Attention, all "less than perfect" pilots

[stratoflyer]

Jolt, don't ever let FAA stuff like this scare you from one of man kind's greatest adventures. Flying is just awesome because once you are cruising and you look outside the window, it all clicks and you really begin to feel why you fly in the first place. My advice: Join AOPA. They got loads of legal advice and if you ever have such a question, give them a call. I have.

Continuing on, let me tell you all a little bedtime story. On a beautiful summer day (about 2 weeks ago) I arrived at my home airport early and decided to sit under a shady palm and listen to my hand held transceiver and listen to the tower frequency. No more than 5 minutes in I hear the start of one student pilot's odyssey.

This poor feller got so confused up there that he not only entered the pattern the wrong way, but the tower kept giving him instructions that he should have followed and didn't. He ended up going upwind on the downwind leg and I personally saw airplanes pulling 360's trying to avoid him. As a precaution, the controller denied any airplanes from entering Class D airspace, and proceeded to vector the student pilot out of the airspace. He then landed as many as possible and began letting in those who were waiting. Then, after carefully giving instructions with an edge in his voice, he cleared the student back into the pattern with a clearance to land. And again, the student flew completely opposite the traffic pattern onto the other side of the airport. Finally, he landed after a 40 minute ordeal.

And get this: he was told to contact ground, and when he did the ground controller questioned him. The poor feller expressed his apologies and simply said "It was a terrible flight today. I was so confused." The ground controller simply said everyone makes mistakes, just follow directions next time, and go over your pattern procedures with your instructor.

Here's my question: Does anyone think this guy should ever fly again?

Well, truth be told, he was back in the air 2 days later.

IMHO, he should have been suspended pending an additional 5 hours of ground and flight instruction. But he should have been able to fly again.

What should the controllers have done? This guy could have caused an accident. Not to mention managing to anger everyone with 10 miles of the airport.

Is this the sort of thing the FAA really wants to go after? Guess what?! I've seen this happen at uncontrolled airports. Then what? Who has the responsibility of reporting these guys? The guy listening to UNICOM? Give me a break.

[Jolt]

That story made me feel a little better, but I've done stupid stuff, too.

My second solo flight I told myself, "I'm ready to leave the pattern!"  So I did everything the way I was supposed to and departed to the East to the practice area I was very familiar with.  I would have started practicing some of the things I'd done so many times dual, but I froze up because I just didn't recognize anything.  I missed all of my landmarks on the way out.  I opened my sectional and I couldn't even find my home airport on the map because I was so frazzled.  On top of that, I forgot how to use the airplane's GPS, and I suddenly forgot how to use VORs (and I probably had radials written on my kneeboard that would have brought me home).

I just gained some altitude and finally admitted to myself that I was helpless.  I ended up calling the tower.  The controller asked me to ident and I realized my transponder was off (Doh!) and when I turned it back on and hit the button, I was definitely not squawking 1200.

I landed and that was that.  I don't think I soloed again until I renewed my endorsement nine months later.

Stupid, stupid, stupid!!!

[Mustang]

As a military member who's pay and benifts are totally at the mercy of pentagon/beltway politics.....I hate the chess game that the ATC Union plays with the safety and economics of our country.

As for reporting violations....if we want to make our airways safer we have to hold pilots accountable.

It's not the ATC union playing the chess game, Pat. 

Ever since the Bush Administration declared ATC one of those governmental services that should be privatized, the FAA has been doing everything in its power to wreck ATC -- from unilateral imposition of b-scale wages to this.  I could go on and on, suffice to say, I don't think you have good SA on the subject.

[D242]

And get this: he was told to contact ground, and when he did the ground controller questioned him. The poor feller expressed his apologies and simply said "It was a terrible flight today. I was so confused." The ground controller simply said everyone makes mistakes, just follow directions next time, and go over your pattern procedures with your instructor.

Here's my question: Does anyone think this guy should ever fly again?

Well, truth be told, he was back in the air 2 days later.

A lot of what happens after a pliot screws up depends on the pilot's attitude when they make that (usually on a phone) call to the tower. Come across as arrogant and defensive, like you don't believe you made a mistake, and you're likely to end up talking to the FSDO. Acknowlege that you know you made a mistake, and give the controller reason to believe you're going to work on your own initiative to fix the cause of that mistake, and they'll help you in any way they can. They're there to help you aviate safely--not to be the bad cop.

