http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/03/c...k_n_483559.htmlApparently a ATC controler allowed his kid to direct Air Traffic at JFK International. Now the FAA is investigating because it was a hazard to Air Safety. The audio is supplied on the page too.

I really don't understand it. Someone spends years and possibly thousands of dollars to become an air traffic controller then risks throwing it all away by doing something stupid like that.From my stand-point, saving up for a long time just to have a hope of getting a PPL, it is madness. If I ever managed to get to be a cargo/airline pilot I'd be far more careful than that.I'll listen to the audio when I get home.

Knowing now nothing wrong happened I can think of it as an amusing incident.The pilots apparently did have some fun.But how could it really happen at one of the world's busiest airports is beyond belief.

I personally thought it wasn't a big deal, it's not like a kid was alone directing traffic, the controller/father was with him all the time. I do understand the nature of the safety concern though. The controller and the supervisor were both fired, the media said this morning. I wouldn't go as far as that but I'd sure suspend both of them without pay for a month.

While I can't argue with the safety concern of the people, come on, it's funny! The kid did an awesome job indeed, very fluent if you ask me! :( It's something to laugh about on what would be just an average day.Obviously not everybody feels the same way...

I heard this audio a day or so after the actual event last month - most, if not all, reacted as I did - "Good for that kid!" With adult supervision right there, and a 2-way means of communication, the chances for problems are slim to none. The only drawback is that the FAA *AND* the American newsmedia have a penchant for making serious mountains over what may be at the time a molehill.It was a brilliant way to have some father/son time, and a great way to add a little flavor to the radio waves at JFK... but the one fatal flaw in this event? It was recorded. (Both with the FAA, and on the Internet via LiveATC.net)Too bad, too... I'd have loved to have been that kid, but I'd HATE to be that kid if his father gets squashed for it. -Greg

I heard this audio a day or so after the actual event last month - most, if not all, reacted as I did - "Good for that kid!" With adult supervision right there, and a 2-way means of communication, the chances for problems are slim to none. The only drawback is that the FAA *AND* the American newsmedia have a penchant for making serious mountains over what may be at the time a molehill.It was a brilliant way to have some father/son time, and a great way to add a little flavor to the radio waves at JFK... but the one fatal flaw in this event? It was recorded. (Both with the FAA, and on the Internet via LiveATC.net)Too bad, too... I'd have loved to have been that kid, but I'd HATE to be that kid if his father gets squashed for it. -Greg

I agree in this case, the perception of safety was compromised, but I don't think actual safety was! Safety could have been compromised if the kids instructions, (which I am sure was fed to him by his father) wasn't understood by the pilots. Since though the controller hears the pilots readback of the instructions and can tell if there was a mistake, it would have been corrected immediately. Of course it was wrong, and both the controller and supervisor should be sanctioned for it, but I think dismissal is too harsh. (Unless they have other blemishes on their records) A long suspension would have been more appropriate.

I can sort of understand a parent letting their kid 'have a go' at doing their job in a lot of circumstances, but in the case of ATC, the controller really should have known better than to let that happen with his job.Even though the kid actually seemed to do okay (judging by the audio), and the pilots seemed to be aware of what was occurring and taking it in good humour, the thing is, you just don't do that sort of thing in any professional job where there is the potential for it to compromise the safety of people who are your responsibility. And if you do, it should come as no surprise when it raises serious questions about the ability to recognise how doing so could compromise safety and the image ATC has: Since the kid in question did okay, probably because he is too young to have a proper conception of the responsibility a controller carries, would you want people to have the perception that ATC is so simple a child could do it?If salutary lessons are anything to go by, one would like to think the controller who allowed it to happen, would have been aware of the tragic consequences for the passengers and crew of an Aeroflot Airbus A310, in 1994, when the crew allowed the Captain's 15 year old son to 'have a quick go at the controls' of the Airbus during a flight. What seemed like a harmless thing to do eventually led to the aircraft stalling, then spinning all the way down from cruise altitude to impact with the ground, killing everyone on board. If you listen to the CVR for that flight, that too sounds similarly good-natured and harmless before things go awry, thus it is an example of how an unguarded drop in discipline can lead to disaster.With regard to ATC skipping any sort of procedure and courting disaster because of it. If we consider the case of a Bashkirian Airlines Tupolev Tu-154 which collided with the DHL Boeing 757 Boeing near Lake Constance in 2002. We find that a controller taking an unauthorised break, leaving a colleague with more work to do than he would otherwise have had for a minute or two, was the catalyst for an accident. As a result, over 70 people were killed, and the media had a field day because of it. This actually led to further tragedy, when the controller at the scopes when the accident occurred, was also killed two years later, as a distraught man who lost his wife and two children in the mid-air collision stabbed him to death; this knowledge would make me think twice about compromising an ATC chair if it was my job, let alone the responsibility for the lives of others. You can be sure that the bosses who make the decisions at JFK will be fully aware of what the media could do with such a potentially negative story, as evidenced by the fact that even the happy tale of Sullenberger belly landing his Airbus in the Hudson attracted a media frenzy, and it was difficult for those concerned to project a positive spin on aviation for even that tale.It is easy to brush off the incident with the child having a go at ATC and seem too serious, but anyone who knows flying will be aware, or at least should be aware, that getting sloppy and compromising safety, even for a second or so, is often all it takes to cause a calamity. Since we are talking about the reputation of a major world airport, I would not be at all surprised to find that the controllers in question become sacrificial lambs to assuage the media potential for bad PR. And the truth is, if that happens, they'll only have themselves to blame; they won't find much sympathy for their plight, from any quarter. We all know how difficult it is already to promote a positive image for aviation with a media which delights in inaccurate over-dramatic journalese, never more concisely summed up than when referring to a flight data recorder as 'black box crash recorder', and this tale, with its potential for bad PR, is ammunition an ambitious journo will find certainly hard to resist. Al

