LaGuardia pilots raised safety alarms months before deadly runway crash • Hacker News Board

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

#81

Post by inaros » Tue, Mar 24, 2026, 4:51 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #70

inaros wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> One controller overnight is completely reasonable So if said controller has a medical episode?

"Funny" enough if this controller had had a medical emergency (or just bad sushi) and been off the radios, this wouldn't have happened because the fire truck would not have received clearance to cross the runway and wouldn't have. Or at least would have crossed like the airport was uncontrolled, been much more careful and announced itself, and likely have seen the landing aircraft.

An empty tower at La Guardia with a bunch of airplanes in the air not getting a reply to their calls is Die Hard 2 stuff. Spare me the Pete Hegseth school of ATC...

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

#82

Post by ferguess_k » Tue, Mar 24, 2026, 4:51 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #56

ndiddy wrote: post #5

I just hope they don't try to pin this on the controller who was on duty and move on without putting plans in place for some sort of structural change. Controllers are forced to work 60+ hour weeks and overnight shifts, and the controller in question was working both ground and air control simultaneously due to staffing shortages. If you listen to the ATC audio, he was handling finding a spot for a plane that aborted…

> the controller in question was working both ground and air control simultaneously due to staffing shortages How many planes land at LGA in the middle the night? One controller overnight is completely reasonable.

Looking at the things he needs to juggle at the same time, is it really reasonable? Any standard we are referring here? Sure such cases are rare but that's why we have redundancies for critical positions.

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

#83

Post by pc86 » Tue, Mar 24, 2026, 4:51 PM UTC

jakelazaroff wrote: post #29

metalliqaz wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know it was due to staffing shortages? It is common at LGA for one controller to be handling Tower and Ground late at night.

You are describing a staffing shortage.

"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?

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

#84

Post by VK-pro » Tue, Mar 24, 2026, 4:51 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #58

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.

Planes landing at a rate of one every 30-40 minutes isn't exactly "overworked."

I don’t have time to check flight logs but I personally landed at LGA coming from MDW on Sunday. And I also know people who got diverted within the hour coming back to LGA that night. 30-40 minutes doesn’t seem accurate. That aside, if you’ve ever done operational staffing, you’d know that you should probably have at least one redundancy. When there is any chance of emergency or two events happening simultaneously, you should have more than one person.

One last meta point. We live in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, and the highest air travel prices (some part is a function of longer distances I know). We should expect that we have ample coverage, if not over-coverage, at all times for one of our major metropolitan airports. Pay them.

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

#85

Post by MeetingsBrowser » Tue, Mar 24, 2026, 4:52 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #70

inaros wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> One controller overnight is completely reasonable So if said controller has a medical episode?

"Funny" enough if this controller had had a medical emergency (or just bad sushi) and been off the radios, this wouldn't have happened because the fire truck would not have received clearance to cross the runway and wouldn't have. Or at least would have crossed like the airport was uncontrolled, been much more careful and announced itself, and likely have seen the landing aircraft.

I can’t find a way to read this other than

“If we remove regulation and safety controls, things will be safer because everyone will be more careful.”

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

#86

Post by bloudermilk » Tue, Mar 24, 2026, 4:52 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #56

ndiddy wrote: post #5

I just hope they don't try to pin this on the controller who was on duty and move on without putting plans in place for some sort of structural change. Controllers are forced to work 60+ hour weeks and overnight shifts, and the controller in question was working both ground and air control simultaneously due to staffing shortages. If you listen to the ATC audio, he was handling finding a spot for a plane that aborted…

> the controller in question was working both ground and air control simultaneously due to staffing shortages How many planes land at LGA in the middle the night? One controller overnight is completely reasonable.

Approximately one per minute in the 15 minute span proceeding this crash, including one that had an emergency takeoff rejection and was being maneuvered along with the emergency support vehicles that were being sent to attend to it

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

#87

Post by 0xffff2 » Tue, Mar 24, 2026, 4:52 PM UTC

adolph wrote: post #62

It is surprising to me that airports do not use an interlock system for deconflicting the various paths segments that may be occupied by a vehicle. Trains have used mechanical ones since the 1800s [0]. The story and comments seem to indicate the only thing preventing collisions is the mind of one person--that sounds insane. 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlocking

While it's not as sophisticated, there is a technology called Runway Entrance Lights [0] that does somewhat the same thing in the specific context of this incident. LGA is one of 20 airports around the country where this system is installed, and you can clearly see that the system was functioning if you know where to look in the surveillance video that is circulating online. For whatever reason, the truck did not respect the indicator that they should not enter the runway. So in this specific incident, short of rail-like physical limitations on movement, I think it's unlikely that any amount of additional technology would have helped.

0: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/rwsl

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

#88

Post by krisoft » Tue, Mar 24, 2026, 4:53 PM UTC

eviks wrote: post #69

With all the advances in technology, can there be no navigation app that can just tell you you're on a collision course instead of relying exclusivly on playing broken phone between flying and driving meatbags via a sitting one?

There is actually a set of lights which should have displayed red towards the trucks.

Were they not operating correctly, or did the driver ignore them is one of the questions the investigation will answer.

The system is called Runway Status Lights. And in case there is a disagreement between the ATC clearance and the lights the drivers are supposed to not enter the runway.

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/rwsl

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

#89

Post by rekrsiv » Tue, Mar 24, 2026, 4:53 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #56

ndiddy wrote: post #5

I just hope they don't try to pin this on the controller who was on duty and move on without putting plans in place for some sort of structural change. Controllers are forced to work 60+ hour weeks and overnight shifts, and the controller in question was working both ground and air control simultaneously due to staffing shortages. If you listen to the ATC audio, he was handling finding a spot for a plane that aborted…

> the controller in question was working both ground and air control simultaneously due to staffing shortages How many planes land at LGA in the middle the night? One controller overnight is completely reasonable.

Can a single human being reliably and robustly maintain a safety-critical system alone under any circumstances, ever?

Ever?

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

#90

Post by MeetingsBrowser » Tue, Mar 24, 2026, 4:53 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #56

ndiddy wrote: post #5

I just hope they don't try to pin this on the controller who was on duty and move on without putting plans in place for some sort of structural change. Controllers are forced to work 60+ hour weeks and overnight shifts, and the controller in question was working both ground and air control simultaneously due to staffing shortages. If you listen to the ATC audio, he was handling finding a spot for a plane that aborted…

> the controller in question was working both ground and air control simultaneously due to staffing shortages How many planes land at LGA in the middle the night? One controller overnight is completely reasonable.

> One controller overnight is completely reasonable.

How many fatal accidents are reasonable in your opinion?