Problems In Air Traffic Control And Proposed Solut Essay Example For Students

Problems In Air Traffic Control And Proposed Solut Essay ionsProblems in Air Traffic Control and Proposed SolutionsIn northern California this summer, the Federal Aviation Administration(FAA) unintentionally performed its first operational test of free flight;aviation without direct air traffic control. This was an unintentionalexperiment because it was a result of a total shut-down of the Oakland Air RouteTraffic Control Center (ARTCC). Although Oakland is only the 16th busiest ARTCC, its responsible forthe largest block of airspace of any ATC facility; 18 million square miles. Oakland directs all upper-level flight from San Luis Obispo, California to theCalifornia/Oregon boarder, including most Pacific oceanic routes. The failurehappened at 7:13 a.m. local time during the morning departure push. Controllers estimated there were 60-80 aircraft under their control when thepower died. All radar screens went dark and all radios went silent. It took 45minutes to restore radios and bring up a backup radar system. It was more thanan hour before the main radar presentations came on line. One controller described the sudden quiet in the control suite as theloudest silence Ive ever heard (UPI , 1995). He went on to say there waspanic on everybodys face as they realized they had been rendered deaf, dumb,and blind by this catastrophic equipment failure. It took a few minutes forcontrollers to realize the shut-down had affected the entire facility. There wasno book procedure to cover this emergency scenario, so most controllersimprovised. Controllers in adjourning Los Angeles, Salt Lake, and Seattle ARTCCs andvarious Terminal Radar Approach Controls (TRACON; the level of radar coveragebelow upper-level ARTCC radar) were asked to take control over all airspacewithin their radar coverage, and divert aircraft under their control inbound toNorthern California. Control towers in San Francisco, Oakland, San Jose,Sacramento, and other airports in the area were instructed to hold all IFRdepartures on the ground. The most difficult problem was getting notification tothe airborne flight crews. In one case, controller Mike Seko said, We had Napatower telling high altitude aircraft Oakland Center had lost everything, and toswitch to emergency frequencies (Seko, UPI, 1995). But most airborne aircrafton Oakland Center frequencies were in a state of lost-comm unless they figuredout what happened on the ground and switched to another ARTCC or TRACON. Flight crews did their own improvising. Some pilots squawked VFR andcontinued the flight on their own. Others continued on their previously issuedclearance, while others climbed into or descended out of Class A airspacewithout a clearance. Later analysis tells us one of the biggest problems was nobody believeda prolonged outage like this could occur. Both controllers and supervisorsworked on the assumption their radar and radios would come back any moment now. The same thought process prevailed at Bay (Oakland) TRACON where operations wereparalyzed by the Centers blackout. Its impossible to say how many separation losses occurred during thehour-long episode. Some near mid-air reports were filed, but the vast majorityof separation-loss situations will probably go unreported. After power wasrestored, and the primary radar system was returned to operation, extensive airtraffic delays, diversions, and flight cancellations persisted for many hours atBay area airports, especially departures from San Francisco International. We may never know the full aftermath of this incident. Changes will bemade as to how power is fed to ATC facilities, and how maintenance is performed. Contingency plans will be rewritten and controllers will be trained how toimplement them. Meanwhile, controllers nation wide are brushing up on their non-radar and lost-comm procedures. After an extensive investigation, its now clear why the failureoccurred. One of three power sources was down for maintenance testing. Thesecond power source failed unexpectedly. When technicians tried to bring thethird power source on-line, a faulty circuit board failed in a critical powerpanel, preventing power from being restored. Oakland Center was completely dead. This was the story of one air traffic control facilitys system failure. Dont think this was an isolated incident though. A partial list of this yearsATC radar failures:Chicago Center lost their primary radar system when the 1970s technology IBM9020E host computer went down for 29 hours. ASR-9 radar failure at Miami TRACON possibly due to a lighting strike. Miamiswitched to a back-up ASR-9 system at Fort Lauderdale. The Fort Lauderdalesystem then failed just as technicians at Miami brought their radar on-line. Miami failed again forcing controllers to revert to non-radar procedures. Fort Worth Centers host computer lost power while technicians were replacingsome related processing equipment. Back-up radar was on-line for almost threehours. All departures experienced a 60-90 minute delays. Pittsburgh TRACON briefly lost communication and radar with 38 flights in theair. Radar contact was lost for 5-8 minutes. Everyone from vacationing families to the director of the FederalAviation Administration recognizes the national air traffic control system is indesperate need of reform. Host computer systems are 20 years old, power suppliesare at times unreliable, and facilities are under-manned with over-workedcontrollers. Moral is low at facilities because of these problems. The mainproblem that currently plagues the system though is whos going to take chargeof the situation and with what reform plan. The controllers union has theirreform plan as does the FAA and the law makers in Washington. These groups fightamongst themselves to promote their reconstruction plan, but meanwhile nothingsaccomplished and the skies stay unsafe. The National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) is the unionthat replaced the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO). NATCA, representingthe controller work force, supports a plan to structure theair traffic control branch of the