Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

LaGuardia pilots raised safety alarms months before deadly runway crash

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 324 posts

Re: LaGuardia pilots raised safety alarms months before deadly runway crash

#211

Post by AnAnonymousDude »

jamincan wrote: post #190
0xffff2 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this specific incident, there was a system in place called Runway Entrance Lights [0] that does serve as an automated sanity check on controllers commands. The surveillance video that is circulating shows that the system was working and indicated that the runway was not safe to enter. It's not clear yet why the truck entered the runway anyway. 0: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/rwsl

I wonder if they thought that since they were responding to an emergency, and they were given clearance to cross by ATC, that that would override normal procedures. Kind of like how emergency vehicles cross a red light all the time when responding to an emergency.

If they thought that, it was in error. Training SPECIFICALLY calls this out. The lights ALWAYS overrule the controller. Period.

Re: LaGuardia pilots raised safety alarms months before deadly runway crash

#212

Post by antonymoose »

sonar_un wrote: post #183
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This isn't one guy's fault. Counterpoint. It's Regen's fault. He's the guy who decided that a high priority of the government was making sure air traffic controllers had no power to fight back against being horrifically overworked (because unions are evil you see)

Pretty much everything broken in the USA stems directly from Reagen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g95fiZCzjlo

I’m not saying he didn’t ignore a real problem - but it’s been 45 years since the 1981 airline strike. Surely the blame ought to be spread around our incompetent Federal government.

Re: LaGuardia pilots raised safety alarms months before deadly runway crash

#213

Post by bombcar »

tadfisher wrote: post #178
bombcar wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The pilots would execute untowered approach procedures, a small airport with little to no traffic and VFR flight you may self-announce on frequency, a larger airport you go back to approach, etc.

Each of those flights should have an alternate and be prepared (have enough fuel) to divert. If there is a fuel emergency then self-announcing is likely appropriate as the plane is coming down anyway, but that is multiple things going wrong.

A big part of it is what category of airport it is, and plane. General aviation almost always goes to self-announce (which includes some business jets perhaps, they often land at untowered airports) but not category 135 air travel or whatever it is.

Re: LaGuardia pilots raised safety alarms months before deadly runway crash

#214

Post by xeromal »

zardo wrote: post #157
FL410 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And therein lies the problem. Clearly, having one overworked controller running a combined tower is not safe nor sustainable.

It seems like a critical enough role that you probably want two people there in case one has a medical emergency anyway. Even if it's not that busy.

I believe other areas can assist when something like that happens.

Re: LaGuardia pilots raised safety alarms months before deadly runway crash

#215

Post by volkl48 »

arjie wrote: post #94
jakelazaroff wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are describing a staffing shortage.

Is he? I can see the number of hours worked as evidence of a shortage, but prima facie it is not obvious that a single controller handling both ground and air is evidence of a 'shortage' if it is routinely considered feasible in the industry. It could just be an efficiency choice for low-traffic times. Based on some googling since I'm not an expert it seems this is called 'position combining' in the US and is pretty…

An obvious issue is going to be that while it's supposed to be a lower-traffic time, if you've had delays cascading down the day - it may not be in reality. If the staffing doesn't adjust for delays shifting the time of flights, it would probably often leave you with an overworked controller.

Looking at the normal schedules - if all is on schedule there'd be no departures in the 23:00 hour but you'd still have the arrivals side running pretty heavily. However, once you factor in things not being on schedule, as they evidently were not on that night, you get:

----------

The 15min before the accident had 14 flight operations (per Juan Browne/blancolirio going through the ADSB playback). And that's in marginal weather and at night, which makes things more complicated.

That is 75% of the official maximum capacity of the airport - during the main part of the day where there's government-imposed caps on flights, it's capped at 74 operations per hour or about 18.5 per 15min.

As such, it seems apparent that you would need just as much staffing (or at least 75% as much) at that time to safely handle the traffic volume that was occurring that night as you did in the main part of the day.

Unless the normal staffing here was just 2 people, it seems clear that 1 is inadequate.