Ever since the Bush Administration declared ATC one of those governmental services that should be privatized, the FAA has been doing everything in its power to wreck ATC -- from unilateral imposition of b-scale wages to this.

BINGO! They're out to break the system so badly that people will believe them when they say, "The only way this can be fixed is to privatize it." They might get away with it too, because even in the aviation community, there seems to be very little awareness of what's really going on.

[Frenchie]

BINGO! They're out to break the system so badly that people will believe them when they say, "The only way this can be fixed is to privatize it." They might get away with it too, because even in the aviation community, there seems to be very little awareness of what's really going on.

Actually you are both wrong.  None of this has anything to do with any conspiracy for or against privatization or any FAA conspiracy against NATCA.

How all of this came about was from a controller named Anne Whiteman (google is your friend if you want more information).  This particular controller was getting harassed by her fellow controllers (and management to some degree) because she wanted to follow the rules (the rules in question had nothing to do with busting pilots).  NATCA had the option of supporting and representing her (as they are required to do) and they didn't.  Eventually after years of this situation dragging on, she complained to the DOT IG who definitely did run with the ball that NATCA dropped.  She even went on Oprah to explain her side of the story (no, I'm not kidding).  The subsequent investigation resulted in the IG finding out that the FAA was covering up pilot and controller errors (everyone in the FAA and many pilots already knew that).  Quite a few managers were removed, some were demoted, and some were forced to retire.

As a result of the investigation, many changes have been made and more are coming.  The epicenter of it all was DFW, but its spreading everywhere.  Controllers aren't losing their jobs for minor phraseology errors, but things are getting tougher on them and pilots to some degree.  Most pilots who are getting busted are flying IFR and most of them are airline guys.  The FAA is simply more vigorously enforcing rules that have been there all along.  I don't believe its necessarily making anyone safer, but it has removed any human discretion on who does and doesn't get busted.

[D242]

Actually you are both wrong.  None of this has anything to do with any conspiracy for or against privatization or any FAA conspiracy against NATCA.

With all due respect, we're both right, and you are being short sighted.

You need to consider everything that has gone on in the past five or six years, starting with the agency's failure to begin preparing for the certain wave of retirements that was bound to happen around this time due to the fact that so many of today's controllers were hired in the wake of the 1981 PATCO strike. How would you explain that in 2004, the FAA hired only 13 controllers? It either has to be a case of total mis-management, or some part of a larger strategic plan. If you then consider the FAA's failure to bargain in good faith, and the start of the Imposed Work Rules in September of 2006, and look at the resulting staffing crisis in ATC, the picture becomes more clear. (Note that that all happened during the term of one FAA administrator, Marion Blakey, a Bush appointee.) There's a whole lot more to it than can be posted here, but that's the real story, in a nutshell.

Though the genesis of this particular move on the part of the FAA may have been in the problems revealed in operations at DFW, in its wider application, it's just another part of the orchestrated campaign to bust the union, through fear and intimidation, in preparation for privatization of the whole NAS.

A little off topic, but related, all the same--does anybody think they're getting better service from Flight Service since it was privatized?

[Frenchie]

Actually you are both wrong.  None of this has anything to do with any conspiracy for or against privatization or any FAA conspiracy against NATCA.

With all due respect, we're both right, and you are being short sighted.

You need to consider everything that has gone on in the past five or six years, starting with the agency's failure to begin preparing for the certain wave of retirements that was bound to happen around this time due to the fact that so many of today's controllers were hired in the wake of the 1981 PATCO strike. How would you explain that in 2004, the FAA hired only 13 controllers? It either has to be a case of total mis-management, or some part of a larger strategic plan. If you then consider the FAA's failure to bargain in good faith, and the start of the Imposed Work Rules in September of 2006, and look at the resulting staffing crisis in ATC, the picture becomes more clear. (Note that that all happened during the term of one FAA administrator, Marion Blakey, a Bush appointee.) There's a whole lot more to it than can be posted here, but that's the real story, in a nutshell.

Though the genesis of this particular move on the part of the FAA may have been in the problems revealed in operations at DFW, in its wider application, it's just another part of the orchestrated campaign to bust the union, through fear and intimidation, in preparation for privatization of the whole NAS.

A little off topic, but related, all the same--does anybody think they're getting better service from Flight Service since it was privatized?