FAA. NATCA endorses the government corporationconcept for air traffic control because, it goes furthest towards correctingthe FAAs personnel, procurement, and budgetary problems (NATCA policystatement, 1995). The union goes on to say theyll back any legislative measurethat addresses at a minimum, the following personnel, procurement, and budgetaryconcerns:Provides for protection of retirement, benefits, and job security consistentwith applicable laws, rules, and regulations. Need for long-term leadership at the FAA. Provide the FAA with the ability to hire personnel when needed and allowindividuals to transfer to where theyre needed most, regardless of artificialhiring/managing caps. Provide the FAA with the ability to attract and retain high caliberindividuals. Allow the FAA and its recognized unions, the ability to seek a morestreamlined and factual classification system. Provides a flexible procurement system that mitigates the effects theappropriations process has on large contracts, allows for more off-the-shelfpurchasing, and reforms the contracting appeals process. Provides some relief from the Budget Enforcement Act. Allows for increased (but reasonable) user and internal union input. NATCA actively lobbies their concerns how ATC reform should occur. JamesPoole is the Vice President of NATCAs Great Lakes Region. In September of thisyear, he testified before the House Committee on Transportation andInfrastructures Aviation Subcommittee. He presented an air traffic controlsystem that was in a state of distress . He went on to say the numerousequipment outages nationwide is an indicator the system is moving towardsfailure. Although he gave credit to FAA Administrator David Hinson for somereform actions (such as canceling the failed Advanced Automation System), hedebated the administrators claim the ATC system was 99.4% reliable. Poole said,they (the FAA) are striving to maintain user confidence in the system but theirstrategy tends to trivialize very serious system deficiencies. (UPI, 1995)Again, Poole offered NATCAs recommendation to Congress and the FAA on how toassist the crumbling air traffic control system:Reform the procurement policies so new technology enters the system while itsnew technology. Provide better funding mechanisms for the FAAAuthorize and fund hiring an additional 1,500 controllers. Implement a vehicle to attract high caliber controllers at the busiestfacilities. Many NATCA controllers believe they are able to survive each days shiftin spite of their equipment, not because of it. Its a known fact the technologycontained in a laptop computer outperforms the capacity of the IBM 9020E thatsupports all FAA radar facilities. NATCA goes on to the claim the digitalclarity of a cellular phone is light-years ahead of the antiquated radios nowusedto communicate. John Carr is an air traffic controller at Chicago OHareTRACON and is that facilitys representative for NATCA. His analogy follows;Our nation has entered the on-ramp of the information superhighway. The FAAcant even get their Pinto out of the driveway. (AP, 1995)In 1989, the Chicago System Safety and Efficiency Review recommendedthat a new TRACON be built. A new TRACON and tower at OHare were built and areset for commissioning in late 1996. The price for the TRACON building alone was$100 million dollars. The equipment will cost $200 million dollars. NATCAproposes though, its just radios and rada r. The union reiterates the FAA hasonce again chosen to ignore their most valuable resource; the working airtraffic controller. Carr said the transition plan to the new TRACON calls for 77controllers working six-day workweeks in order to man both facilities. This isrequired so theres orderly training, testing, and transition. According to Carr,there are only 67 controllers, and seven of those are leaving. The staffing forthe new TRACON will be 21 controllers per shift. Using the FAAs own StaffingStandard Plan, OHare TRACON should have 30 controllers per shift. Carr says,this is woefully inadequate and we believe it does a disservice to the user. Basics On Keats EssayA loss of timely and accurate weather reporting would be devastating tothe aviation industry. There have been too numerous aviation accidents caused byunreported or undetected weather conditions. Controllers and pilots alike agreethat SOS represents a serious degradation of service to the aviation community. They call for an immediate return to manned observation stations untilimprovements are made to the automated style of weather reporting. How could the FAA and other national agencies miss these systemdeficiencies? Even with all the criticism coming from every corners of theaviation environment, contractors continue to install and commission SOS. Unbelievable. The reform of the nations air traffic control system is not just oneplan laid out by one person or group. On Capitol Hill,where the final formulawill be decided on, there are several bills before various House and Senatecommittees. Some call for an air traffic control structure thats totallyseparate from the federal government, another calls for the government to run aquasi-independent ATC system, plan. Whatever the outcome is, the desire isbasically the same; eliminate the government procurement nightmare and allowmoney to flow into the equipment buyers hands. A bill to separate the Federal Aviation Administration from theDepartment of Transportationhas already won support from the HouseTransportation subcommittee. In a rare showing of bipartisan politics, thesubcommittee unanimously passed the measure and sent it up to the full committee. The legislation would make the FAA an independent agency, free to set up itsown rules for personnel moves and procurement. The organization would be exemptfrom federal budget restraints, and have total authority to spend its portionof the Aviation Trust Fund as it saw fit. Representative James Oberstar, authorof the bill said, Today is the day when we begin to unscramble the egg that wasscrambled in 1966 when nearly a dozen federal agencies were combined into theDOT. It worked for some agencies, but not for the FAA. (AP, 1995) The bill hasalmost total backing from