Re: LaGuardia pilots raised safety alarms months before deadly runway crash

#216

Post by jimbokun »

rectang wrote: post #198
jimbokun wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current US President is the last person we should listen to when it comes to deciding anything important.

By using the role name rather than proper name, I'd hoped to spare HN from a tangent like this. My point doesn't rest on the nature of single individual, but instead applies to a human tendency. Politicians and press both play to the base impulses of a mass audience, unlike the NTSB. This is not the first time that a politician has scapegoated individuals when systemic failure occurs.

Sure but most of his predecessors knew enough to not weigh in beyond regret for the tragedy and loss of life until after the investigators did their job.

Re: LaGuardia pilots raised safety alarms months before deadly runway crash

#217

Post by volkl48 »

Someone1234 wrote: post #110
pc86 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Staffing shortage" doesn't mean "you can fit more people in the tower." You can't think of any scenario having one controller makes sense?

In general, I can. In LaGuardia? Aside from right after 9/11 and during COVID-19 when almost all commercial travel stopped, I cannot. I don't think people saying this stuff quite understand how busy LGA is even at night. I'd even go as far as to say that three minimum on duty with two in the tower at all times (for a ground/air split), would be the bare minimum for any hour or situation at LGA.

It does quiet down eventually. There's no scheduled departures 22:55-5:45 and only a handful of arrivals 23:59-6:45.

However, arrivals stay pretty heavy right up until 23:59 even on schedule and if you've got a lot of delayed flights (not exactly uncommon at LGA) - you may still have a lot of departures going out in the 23:00 hour.

I would not be surprised to learn that they're staffed to an appropriate level for what the schedule says is supposed to be operating at that time, but a very inadequate level for what actually winds up operating at that time on many days.

Initial analysis suggests they were running about 75% of full capacity in flight ops in the 15min prior to the accident. I doubt they were staffed to 75% of the daytime peak.

Re: LaGuardia pilots raised safety alarms months before deadly runway crash

#218

Post by SecretDreams »

estearum wrote: post #210
rectang wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By using the role name rather than proper name, I'd hoped to spare HN from a tangent like this. My point doesn't rest on the nature of single individual, but instead applies to a human tendency. Politicians and press both play to the base impulses of a mass audience, unlike the NTSB. This is not the first time that a politician has scapegoated individuals when systemic failure occurs.

I actually can't remember or imagine another POTUS even getting to a level of specificity required to scapegoat an individual for something like this. The usual (and correct) answer is to say: "We don't know yet what happened, but there will be a full investigation and we will make the changes necessary to prevent it from happening again." Pretty easy! It doesn't serve us well to act like this administration is anyth…

Agreed. Respect and decorum are gone with the most recent POTUS. It's not okay to ascribe this aviation incident to the ATC controller. However, it is fully okay to call the POTUS and staff out for attacking so many individuals, at such a deeply personal level, over issues that are clearly systematic and that have clearly gotten worse under current leadership.

Re: LaGuardia pilots raised safety alarms months before deadly runway crash

#219

Post by alistairSH »

estearum wrote: post #210
rectang wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By using the role name rather than proper name, I'd hoped to spare HN from a tangent like this. My point doesn't rest on the nature of single individual, but instead applies to a human tendency. Politicians and press both play to the base impulses of a mass audience, unlike the NTSB. This is not the first time that a politician has scapegoated individuals when systemic failure occurs.

I actually can't remember or imagine another POTUS even getting to a level of specificity required to scapegoat an individual for something like this. The usual (and correct) answer is to say: "We don't know yet what happened, but there will be a full investigation and we will make the changes necessary to prevent it from happening again." Pretty easy! It doesn't serve us well to act like this administration is anyth…

extremely aberrational

Is it still an aberration the second time 'round?

Re: LaGuardia pilots raised safety alarms months before deadly runway crash

#220

Post by krsw »

nathanaldensr wrote: post #33
fyrepuffs wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The FAA's problems are systemic and structural. They've existed long, long before the 2024 election.

They got markedly worse after 2024. No need to minimize the damage the current administration is doing to the institutions of the country.
Post reply on HN