All you are doing is throwing up a bunch of red herrings.  I'm well aware of the FAA's hiring practices.  I've been working for the FAA for more than 20 years.  You're also throwing up a bunch of NATCA talking points which I can only assume you're getting from your wife.  What you should realize is that when you only get the story from one viewpoint, you may not have all the information necessary to draw such conclusions.  NATCA did get a raw deal in 2006, but a lot of that was because of their own doing going back for many years.  NATCA also promised a lot of productivity gains on their previous contract and never delivered, yet they still got very large pay increases.  So sometimes what goes around comes around and in this case it took a very long time to come around.  I don't agree with what happened, nor do I support it, but sometimes as you sow, so shall you reap.

As far as contracting out goes, there was a big effort early in the Bush administration for this, but due to numerous failures (not just FS-21), those efforts are dead and gone and I don't see them reappearing anytime soon.  Certainly there are those in NATCA that believe everything that happens is just part of a large conspiracy against them, but actually believing anyone would deliberately mis-manage or sabatoge a large government agency simply so they could contract it out is getting pretty close to the loony fringe and that's giving them the benefit of the doubt.

The current rule enforcement activities are simply part of a crackdown that initiated at DFW about 3 years ago and has been growing ever since.  That's it and nothing more.  I don't particularly care for the way the agency has been run for the past several years, but that doesn't mean I'm willing to buy into every conspiracy theory conceived by an organization that clearly has an agenda.

[stratoflyer]

Well, as the guy in the air who has to make the call, I can only say this:


Oh controller, who sits in tower
Hallowed be thy sector.
Thy traffic come, thy instructions be done
On the ground as they are in the air.
Give us this day our radar vectors,
And forgive us our incursions
As we forgive those who cut us off on final.
And lead us not into adverse weather,
But deliver us our clearances.


I've met controllers before. Great hard-working folks. Definitely don't strike me as wanting to bust me. Again, when I fly, I think of them all the time.

As far as FSS, they are still losing flight plans and their FS21 software seems to be getting better (I was told there will be further software changes). I can say this--those folks understand us pilots (some are pilots themselves) and know safety is at issue and will go out of their way to get a problem solved.

And anyone out there who flies and has ready access to a FSS station, go visit. Put a face to the voice--and thank them.

[D242]

All you are doing is throwing up a bunch of red herrings.

How the election turns out will have a great deal to do with what eventually comes to pass. I guess time will tell.

....but actually believing anyone would deliberately mis-manage or sabatoge a large government agency simply so they could contract it out is getting pretty close to the loony fringe and that's giving them the benefit of the doubt.

So, you're in favor of the "gross incompetence" line of thinking? (Because there has to be some explanation.) Certainly, you're entitled to your opinion....

And anyone out there who flies and has ready access to a FSS station, go visit.

Cause you'll never get hold of them on the phone.

(And that's not a slam on the good folks working there, but on the results they're able to acheive with the system they're working under.)

[Frenchie]

So, you're in favor of the "gross incompetence" line of thinking? (Because there has to be some explanation.) Certainly, you're entitled to your opinion....

I've already given you the explanation.  If you chose to believe wild speculation based on no facts being put out by an organization who clearly has self-serving motives, be my guest.

[Frenchie]

Cause you'll never get hold of them on the phone.

(And that's not a slam on the good folks working there, but on the results they're able to acheive with the system they're working under.)

When was the last time you called them?  I get right through and have been for some time now, and I call before every flight I make.  I also call them on a daily basis when I'm at work and have noticed big changes over the last several months.  I don't at all agree with the direction FS-21 has taken, but their services are improving and have been for some time now.

[D242]

I've already given you the explanation.  If you chose to believe wild speculation based on no facts being put out by an organization who clearly has self-serving motives, be my guest.

You explained your reasoning for the increase of enforcement as of late. You didn't offer anything to explain why there's the current staffing crisis, or why the controllers were given such a raw deal in 06. Of course, we all know that the direct cause of the staffing crisis is due to the higher than predicted number of retirements, on top of the prexisting failure to hire replacements in a timely fashion. Can you explain why that has played out the way it has?

I'll put it to you as well, that anything that emanates from the agency's PR machine is nothing but self-serving, and is often short on truth.

When was the last time you called them?

In truth, I've never called them, since I'm not a pilot. (My experience in CAP was as a Scanner/Observer, and time training in Air Ops. And I'll admit that my comment about not reaching them by phone was sarcastic.)

