wrong. Also, as far as we know, the boy was only directing take-offs, not any landings, so the chance of any immediate danger was minimal and easily fixed before the pilots actually lifted off of the ground.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

I think this was wrong but didnt deserve such a punishment. Imagine you get on a plane. Imagine the pilot says "This is your captain speaking, this plane is being directed by jimmy the third grader who eats paste"

Would 99% of people on the plane freak out? I can tell you they would.

I think this was unproffessional but not really that serious given the pilots reaction. The people on the planes however may not have been happy, you have to see it from their point of view. A warning would have been sufficient.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

In this situation, the father was wrong from the start because he let the child give the pilots directions. You're not supposed to do that. So while nothing did go wrong, you still have to recognize the danger in it. When you let stuff like this slide it can easily come back to bite you in the ass later. Because when one of these dangerous hypothetical situations does occur, your company ends up looking incompetent for failing to enforce the rules.Nobody wants to end up in a situation like that, so it's a necessary precaution from a business standpoint.

I have to agree, somewhat, but I also have to disagree. It may not have been the most responsible thing to do, but it also wasn't as potentially dangerous as everyone seems to be portraying it as. The article does not say, but it seems that the father did not leave the room, and would have been able to correct anything immediately that the child had said wrong. Also, as far as we know, the boy was only directing take-offs, not any landings, so the chance of any immediate danger was minimal and easily fixed before the pilots actually lifted off of the ground.

American Airlines flight 191 crashed 50 seconds after take off, killing 258 passengers, 13 crew, and two people in a caravan park. It was the worst aviation disaster in Americas history until 9/11, and remains the worst aviation accident in American history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191

In 1992 Air Florida Flight 90 crashed into a bridge and then went down into the Patomoc river (which was frozen), killing 78 people. This aircraft was airborne for only 30 seconds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Florida_Flight_90

Take offs are dangerous.

I also love reading about air crashes.

 

[Internet Kraken]

I have to agree, somewhat, but I also have to disagree. It may not have been the most responsible thing to do, but it also wasn't as potentially dangerous as everyone seems to be portraying it as. The article does not say, but it seems that the father did not leave the room, and would have been able to correct anything immediately that the child had said wrong.

It doesn't matter. The point is that he was doing something dangerous and irresponsible in the first place, no matter how "safe" him watching the child made it. You can't just make exceptions based on the nature of the offense in situations like this. The company wants to make it clear that you are not allowed to do something like this, regardless of how "safe" you make it. Besides, if the father let the child do this in the first place, what's to say he wouldn't be even more irresponsible and let him do something more dangerous? Common sense I'm sure, but then again common sense would dictate that you don't let a kid do any of this.

Also, as far as we know, the boy was only directing take-offs, not any landings, so the chance of any immediate danger was minimal and easily fixed before the pilots actually lifted off of the ground.

And this somehow makes it less of a problem? Even if it less dangerous, it still can create a myriad of issues.

 

[silver wolf009]

Well because they cant have any old kid directing air control... that just dangerous. I think the leveled charges are way over the appropraite spectrum of punishment. The kid should just get a gentle slap on the nose and be forgiven.

 

[Ph33nix]

because someone could die