Washington (CNN) -- Two planes landed safely early Wednesday morning at Washington's Reagan National Airport after they were unable to reach anyone at the airport's air traffic control tower, according to the FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board.
The FAA would not comment on a media report that the airport controller had fallen asleep. NTSB spokesman Peter Knudson said, "All we know is the controller was unresponsive and we want to know why."
Later on in the article we find out that there's only one person on the overnight shift manning the control tower at Reagan National Airport on the overnight shift. Are you kidding me? For an airport that saw over a quarter of a million flights last year, they've got the same number of air traffic controllers at night as the Kwik-E-Mart has cashiers? That two planes had to land unassisted just over the span of 15 minutes should obviate the idea that a single person is sufficient.
And yet we need to be exposed to radiation (10 times more than they originally told us) to get on a plane that's going to have to land unassisted? An airport right in the heart of our nation's capitol - one that's a hub for US Airways, the largest US Carrier - can only afford a single air traffic controller on the midnight-to-eight shift? The TSA makes all kinds of noises about the extra security getting onto a flight being needed to prevent incidents in the air, and yet when it comes to getting planes out of the air and onto the ground (as opposed to into the ground), we're skimping on manpower?
Yeah, I'll add that to the giant pile of reasons why I'll be driving to DC and Pittsburgh next month...
That is all.
16 comments:
Given a choice, I'd drive everywhere & never fly again. But for those of us in Alaska, air travel is the only practical option. (It's a 7-hour drive to the state line from Anchorage, and that only gets us to the Yukon Territory. Seattle is 3 DAYS from here - or 3.5 hours by air.)
Good news is the State AG is trying to negotiate a way around TSA. I'm not holding my breath.
The pilot missed the 'BRB' message from the traffic controller.
I don't understand why they don't have at least 2 people in the tower on overnight shifts. You'd think that would be common sense.
Then again, this is the Federal Government we're talking about.
Even more scary is that the pilots attitude was "meh, it's happened plenty of times before." That suggests this is not a one-off occurrence.
Well, if Reagan hadn't fired all those poor PATCO Controllers 30 years ago, this would NEVER had happened. That's why we HAVE to STOP those Tea Bagging Extremists come the Next Election, So send your Donation to the AFL-CIO's 2012 Victory Fund at....
Sorry, seem to have been possessed by my Inner Commie for a minute. Better turn on Rush and get my head clear.
Conditions were probably VFR so they could have announced their arrival on unicom and gone for it . Jack
The response is "we need more regulation to solve this problem!" Yay! Gummint to the rescue.
Meh. Not a lot of takeoffs and landings at the airport at night anyway.
Reagan National is closed to commercial traffic at 10:00 PM due to the noise limitations passed by the hippies that inhabit DC. Hence, one controller is all you need.
After 10:00 one sleeping air traffic controller can not do the job that it would take six sleeping air traffic controllers to not do during the day.
Reagan Nation does not have many overnight flights, I actually thought they didn't have any after 11 or maybe 12 at the latest. I fly out of there all the time and I have never had a flight land after around 10:00 or so.
They had to agree with a bunch of rules to get it built because it's in the middle of a city.
That's why there was only one controller. I wonder what these planes were doing landing at that time.
http://www.metwashairports.com/reagan/1275.htm
There are also nighttime aircraft noise requirements in effect from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m
So, did the planes get a discount from the airport for handling the task unassisted?
The landing fee at Reagan is $3.04 per 1000 lbs. for commercial aircraft. I really think they should get a 25% discount at a minimum.
This is being blown out of proportion by the media, there was no threat to anyone here.
There are procedures for when you can't get in touch with the tower. They were told by approach to treat the airport as a non-towered airport. In addition, they had approach control if they needed some sort of assistance (which they probably didn't). This is regardless of whether conditions were IFR or VFR (which is the reason for the ETA on a flight plan).
As for only one controller, anyone that flies knows how slow things get starting at about 10 PM, even at busy airports. There is absolutely no reason to have multiple controllers on most fields at off hours. My understanding of ATC procedures is that if there is an overload, they have someone on call to assist (or approach control can assist). For the majority of the time, having that much staff there just doesn't make sense for those hours.
Don't overplay ATC, their role isn't as flight critical as most people think it is. They provide some very useful services, but they are not a necessity for safe flight. Being in contact with ATC is not a requirement for a safe flight, it makes life easier, but it isn't necessary. Don't confuse "safe flight" with "following regulations". Almost all your airline flights will be in contact with ATC every step of the way due to regs, but if communications are lost for some reason, it doesn't mean the flight is in danger. The pilots still fly the airplane, regardless of whether they have someone on the ground to talk to or not.
Question 1a: If there are no flights at Reagan after 10, why did two planes land there?
1b: Were they redirected from Dulles or BMI?
1c: How often are flights diverted to Reagan after Reagan's stated close of business?
Question 2: If it is vital to national security that grandmothers be molested and children be subject to pat downs and frequent fliers be subject to more radiation than a Japanese village, why are they skimping on the guys that monitor the skies over our nation's capitol?
I understand that it gets slow. However, not one but two planes not only landed at Reagan after hours, but landed after no contact with ATCs. This begs the question of how many flights landed with contact with the tower after hours that didn't make the news...
I don't know the answer to your questions.
I
f you're expecting one of today's "journalists" to find out, all I have to say is, "Heh".
As a native Washingtonian I actually know the answers to some of the questions posed.
1. After hours landings allows if aircraft is on the "approved" list of quiet planes. Newer Boeings and Airbuses *spit* meet these regs.
2. After hours landings allowed if original scheduled arrival was in allowed window. Delayed flights OK to land after 10pm.
DCA dates to 1941, replacing an airfield located on what is now The Pentagon. Grandma use to take me to DCA to watch the planes take off and land. Even in the early '60s you could see DC-3s in Eastern, Southern and United livery. Despite the dangers of operating an airport in such an urbanized area periodic attempts to close it are always shot down by Congress. They view DCA as their personal airfield. Sen. McCain pressured (what politicians call extortion) the FAA into extending the max. flight range of DCA originating flights just so he could fly non-stop to AZ.
"Reagan National is closed to commercial traffic at 10:00 PM due to the noise limitations passed by the hippies that inhabit DC. Hence, one controller is all you need."
I can assure you, sir - though long haired, I am no hippie.
"As a native Washingtonian I actually know the answers to some of the questions posed.
1. After hours landings allows if aircraft is on the "approved" list of quiet planes. Newer Boeings and Airbuses *spit* meet these regs.
2. After hours landings allowed if original scheduled arrival was in allowed window. Delayed flights OK to land after 10pm. "
Huh. I never knew this.
@Jay: They were in contact with ATC for all but the last few minutes of the flight. They weren't in contact with the tower at the airport, there is a difference.
When on an approach, you are on the radio with approach control for the first part of the approach (the longest part). They hand you off to tower a few miles out for landing clearance. You've already been cleared for the approach at this point and approach control is maintaining traffic separation for any traffic inbound to the airport, the only thing the tower is responsible for doing is clearing you to land when they confirm you have the runway in sight.
In the absence of a controller, pilots talk to each other. Even at GA-heavy airports, this doesn't usually present a problem. With an airport like DCA that has little to no VFR-only traffic, anyone inbound is going to be on the horn with approach and separated from other traffic.
Post a Comment