CRJ collides into Fire engine on runway at La Guardia 3/22/26

Racerx said:
Personally, I don't care if my guys take a 30 minute lunch and leave 30 minutes early. But I'm going to be a little upset if they decide to skip their paid break and leave early.
Click to expand...
But will planes fall out of the sky if all your guys leave early?
 
So the big emergency was the stewardesses smelled an odor while on the ground. Rolled every emergency vehicle out for this.

But the ATC was too busy looking at the exit to go home (or the bar).

I can imagine the incoming traffic being told next time "sorry, were on an union mandated break because we are short staffed. Go around".
 
What actually might have been different and the practice of management in cahoots with union are two separate issues that will be each investigated.

But these two guys and the Supe, are toast. Let the “investigation” continue. FAA is going to be the deep pocket, here… and the feeding frenzy is on……
 
Last edited:
was the offending controller fired? Time card fraud by two non-participants has nothing to do with this accident. They weren't scheduled to be there, and as long as there's no evidence they were summoned to help in the cab and nobody could get a hold of them, then the inclusion of their firing for time card fraud in this accident narrative is a complete non-sequitur.

If the guys were summoned to the cab to help out and couldn't be reached because they dipped, yes that's relevant to the accident chain. But if that is not the case, the govt is being performative by conflating narratives here.
 
Controllers are paid for every minute of their eight (or ten) hour shift. If they're ten minutes into their lunch and needed in the operation, they are recallable. If they have ten minutes left on their shift, they are recallable. If the operation needs a resource, it needs a resource.
 
PastZTL said:
Controllers are paid for every minute of their eight (or ten) hour shift. If they're ten minutes into their lunch and needed in the operation, they are recallable. If they have ten minutes left on their shift, they are recallable. If the operation needs a resource, it needs a resource.
Click to expand...
right, but were these two actually recalled? if they were, yes that's relevant to the deaths. If they weren't, then it is not, even if one stipulates the time card fraud. The distinction matters; we can't conflate narratives just because it's nice to have scapegoats.
 
PastZTL said:
but they must remain available for recall until their shift is over.
Click to expand...
This is 100% not a break. Every state will define a work were you are NOT INTERRUPTED for X minutes. When I was at a Fortune 50 we IT staff and managers would turn off our phones. Why? We are on break. If I have to answer a call, its not a break. If you need me back in the office, the result is 'no, I'm on break' OR 'ok, I take my break later'.

ninja edit: I removed part of this post because I could not find a current NATCA contract to read, and the one I could find stated specifically (it was an Air Force Base / NACTA agreement from 2012) that using breaks to leave early was not permitted.
 
Last edited:
pfarber said:
This is 100% not a break. Every state will define a work were you are NOT INTERRUPTED for X minutes. When I was at a Fortune 50 we IT staff and managers would turn off our phones. Why? We are on break. If I have to answer a call, its not a break. If you need me back in the office, the result is 'no, I'm on break' OR 'ok, I take my break later'.

I'm 100000% positive NATCA (the ATC union) has rules about breaks. I've been told (thank you OB) that if you are a controller ON BREAK you are 100000% not going to be called back because that time is for mental relaxation, not as a 'standby pool' of workers. ATC has rules about hours on station before a mandatory break etc. I'm sure someone at the FAA spouted off without actually knowing the rules/situation and the garbage media ran with it.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you're correct. What I still don't know about is whether (1) there is a minimum number of controllers required to be on duty, not on break, and (2) whether protocol allowed two controllers to be on break at the same time, leaving only two controllers on duty.

I would not be surprised to learn that breaks were supposed to be one controller at a time, and letting two people go on break caused the tower to be short-staffed for that time of night, but I don't really know whether that's the case.
 
Half Fast said:
I'm sure you're correct. What I still don't know about is whether (1) there is a minimum number of controllers required to be on duty, not on break, and (2) whether protocol allowed two controllers to be on break at the same time, leaving only two controllers on duty.

I would not be surprised to learn that breaks were supposed to be one controller at a time, and letting two people go on break caused the tower to be short-staffed for that time of night, but I don't really know whether that's the case.
Click to expand...
The FAA stated that the tower was properly manned and the two people were not required for operation.

It seems like these two are being scapegoated by 'well if they WERE there it MIGHT have been different' thinking.

That facts is that the responders did not clear the runway visually and did NOT GIVE RIGHT OF WAY to moving aircraft. Again, no hate on the responders, but THEY screwed up. ATC can give bad instructions, its still up to the pilot/operator to see and avoid and follow the rules.

The number of times a Charlie/Delta controller has heard me say 'unable, clouds' while in their airspace it do darn high.
 
