Cargo-aircraft holds for 30 mins as ATC fell asleep

Post by **luchtzak** » 09 Mar 2005, 15:35

Strange story, a cargo-aircraft flew a holding-pattern above Nice airport for 30 minutes as the pilots tried to contact Nice ATC but didn't get any response, apparently the ATC-controller fell asleep. Security-staff woke the ATC-controller so the aircraft could safely land.

http://www.hln.be/hln/cch/det/art_42703.html

waldova · Post by **waldova** » 09 Mar 2005, 16:12

:wow: I hope this person will not be working anymore for ATC. He should get fired right away. I can't believe that a person with such high responsability does something like this.

Mighty · Post by **Mighty** » 09 Mar 2005, 16:26

I can't believe it... but should they not be in a shift with 2 persons?? where was the other person??

Post by **luchtzak** » 09 Mar 2005, 16:29

Mighty wrote:I can't believe it... but should they not be in a shift with 2 persons?? where was the other person??

Good questions but I can't find another article with extra information...

SicilianFalcon · Post by **SicilianFalcon** » 09 Mar 2005, 17:11

I dont think they should be sacked. Some people cant help but fall asleep through Boredom or sleep deprivation etc

The real point to be made is why was there only 1 controller, He could have had a breakdown or a heart attack and would you have blamed him then? Need more then 1 guy there.

Knight255 · Post by **Knight255** » 09 Mar 2005, 17:44

I disagree!!! They shold be fired immediately!!! On a IFR flight plan, they are the eye's and ears for the pilot (assuming no TCAS and in IMC). There is absolutely no excuse for this!!!

Post by **speedbird1** » 09 Mar 2005, 18:09

Where was the controller? Was he in the tower or in a "centre" or "approach" ATC centre?

Emirates

Mighty · Post by **Mighty** » 09 Mar 2005, 21:25

Thinking of the mid air collision above Germany (with the Boeing 757 and Tupolev 154) I thought one of the recommendations was not to have 1 controller during the night!

Could someone confirm this??

waldova · Post by **waldova** » 09 Mar 2005, 21:54

There the it was the fault of the Russian pilot who didn't listen to its own TCAS wich has higher priority then what the controller says.

bits44 · Post by **bits44** » 09 Mar 2005, 22:40

It sounds like the pilot did not follow lost contact procedures as well, flying around for half an hour blind is not too smart, he should have a least contacted his last known atc controller for direction.

waldova · Post by **waldova** » 09 Mar 2005, 23:01

Yes, that would be the obvious choice a normal pilot would do. Something is not right in this story.

Mighty · Post by **Mighty** » 10 Mar 2005, 08:59

There the it was the fault of the Russian pilot who didn't listen to its own TCAS wich has higher priority then what the controller says.

I think this is not totally true. It started with the late actions of the controller. And another issue is that the Russian pilot learned that the controller had priority over the TCAS. The last issue does not excised anymore.

But now the subject is slowly changing....

I think bits44 made a good point..... Why did the pilot not try to contact his last know contact. That last know controller could have woken up the controller by giving him a call....

It remains a strange incident....

waldova · Post by **waldova** » 10 Mar 2005, 10:22

Mighty wrote:
There the it was the fault of the Russian pilot who didn't listen to its own TCAS wich has higher priority then what the controller says.

I think this is not totally true. It started with the late actions of the controller. And another issue is that the Russian pilot learned that the controller had priority over the TCAS. The last issue does not excised anymore.

Maybe I'm going of topic but I have to disagree with what you say here. A TCAS system will first give you a warning for collision. When giving the warning the TCAS systems of both airplanes are communicating with each other. If the neither pilot reacts on the first warning the TCAS will give a second warning and before the collision the TCAS will give an order to the pilot to change course as indicated by the TCAS. But the pilot, who learned how TCAS works and know that if both planes (what was the case here) are equipped with TCAS, the TCAS will give the avoidance course after communication with the TCAS of the other plane. So if you TCAS is telling you to descend, the TCAS of the other plane is giving that pilot an order to climb. Any pilot who knows how TCAS works will not follow an order of the controller if the controller says the opposite of his TCAS. This is why I say that TCAS has higher priority then what a controller says.
The crash of the Russion plane with the DHL plane was caused because the DHL was following his TCAS but the Russion was listening to the controller.

boeingnl · Post by **boeingnl** » 10 Mar 2005, 10:55

First things first... Sleeping is very important for a human being!!!

Mighty · Post by **Mighty** » 10 Mar 2005, 12:25

waldova you are totally right! 8)

But I can remember that there was something that made de TU154M crew not listen to their TCAS. I will try to find out in the BFU investigation report I have somewhere

.....

Avro · Post by **Avro** » 10 Mar 2005, 14:23

That guy should be fired in my opinion. Just think of the consequences an event like that one could have !!!
The controllers do a very hard, very important and stressful work. Normally they have to take some naps every hour or two if I remember well. But this is not a reason to fall asleep during work.

Now there is also another problem as well. Why wasn't there a second controller ? And why didn't the pilot react quicker than that ?

Chris

itsdoctorv · Post by **itsdoctorv** » 10 Mar 2005, 14:45

waldova wrote:There the it was the fault of the Russian pilot who didn't listen to its own TCAS wich has higher priority then what the controller says.

The Russians pilots just followed policy established in their country i.e. you may disregard TCAS if ATC gives you avoidance guidance. This is not what ICAO says on the matter (ALWAYS follow a Resolution Advisory), but countries are not forced to follow ICAO policies (as long as they notify ICAO and document the changes).

It might be that Russia has since changed its policy, but I'm not sure.

Mighty · Post by **Mighty** » 10 Mar 2005, 15:12

I think the Russians did change their policy....

SN30952 · Post by **SN30952** » 10 Mar 2005, 15:14

luchtzak wrote:
Mighty wrote:I can't believe it... but should they not be in a shift with 2 persons?? where was the other person??
Good questions but I can't find another article with extra information...

Pas de sanction contre un contrôleur aérien endormi à Nice

Knight255 · Post by **Knight255** » 10 Mar 2005, 18:36

I can't believe this!! Are you all neglecting the fact that the person fell asleep on the job?!?!?! In almost any job if you fall asleep while on the clock you will get fired, how can we start to question the pilots actions when it was the controller who fell asleep while on the clock?! And air-traffic controllers have MUCH more responsibility than most other jobs, so the consequences for those actions should be more severe.