I do know what I've been told by pilots though, and by one controller whose opinion I have the utmost respect for.

A pilot friend of mine has made it a practice to "file a flight plan" with me, because he no longer trusts Flight Service to notice that he hasn't called to close the one he might be able to file with them. He also has serious problems witht the fact that he used to be able to get a weather briefing from a specialist that was imtimately familair with the area of his intended flight. Now, he's just as likely to get someone that doesn't know the weather across the mountains of PA from the weather in Timbuktu.

I've read that the use of the service is down by 50% anyway. A sign that many of their 'customers' have just given up?

I've heard stories at the dinner table (first person accounts, not rumors passed on by a friend of a friend of somebody that knows a pilot),about their refusal to take a PIREP, about moderate turbulence, that was offered by a USAF C-130. I've heard that even for FAA ATC facilities, it's sometimes hard to get through on the phone. I've heard that they've refused to read back to the controller, IFR clearances that they were relaying to aircraft at satellite airports--that that refusal was not just one obstinant individual, but policy. The controller is responsible for those clearances being accurately relayed to the pilot--how can they know that's going to happen when FS refuses to read it back? I've heard that when giving one such clearance that included the term "Clearance void after (whatever time)", the FS person said "What's 'void after' mean?"

I showed Mrs. D242 your replies here, and she commented (obviously pleasently surprised) that just yesterday she'd read an IFR clearance to FS, and had it read back in it's entireity, and correctly. So, ok, maybe some progress is being made. That doesn't prove that privatization was the right way to go, or that the results have been an improvement over the old system. And I notice that you didn't claim that it was an improvement over the old system either.

[Frenchie]

I've already given you the explanation.  If you chose to believe wild speculation based on no facts being put out by an organization who clearly has self-serving motives, be my guest.

You explained your reasoning for the increase of enforcement as of late. You didn't offer anything to explain why there's the current staffing crisis, or why the controllers were given such a raw deal in 06. Of course, we all know that the direct cause of the staffing crisis is due to the higher than predicted number of retirements, on top of the prexisting failure to hire replacements in a timely fashion. Can you explain why that has played out the way it has?

You're really getting off on a tangent here.  At the risk of getting this thread shut down due to the tangential discussions, yes I can explain the "current staffing crisis".  First of all, there's nothing "current" about it.  It's simply business as usual.  Technicians, inspectors, and dozens of other entities within the FAA have been in "crisis" for many years.  This is nothing new within the government, and until congress appropriates enough money to hire more employees than presently needed in anticipation of shortfalls later on, this dynamic is not going to change anytime soon.  The only reason why there's a "crisis" at all is because the current changes are causing controllers to retire earlier than they normally would have, which nobody could have predicted.  It's rather easy to look back with 20/20 hindsight and say they FAA should have done something different.

As far as controllers getting a "raw deal" in '06, the rules that allowed such a deal were written in '96 under a different administration.  Many other FAA employees were given their "raw deal" back then when controllers were given huge pay increases.  Furthermore, when NATCA's promised productivity increases never panned out, other FAA employees were given even more of the shaft because of budget shortfalls produced by those raises.  Countless employees were hired at lower pay levels because of payroll shortfalls.  Other existing employees were given reduced raises because of payroll shortfalls. 

NATCA didn't have a problem with those rules when they were receiving huge benefits.  In fact they politically supported them at the time because they allowed for their raises to happen.  Well guess what?  This "raw deal" they are getting doesn't take back any of those pay increases.  The "raw deal" they got was not being able to wear shorts and flip-flops to work on their 6-figure salaries.  Perhaps you can explain how other employees got their "raw deal" which actually did take money out of their pockets and away from their families, all of which happened under the previous administration.  There's a LOT more to the story which you can't even begin to comprehend.

I'll put it to you as well, that anything that emanates from the agency's PR machine is nothing but self-serving, and is often short on truth.

Which is why I would never regurgitate anything from them either, but one thing is for sure, I would definitely put them at least one notch higher on the truth scale as compared to NATCA.

When was the last time you called them?

In truth, I've never called them, since I'm not a pilot. (My experience in CAP was as a Scanner/Observer, and time training in Air Ops. And I'll admit that my comment about not reaching them by phone was sarcastic.)

