Former LEX 'Controller' View

[twepilot]

I agree that this accident was not the fault of the ATCS. However, in the above post, the "not my job" part doesn't pass the smell test.

RV

 

[Paris]

Correct me if I am wrong, but my flight instructor told me that it is an FAA requirement that you have an airport diagram of the airport you are flying into, and out of.


Your instructor is wrong. It might be nice to have, but it is not an FAA requirement.

 

[Lars!]

Correct me if I am wrong, but my flight instructor told me that it is an FAA requirement that you have an airport diagram of the airport you are flying into, and out of.


Your instructor is wrong. It might be nice to have, but it is not an FAA requirement.

Well, it depends. If you are flying 121 or 135 an your Ops Manual says you must have it out, then it's required by the FAA.

Also, if you have an incident at a complex airport and don't have a taxiway diagram out that could be "Careless and Reckless" with is illegal per the FARs.

 

[EdAtTheAirport]

TWE:

(With all due respect.)

It is a pitiful day when it is written in an ATC handbook that the Tower is required to watch to make sure the pilots taxi to the right runway! Your use of catch phrases might work in political campaigns, but the truth of this matter is that it indeed was not the Controller's job to "see" them to the runway.

 

[twepilot]

Ed,

Agreed. A pitiful day indeed. But, as with all jobs there is simply more that a person is responsible for than just the stated job description. The person on position (including local, gnd, cd if combined) takes on those responsibilties when he plugs in. I think we are both in agreement that a controller should not nor is he required to babysit a pilot. But, he still has a responsibilty to monitor his traffic. And it was locals/gnd responsibility to monitor the airport surface.

RV

 

[wmuflyguy]

Well if runway 26 was closed, I guess they didn't deam it necessary to pull out the big yellow X's to put on it.

I however noticed after the accident these Yellow X's(with bright lights on them) were brought out to show that the runway was closed.

I am sure a lawyer could prove some sort of carelessness ont he airport management. I mean if they have these X's why aren't they brought out when a runway is closed(especially when heavy construction is being done, not just when they feel like it.

 

[saabdude]

Why do controllers even have windows on the tower. If they aren't going to use them, I'm sure the air wisconsin guys in DCA would swap their crew room 10 X 12 room with a poo-pipe running down the middle of it for their control tower room.

 

[belchfire]

It's NOT the controller's fault:

1) Runway 26 was closed.
2) Runway 26 was so closed that the lights were even off.
3) The pilot was (assumably) issued a "taxi to" and "cleared for takeoff" from Runway 22.
4) Instead of following the clearance he was issued, the pilot departed on a closed, unlit, runway with a rough surface, 40 degrees off of the RH he was supposed to be on.
5) And you guys want to blame the controller???

6) Additionally, the second controller that was supposed to be on duty was for RADAR services, i.e. approach control, not for the "Tower" functions.

It is completely unfair for us to blame the controllers for this one.

How light (ie civil daylight) was it at the departure time? If the lights weren't on it may not have been legal to use that runway regardless of being closed...Also, what was the condition of the signage along the route of taxi? Did someone put the wrong sign in place somewhere? Even if off the taxi lights would have illuminated one of the signs.

 

[EdAtTheAirport]

RV,

The controller is responsible to monitor his/her traffic for separation purposes. You are talking about navigation.

If a pilot blows across a hold line and a landing airplane collides with him, there would be an argument that the controller should have been watching. (Didn't keep airplanes separated.) Same thing for a hypothetical midair resulting from an altitude bust.

Separation was not an issue here. There was one airplane on the field. There was only one runway open. To say that the controller needed to watch that situation to ensure that two professional pilots navigated to the correct runway is outrageous.

 

[ATR-DRIVR]

RV,

The controller is responsible to monitor his/her traffic for separation purposes. You are talking about navigation.

If a pilot blows across a hold line and a landing airplane collides with him, there would be an argument that the controller should have been watching. (Didn't keep airplanes separated.) Same thing for a hypothetical midair resulting from an altitude bust.

Separation was not an issue here. There was one airplane on the field. There was only one runway open. To say that the controller needed to watch that situation to ensure that two professional pilots navigated to the correct runway is outrageous.

You just don't have any concept of ATC.

 

[Midnight Flyer]

RV,

The controller is responsible to monitor his/her traffic for separation purposes. You are talking about navigation.

If a pilot blows across a hold line and a landing airplane collides with him, there would be an argument that the controller should have been watching. (Didn't keep airplanes separated.) Same thing for a hypothetical midair resulting from an altitude bust.

Separation was not an issue here. There was one airplane on the field. There was only one runway open. To say that the controller needed to watch that situation to ensure that two professional pilots navigated to the correct runway is outrageous.

Here's my opinion:
If people are looking for somebody to blame, I say the responsibility lies with the crew on this one. Just my opinion based on the information that is out. I mean, come on; since when do tower controllers have to babysit & hold the crews hand all the way to liftoff. From what I understand, there was only one controller in the tower at the time, and I'm sure they had numerous duties to accomplish to prepare for the day. There were 2 pilots monitoring the taxi...no disrespect, but come-on!
I wasn't there, I don't know what happened 100% but I'm sure the ATIS said 26 was closed, and like you said, the rwy lights were off, surface was rough and heading bug would be wayyy off. Geeze, how many clues did they need?
I know there are windows in airport towers for a reason and the controllers share responsibility in monitoring seperation, etc... but how much spoonfeeding should ATC be required to give?
I think the tower controller is not responsible for the accident, but is guilty of not visually monitoring the traffic. I feel the crew is responsible because they physically steered the aircraft onto the wrong runway, overlooking numerous clues. Simple as that.

 

[twepilot]

with the limited facts that we have currently I too agree that the crew effed up.. no question. Why did they make such a mistake? Who knows? One day the facts will all be in. But the controller, for whatever reason, was not paying attention and could have made a difference in the overall situation.

end of report...

RV