KE5BM said:
In my view, the primary causal factor was an overloaded controller working an emergency and controlling traffic at the same time. Had the two MIA controllers been in the cab, one of them could have taken full control of the emergency and all the ground movements associated with it. That controller would have likely had full situational awareness of the rescue vehicles as opposed to giving instruction and then shifting attention elsewhere - like landing aircraft. That's why this is being discussed. The mishap controller should have never been allowed to be in that position to begin with.
Click to expand...
Let's say that the 2 Controllers didn't leave early but stayed in the break room. How long would it have taken for the Controllers in the Cab to realize that they were oversaturated and called down to the Break Room for help. Then how long would it had taken for a Controller to get from the Break Room to the Cab. More than likely by the time a Controller got from the Break Room to the Cab the accident would have already happened. This doesn't even take into consideration the time needed to bring the Controller coming from the Break Room up to speed on what is happening.
 
jayhawk74 said:
Let's say that the 2 Controllers didn't leave early but stayed in the break room. How long would it have taken for the Controllers in the Cab to realize that they were oversaturated and called down to the Break Room for help. Then how long would it had taken for a Controller to get from the Break Room to the Cab. More than likely by the time a Controller got from the Break Room to the Cab the accident would have already happened. This doesn't even take into consideration the time needed to bring the Controller coming from the Break Room up to speed on what is happening.
Click to expand...
What if they had taken their break 1.5 hr earlier and were thus still working.
 
So your saying the fire truck wouldn't of entered the runway and hit the aircraft if the tower cab had more staff on duty?
 
FlightmechH3 said:
The excuse that the controller(s) were overworked/overloaded is wrong. Their job is to keep things safe, not cry that they have to work through a 10 minute break or want to go home. Then get another job.

No one forced you to be an ATC. You chose your fate. Go work in an HR dept at Wal Mart if working in a tower is too hard.

Fire everyone in that tower and others that left work early or gave approval for time card fraud.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just fire everyone, that'll improve safety. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
bonefishpete said:
So your saying the fire truck wouldn't of entered the runway and hit the aircraft if the tower cab had more staff on duty?
Click to expand...
Possibly. There would have been more people to deal with the existing emergency and allow better situational awareness.

It's an enless cycle: Something happens -> New rule is made to prevent it -> Time passes -> People forget why the rule is there -> Rule is broken or removed -> Something happens.

After Comair 5191, the FAA said "no more single controllers on duty." Yet here we are.
 
WDD said:
But……. It’s yet to be determined that having the two extra guys in the tower would have made a difference. Maybe that had nothing to do with anything.

Why did the controller let the trucks cross, why did the trucks cross when they had a red light?
Click to expand...

When the trucks see a red light, they are to hold short unless ATC tells them to proceed.

There was a garbled, stepped-on transmission shortly before ATC cleared them to cross. It’s pure speculation, but it’s possible that part of the garble was the truck saying, “We see red lights. Please advise.” IF SO, the next thing the truck heard was a clearance to cross the runway, and the driver would then be correct to move across.

Speculation, of course, but a scenario that could explain what happened.
 
Half Fast said:
IF SO, the next thing the truck heard was a clearance to cross the runway, and the driver would then be correct to move across.
Click to expand...
Not true. You don't cross the red status lights even if ATC tells you to. If they are stuck on red, ATC has to disable the system first.
 
Half Fast said:
When the trucks see a red light, they are to hold short unless ATC tells them to proceed.

There was a garbled, stepped-on transmission shortly before ATC cleared them to cross. It’s pure speculation, but it’s possible that part of the garble was the truck saying, “We see red lights. Please advise.” IF SO, the next thing the truck heard was a clearance to cross the runway, and the driver would then be correct to move across.

Speculation, of course, but a scenario that could explain what happened.
Click to expand...
This is a human factors failure... on the part of the responders. Even if ATC gave clearance to cross, every rule in every book regarding operating a vehicle in the movement area is that it is still your responsibility to see and avoid and moving aircraft ALWAYS HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY.

I see it almost every day at work. An ambulance/police/rescue holding at the alley way as an aircraft passes. I've never seen an AC slam on the brakes for them.

Responders have get-there-itis like pilots.
 
The Parties recognize that air traffic controllers should have break periods away from their assigned duties during their shifts, based on staffing and workload, to recuperate. Breaks are defined as a period of time during which no duties are assigned, and offer employees opportunities to attend to personal needs and rejuvenate their mental acuity. However, employees are subject to recall. Requests for an employee leaving the facility for short periods of time shall not be unreasonably denied.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top