By your own admission, any info you have about FS-21 is 2nd hand at best.   Years ago, the old FSSs were consolidated into the Automated FSSs (which have been further consolidated by FS-21).  During that time there were just as many complaints as now (if not more).  The bottom line is that as weather technology improves and is being disseminated by the internet, FSS services are being used less and less.  Consolidation makes sense.  I don't agree with the method in which it was done and I can name horror stories you don't even know about as far as why and how it was poorly done.  However that doesn't change the fact that some changes were necessary and prudent.  It also doesn't change the fact that service is improving.

[Crude]

How all of this came about was from a controller named Anne Whiteman (google is your friend if you want more information).  This particular controller was getting harassed by her fellow controllers (and management to some degree) because she wanted to follow the rules (the rules in question had nothing to do with busting pilots).

Were you there at the DFW Tracon (D10) at that time?  If not then you don't know squat about the situation.

Do you know what really transpired re: Ms Whiteman?  If you were not there then again you don't know squat.

I was there, I know what went on. 

She even went on Oprah to explain her side of the story (no, I'm not kidding).  The subsequent investigation resulted in the IG finding out that the FAA was covering up pilot and controller errors (everyone in the FAA and many pilots already knew that). 

Yes some errors were being covered up but there were also errors that were never reported either that were caused directly by Ms. Whiteman not following those very rules.

Quite a few managers were removed, some were demoted, and some were forced to retire.

Name one mangler that was forced to retire, just one.

Crude

[D242]

You're really getting off on a tangent here.  At the risk of getting this thread shut down due to the tangential discussions,...

It's called "thread creep", and it happens. I participate in a number of forums, am an Admin at one, and as long as the discussion remains civil, and informative, I don't see any reason to close it simply because nobody's adding anything on the original topic. There are other options, like splitting threads available as well. But, the mods here will do what they feel is proper, because that's why they're here.

First of all, there's nothing "current" about it.  It's simply business as usual.  Technicians, inspectors, and dozens of other entities within the FAA have been in "crisis" for many years.

I'll have to take your word on that. However, the actual number of people making the decisions, minute to minute, that keep airplanes from occupying the same physical space, was not in crisis two years ago. There are a whole lot of people, smarter than myself, who agee that's it's in crisis now.

The only reason why there's a "crisis" at all is because the current changes are causing controllers to retire earlier than they normally would have, which nobody could have predicted.

NATCA predicted it. Knowing the changes, and their effect on any given controller's economic situation and morale, and knowing how many were eligible to retire earlier than mandated by law, the village idiot could have predicted it. Sorry, I'm back to either gross incompetance/gross neglect, or deliberate intent on the part of those at the top.

As far as controllers getting a "raw deal" in '06, the rules that allowed such a deal were written in '96 under a different administration.

And, of course, when asked whether the 06 raw deal was in accordance with the rules, the Labor Relations Board, from this administration, didn't say it wasn't. Ultimately, the courts may have to make that call. The fat lady hasn't sung yet.

This "raw deal" they are getting doesn't take back any of those pay increases.  The "raw deal" they got was not being able to wear shorts and flip-flops to work on their 6-figure salaries.  Perhaps you can explain how other employees got their "raw deal" which actually did take money out of their pockets and away from their families, all of which happened under the previous administration.

I'm sorry, but I have no first, or second, hand knowlege of anybody else's raw deal. You're certainly welcome to explain them to me. (Other than the deal the FSS folks got when the FAA bundled them up in a neat little package and delived them to LockMart, sans their hard earned government retirements.)

The dress code was really just icing on the cake for management. It gave them the opportunity to show the controllers "who's boss" at the most basic level, every day. Everybody kows that, including the guys that wore dresses to work.

As far as pay increases, my family's income is less now than it was two years ago, due to changes in things like changes in holiday pay, and loss of CIC pay. (For those readers that aren't familiar, that's Controller In Charge pay--a differential paid to controllers when they have to assume the responsibilites of a supervisor, because the FAA isn't paying to have one of those there. The controllers still get to shoulder the responsibility, they just get to do it for free now.) And, my wife will never see another pay raise, while the rest of the government's payroll will see one every year. Been to the gas station lately? That alone amounts to a pay cut, year after year.

You fail to mention that the agency has created a "B Scale" wherin new hires are not on the same pay structure as those who were hired before 06. (Starting salries are competitive with burger flipping.) How that helps to attract qualified people to replace the allegedly unpredictable wave of early retirees is beyond me. Any explanation would be appreciated.

