FAA orders new procedures for controllers

Polar742 said:
Problem solved:

_Super_loud_alarm_clock.jpg


Somewhat different than the Airbus model, but same effectivity....
Click to expand...

FOUR TWENTY!!!!!
 
bike21 said:
Exactly, in this case clearance, schmearance - I'm landing.
Click to expand...

Only thought I have is purely hypothetical, what happens if the controller had suffered a heart attack and his last action while conscious was to clear a maintenance team onto the runway? Despite the conjecture that "this is no different than an uncontrolled field" the Tower frequency isn't a Common Traffic Frequency in such an airport, those workers could be on a ground frequency and never know an airliner was broadcasting an intention to land on the runway via the tower freq.

Just food for thought, I don't feel remotely qualified to question the decisions by the PICs' in this situation.
 
boondr said:
Only thought I have is purely hypothetical, what happens if the controller had suffered a heart attack and his last action while conscious was to clear a maintenance team onto the runway? Despite the conjecture that "this is no different than an uncontrolled field" the Tower frequency isn't a Common Traffic Frequency in such an airport, those workers could be on a ground frequency and never know an airliner was broadcasting an intention to land on the runway via the tower freq.

Just food for thought, I don't feel remotely qualified to question the decisions by the PICs' in this situation.
Click to expand...

I know it's hypothetical, but in order to be on the runway like that, don't you have to be on tower/ctaf?
 
mshunter said:
I know it's hypothetical, but in order to be on the runway like that, don't you have to be on tower/ctaf?
Click to expand...

No, because in his example, they'd be listening to ground and never would have know tower went off the air and the airport was uncontrolled.

Sounds like a good plot line for a John Nance book.
 
BobDDuck said:
Out of curiosity, why?
Click to expand...

I think Boondr hit up what I was thinking, nobody there is watching the runway and it is night. I guess for me the tower is one extra layer of protection at a very unique airport (proximity to White House and other important places), and in any situation it would seem the thing to do in an airliner at night especially. It isn't very far to go over to Dulles and for the passengers sake, they could be bussed over to National. I will make it clear that I am not an airline pilot and my decision making is from a PSEL perspective, so I do not know everything that goes on as a PIC of an airliner.
 
jonnydwolf said:
I think Boondr hit up what I was thinking, nobody there is watching the runway and it is night. I guess for me the tower is one extra layer of protection at a very unique airport (proximity to White House and other important places), and in any situation it would seem the thing to do in an airliner at night especially. It isn't very far to go over to Dulles and for the passengers sake, they could be bussed over to National. I will make it clear that I am not an airline pilot and my decision making is from a PSEL perspective, so I do not know everything that goes on as a PIC of an airliner.
Click to expand...
 
mshunter said:
I know it's hypothetical, but in order to be on the runway like that, don't you have to be on tower/ctaf?
Click to expand...

Short answer, no, long answer

Authorization
for aircraft/vehicles to taxi/proceed on or
along an active runway, for purposes other than
crossing, shall be provided via direct communications
on the appropriate local control frequency. This
authorization may be provided on the ground control
frequency after coordination with local control is
completed for those operations specifically described
in a facility directive.
Click to expand...

There is wiggle room and also human factors to consider, if the vehicle calls up on the ground frequency how many people do you think are going to say "change to my other frequency" when they are the only one there?
 
KLB said:
You don't have to divert. All you have to do is the lost comm procedures.
Click to expand...

I don't think NORDO procedures would work here considering there was capability to communicate with a controller to communicate intentions.
 
mshunter said:
I know it's hypothetical, but in order to be on the runway like that, don't you have to be on tower/ctaf?
Click to expand...

dont bet your life on it in 1990 i had a Lear miss the approach at KGRR on the mid night with the tower closed, the county had been plowing and had advise me that the rwy was open and the plows were clear. WX was 200 1/2 and when the pilot called on the missed and advised me there was a plow on the rwy and the plow was not on the ctaf.all i can tell you that if i had a lump of coal up my arse that night my wife would have had a nice diamond.
 
Ok so let me get this straight...APPR is now supposed to CALL the TWR when someone is 40NM out. Is this the same phone that was ringing the night of said incident and no one answered....

Also, if they tell me no one is in the TWR and say would you like to divert..."Nope, I would like to go home. River and airport are in sight..."

And lastly, I like Babbits statement about how they are looking into if the Tower needs someone else there during mid shifts. Translation, we are going to talk to the ATM and see how much that would cost.

CHEERS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top