the aviation community, but is opposed by the Clintonadministration. As discussed earlier, the Clinton Administration is fully behindthe formation of the United States Air Traffic Service corporation which wouldtotal privatize ATC services. . Another bill circulating is sponsored by Senator John McCain. His billwould make the FAA a quasi-independent agency financed largely through user fees. Obviously, this legislation has almost no support from those who would be forcedto finance the majority of the system; aircraft owners, pilots and the generalaviation community. They are afraid they would be obliged to provide the revenueto fund the reformed FAA. Fee structure would be based on aircraft performance. Commercial and business jets would be charged for ATC services based on theabove. Opponents to this measure ask, If we want a higher altitude, will thecontroller ask for a major credit card? (AP, 1995)FAA Administrator David Hinson has praised this bill saying it wouldgive the FAA greater flexibility in purchasing and managing personnel. TheMcCain bill is seen as a compromise to the administrations efforts, but stillrelies heavily on user fees. Representative Jim Lightfoot has proposed to reform the FAA from within. Along with Representative John Duncan (head of the House Aviation Subcommittee),their bill would give the FAA independent-agency status, removing it from theDepartment of Transportation. Lightfoot said, our legislation will streamlinethe FAA, reform the costly and often delayed rule-making process, and increaseaviation safety. The legislation is seen by some as an attempt to counter theUSATS proposal by President Clinton. It also appears many aircraft owners andpilots support this reform action. There is quite an array of legislation proposed to reform our nationsaging, outdated air traffic control system. One has to suppose each effort hasthe good of the consumer in mind as time ticks by without any changes. The following is an editorial that appeared in the September 4, 1995edition of the Federal Times. It was written by a controller at Denver Center:Last year, air travelers flew 520 billion miles within the U.S. airtraffic control system. This year that system seems to be falling apart. Eachtime an air traffic control centers radar shuts down, every traveler blinks andgulps. When air traffic controllers hand out scary literature in airports andair traffic control outages are separated by days instead of years, its timefor some serious attention to the system. That being the case, youd think wedhave invested time, talent cash in the best darn air traffic control system theworld had ever seen. Instead were limping along with computers whose vacuumtubes are the butt of jokes on late-night television shows. Too often, ourcontrollers are silenced and blinded by technical failures 11 since lastSeptember. Glitches force controllers to pass planes between centers viatelephone. Now even backup systems have started to fail. As it has tried toupdate its now 30-year-old machinery, the Federal Aviation Administration hasbecome a budget ary black hole. A May General Accounting Office review foundmodernization contract completion dates slipping and sliding as costs mount. Congress has wrung a pledge from FAA for an interim fix in 1997 at five of 20big centers, with the other 15 to be upgraded by 1998. Thats a small start, butlittle solace to fliers. Its time for legislators and aviation administratorsto call a halt to this Russian roulette in the skies. Quit waiting for accidentsand outcry to prod action. Get the equipment tested, functioning and in place. Staff towers and centers to match the growing number of planes. Breathe harddown the necks of the officials responsible until it gets done and done right. Get us the system we deserve and have paid for. Do it now.(World Wide Web, FAA Homepage, 1995)The Oakland Center nightmare could have caused the largest loss of lifefrom an aviation-related accident. There literally could have been bodies andairplane wreckage falling from the skies throughout Northern California. Butthankfully, it didnt happen. The day was saved by every controller workingwestern Americas airspace that day. The day was saved by pilots that followedpreviously assigned clearances, and those that were worthy enough aviators toweave their way through uncontrolled, but not uncrowded airspace. Everyones got an opinion. In this case, everyone knows the best way tofix the crumbling airways. NATCA wants the FAA structures as a corporation wouldbe. But the union goes on to say theyll support any legislation that meetstheir laundry list of concerns. The FAA wants to restructure the system fromwithin. The also support the notion of freeing their agency from the procurement,budgeting, and hiring stranglehold theyre under from the federal government. And then our nations lawmakers got involved. There are approximately fivevariations the basic reform bill making their way around Capitol Hill. Theres aplan to totally privatize the FAA, another to partly privatize it, another torework it from within, and a few other variations of those. Legislators havetheir own reasons to support certain bills; is our safety one of them?The Federal Times editorial sums up an everyday controllers concern. Hes the one working with that aged computer equipment, hes the one working theunnecessarily long shifts, hes the one scared every day his screen will go darkduring the morning rush hour. I would be inclined to listen very closely to hisconcerns and follow his recommendations towards a solution. The FAAs Quality statement declares the agency as an organization dedicated to eliminating barriers, improving communication, providingadditional opportunities for training, and constantly encouraging all personnelto seek ways to improve. The FAA is proud of its Quality activities becausethey foster such initiatives as continuous improvement of work processes,empowerment of employees, partnering of labor and management, and re-engineering. (World Wide Web FAA Home-page, 1995) These are very lofty goalsthat always require improvement. But will disaster strike before their processesgets us a new ATC system?