And while we're on the subject of pay not changing, and staffing, it used to be that controllers would routienly begin their careers at lower level facilities, and as they gained skill and experience, they'd transfer to higher level, more demanding, and yes, better paying, facilities. Under the IWRs, any such move by an experieced controller is likely to result in a loss in pay, because the transfer means the controller moves to the B Scale pay rates. Any explantion of how that's helping to have "the right people in the right place at the right time" would be welcome as well.

By your own admission, any info you have about FS-21 is 2nd hand at best.

In the same respect that a controller passing along a braking conditon report, while never having personally set a wheel on the runway, or a CAP IC reporting to the RCC that the search objective has not yet been located, while not personally having flown each grid, ok, I'll concede that my information is 2nd hand.   

[Crude]

How would you explain that in 2004, the FAA hired only 13 controllers? It either has to be a case of total mis-management

NATCA was telling the agency at least 6 to 7 years ago to start hiring more controllers.  Did they?  Yep, all of 13 of em in '04.  Mismanglement at it's best.

I'm well aware of the FAA's hiring practices.  I've been working for the FAA for more than 20 years.

Doing what?  Certainly not being a controller!  Pushing paper or aircraft?

You're also throwing up a bunch of NATCA talking points which I can only assume you're getting from your wife.  What you should realize is that when you only get the story from one viewpoint, you may not have all the information necessary to draw such conclusions.

And you are guilty of of the same in reverse:  FFA talking points, getting/telling the story from one viewpoint (the FFAs).

NATCA also promised a lot of productivity gains on their previous contract and never delivered, yet they still got very large pay increases. 

NATCA never had the chance to show what gains could be had by previous contract.  Things did need change as far as facility classification.  There were facilities that had been at their top level for years working over twice the traffic of other facilities that had just made the top level and both facilities were getting the same pay.  Is this fair?  Reclass, however in my opinion, was a very big mistake for NATCA to make and one will not find very many controllers to agree with me.

in this case it took a very long time to come around.  I don't agree with what happened, nor do I support it, but sometimes as you sow, so shall you reap.

Long time my behind! 

Since you do not agree or support "with what happened", then what have you done to reverse or change it?  Your response?  (sounds of silence with maybe a cricket or two chirping)

As far as contracting out goes, there was a big effort early in the Bush administration for this, but due to numerous failures (not just FS-21), those efforts are dead and gone and I don't see them reappearing anytime soon. 

I hate to continually point out your mistakes and misinformation but the first significant wave of contracting out the level I & II towers occurred under the Clinton administration.

Failures like AAS?  Mr. Safety Sabatini's Customer Service Initiative?

I suggest that all of you go to:

http://www.oig.dot.gov/StreamFile?file=/data/pdfdocs/FSS_Testimony_Web_File.pdf

and read for yourself just how well FS-21 is doing along with Lockmart FSS.  In case you didn't know this Frenchie, these were CONTRACTED out FEDERAL Flight Service Stations.

The current rule enforcement activities are simply part of a crackdown that initiated at DFW about 3 years ago and has been growing ever since.  That's it and nothing more.  I don't particularly care for the way the agency has been run for the past several years, but that doesn't mean I'm willing to buy into every conspiracy theory conceived by an organization that clearly has an agenda.

Rule enforcement like the Southwest Airlines inspection debacle this year and the grounding of how many AAL MD-80s very shortly thereafter?  Crackdown my behind, this is nothing but assuming control and exerting power over one's workforce.  Talk with the two inspectors involved with the situation earlier this year.

Can you honestly state (with facts and documentation to back it up) that the agency does NOT have an agenda of it's own?  I have documentation that proves otherwise.

To get back onto topic, I think it's wrong for controllers to have to rat out pilots for every single simple mistake, most of the time a couple of words between them is all it takes to resolve a situation and to foster understanding.  But if controllers who do not do this risk their jobs then all bets are off.

Since now pilots are going to be under the microscope when will the airlines be?  If a pilot could face losing their license for a simple failure to follow the correct path assigned to the runway, will airline companies loose their operating certificate or will they be allowed to continue flying those aircraft that were not inspected ala Southwest?

Pilots please remember that this is not controllers doing this to you, it's the FFA and we (well maybe most of us) all know just how friendly to their customers they can be.  It just depends on who they consider to be the customers.

Good luck out there, you'll need it!