Not the smartest thing for the controller to have done.On the other hand where I fly is a training area for controllers. The number of mistakes they make are staggering, and there is a supervisor standing right by who quickly takes control if a mistake is made, which is quite often.I don't see that it was any less safe here, was probably a major event in the kid's life ( though it will likely go the other way for the kid and his Dad when the media gets done), and the pilot's got a kick out of it.Too bad-the kid did a great job-a lot better than some of the trainees I've had. :( I say officially reprimand the controller so everyone can feel good and then let it go.I also wonder if the pilot's had a heads up on the event-as I know if I heard a kid giving commands on the band I would question what was going on first before blindly following the instruction.

That thought occurred to me too, about the pilots knowing what was going on, since none of them appear to question the occurrence. What also occurred to me because of that though, is that anyone coming on frequency who was not aware of what was happening, would then have needlessly jammed up ATC by quite rightly querying what was going on, and as we know, with ATC, brevity and clarity are the kings.Al

I say right on. I work in an electrical control center. We control power through the province an have access to breakers to disrupt power. Security is tighter then a bull's arse. We used to allow Cubs and Scouts in for tours to see what life in the working world is about. That is a no no now except for the Take your Kid to Work day. Very sad how 911 has affected the world.JimCYWG

Like the rest of you I have very mixed feelings about the incident. My first reaction was that I was not at all amused, more like astounded that it took place at all! Bad idea! BAD! BAD! Can the lot of them! But you know, . . . . after a little thought, other aspects of this come to mind. Just for a minute imagine being in that kids shoes at that time, with a father who cares enough to do that. I would have been smiling so much my face would hurt for a month! As has been pointed out, he did ( the child ) do a nice job of it, and it isn't like the adults went 'out' on break. The repercussions will most likely ruin the experience for the father and the child, which is regrettable, but should have been foreseen. In the end it was a great thing to do for the kid but it was a reeeaaaaallly bad idea. BTW I liked one of the pilot's remarks that was to the effect," See what happens when the kids are out of school." ( not quoted word for word )I hear there is a doctor taking his kid to work. Anyone scheduled for surgery? :( Regards,Mel

At least he/she didn't require a telepromtor to get it right................. :( good job kid :(

But you know, . . . . after a little thought, other aspects of this come to mind. Just for a minute imagine being in that kids shoes at that time, with a father who cares enough to do that.

I actually thought about that too, and here's my conclusion: It's all very well caring for your kid, but the controller in question is going to have a hard time caring for him if he loses his job over it and then can't pay for an education of a standard for the kid to become a controller if that should be his wish. How caring would his kid think he was then?As heartwarming as caring about your kid is, the controllers were in fact being paid to care about the hundreds of air passengers who'd placed their lives in their care, and not to be awarded 'dad of the year'. The cold reality is, if I'm either a passenger or a pilot being directed by a controller, I want to know he cares about me and my aircraft's safety, and not that he's a great dad, which is going to be no consolation to me at all as I plummet to the ground following a mid air collision. And at the end of the day, that is what the controllers in question took a chance on.I remember getting a tour around the Fairey works when I was a kid and my dad worked there on the aircraft they made, but I think if they'd have let me have a crack at machining a few critical parts for an aeroplane, it might not have been the smartest thing they could have done. It's great that they involve kids, but there are plenty of ways they could do it that don't compromise safety, for example, the kid could have perhaps radioed an aircraft that was not taxying and approved an engine start on a frequency where safety was not a critical concern, or something of that nature. But how likely is it that this will happen now the controllers have indulged in what they did?Al

As amusing as this incident is, it is a weird thing for an ATC controller to do. Not the smartest of moves.

I actually thought about that too, and here's my conclusion: It's all very well caring for your kid, but the controller in question is going to have a hard time caring for him if he loses his job over it and then can't pay for an education of a standard for the kid to become a controller if that should be his wish. How caring would his kid think he was then?As heartwarming as caring about your kid is, the controllers were in fact being paid to care about the hundreds of air passengers who'd placed their lives in their care, and not to be awarded 'dad of the year'. The cold reality is, if I'm either a passenger or a pilot being directed by a controller, I want to know he cares about me and my aircraft's safety, and not that he's a great dad, which is going to be no consolation to me at all as I plummet to the ground following a mid air collision. And at the end of the day, that is what the controllers in question took a chance on.I remember getting a tour around the Fairey works when I was a kid and my dad worked there on the aircraft they made, but I think if they'd have let me have a crack at machining a few critical parts for an aeroplane, it might not have been the smartest thing they could have done. It's great that they involve kids, but there are plenty of ways they could do it that don't compromise safety, for example, the kid could have perhaps radioed an aircraft that was not taxying and approved an engine start on a frequency where safety was not a critical concern, or something of that nature. But how likely is it that this will happen now the controllers have indulged in what they did?Al

Good points.