Crude - D10 Escapee 12-26-06 
(24 years, 11 months ATC, ZERO staph infection time)

[Crude]

As a military member who's pay and benifts are totally at the mercy of pentagon/beltway politics.....I hate the chess game that the ATC Union plays with the safety and economics of our country.

What chess game?  Did NATCA  force the agency to contract out facilities like the Level I&II towers and FFSs. 

The safety aspect is real, controllers at many facilities are working 6 day work weeks (forced overtime) and even 10 and 12 hour shifts due to the lack of full performance level (that means certified on all positions) controllers.  I have seen what this has done to my former coworkers, it shows in their faces, they are tired, many of them are making errors (thankfully most if these are minor) that they would never have made working with a full complement of bodies.  To the errors they are making, when will one of them be a serious error that causes loss of life?

Would you want the surgeon about to cut into you to fix your ailing heart to be at the top of his game or do you want him to run you through his assembly line of 15 that day and you're last in line?

Delays are going up directly due to this lack of staffing along with the other normal reasons (wx, runway capacity, etc.).  Ground stops have been issued for this.

Delays are also due to the fact that instead of conducting preventive maintenance on equipment, technicians only fix on fail.  So instead of that ILS, radar or comm system working when you need it to, it might be fixed the next day, week, month, whenever.

Do you want the city to staff the fire station with enough bodies and ready to go equipment to respond immediately when your house catches fire or is it ok to wait for them to show up the next day after they fix the broken pump on the fire engine?

Safety and economics are tied directly to the mis-manglement done to the NAS by the FFA.  It's all about costs to them, they are trying to run the NAS like a business and most businesses fail at one time or another, even the contracted ones.  Costs be [darn]ed, this is supposed to be a service to the American people.  Attempt to minimize costs when able but be able to provide the service FIRST!

As for reporting violations....if we want to make our airways safer we have to hold pilots accountable.

Like how the FFA makes management accountable for their errors (SWA, AAL, IG investigation of DFW, etc., etc.)?

Accountability (depending on the situation) is fine but it must be moderated to be proactive (educational) and not punitive in nature.  With the FFA this will not happen.

Crude - D10 Escapee 12-26-06

[lordmonar]

Crude....

That is exactly how we work in the military...and I don't get $120K as starting pay, I don't get collective bargaining.  If I get a 4.5% pay raise I am happy that I am staying in front of inflation.

You just are not going to get much sympathy from me.

[D242]

Crude....

That is exactly how we work in the military...and I don't get $120K as starting pay, I don't get collective bargaining.  If I get a 4.5% pay raise I am happy that I am staying in front of inflation.

You just are not going to get much sympathy from me.

No controller has ever gotten 120K as starting pay. And to paraphrase something author Earnest Gann said about airline pilots in "Fate is the Hunter", a controller might earn his/her entire year's pay in one minute.

And I'm still waiting for you to elaborate on how the union is playing games with safety and economics.

[awnuts]

lordmonar, No controller starts out at 120K per year unless you work in Kabul for KBR or one of the other military contractors.  Then the starting pay is above 160K.  I work with one of those guys.

As a controller eligible to retire, with an instrument and commercial rating for 30+ yrs, I will let you in on a secret.  If it comes down to me violating a pilot or losing my pay raise or job, I will not jeopardize either to save a pilots butt.  Sorry.  How are most controller errors and pilot deviations being found?  by randomly pulling radar data and voice tapes which are retained for 45 days. 

The bush administration is out to put the screws to all non-scheduled operations.  Look at the proposal for charter operations presented by Homeland security. Look at the AFSS debacle.  Been down to DC ADIZ lately?

We've lost 50% of our new hired controllers in 18 months.  All resigned because they could get a better paying job.  Until two years ago, the only resignees were trainees about to fail.  Of which there were 6 in 15 yrs.

The CAP is now going to fly the equivalent missions for surveillance that used to be flown by UH60 Army helicopters.  Do you really want to get shot down?  The CAP is not Air Force or law enforcement, yet the mission is slowly being changed to that role.  Be careful. 

Finally, as far as AFSS and Lockmart goes, I deal with these people daily.  They can't spell ILS, have to read the script whether you want it or not (or they will be fired).  Since FS21 is being set up as a pay for fee service, keep your credit card handy.  Phil Boyer sold a bill of goods his membership ( which I used to be one) then retired.  General aviation is about to get squashed with user fees on briefings which will be mandated.  Or you will be violated when you don't have that transponder code that was assigned in your briefing.