• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

JFK tower allowed a kid to direct air traffic

Any risk was to your daughter. I don't see the correlation with the situation at hand.

I don't see how people think that children going to work with their parents is appropriate for every job. It depends on the specifics of the job. In this circumstance, the safety of planes and their passengers was at issue. Children have no business being there. I don't care how quiet they are. They are a distraction, whether a positive one or a negative one.

I do not believe that anyone was at risk in this situation and that the response to it is a complete overreaction.
 
How so????

I can read Deuce's words and think, "Yeah, safety wasn't compromised," but I cannot make that conclusion myself.

I don't see how a child directing air traffic poses no risk. But that's me. People can disagree with me and tell me how wrong I am, but I stand by my assesment. The suspension was proper--the employee was an idiot, IMHO.
 
I do not believe that anyone was at risk in this situation and that the response to it is a complete overreaction.

That's your opinion. That's fine.
 
But staying with THIS instance...the employee was there...the supervisor was there. its OBVIOUS the kid had been given lines to relay to the pilots and he did it VERY welll. The pilots obviously werent upset that they were given on-ground instructions by a minor, in fact they sounded enthusiastic and supportive.

I think sometimes people get a burr in their underwear and instead of changing drawers they get pissy about any and everything they read, hear, or come in contact with.

I see what you're saying. Someone is feeding the kid lines. I get it. But when the employee parent is feeding the kid lines, is the employee parent giving the situation his undivided attention? Nope. Hey, I can drive my car while talking on the phone (speaker or ear piece) or talking to someone else that is present in the car with me, is my concentration affected? ABSOLUTELY. So this business that the child repeating his father's words has no impact on his father's concentration is BS, IMO.
 
I can read Deuce's words and think, "Yeah, safety wasn't compromised," but I cannot make that conclusion myself.

I don't see how a child directing air traffic poses no risk. But that's me. People can disagree with me and tell me how wrong I am, but I stand by my assesment. The suspension was proper--the employee was an idiot, IMHO.

Did anyone crash? Did you hear any of the pilots screaming HOLY FU## but the real guy back on...oh my god we're all gonna die!!!!? :)
 
Last edited:
It's hard to explain in less than six pages about how the air traffic control system works, but the short of it is there are no circumstances in which this could have put anybody in danger.

The father issued the "position and hold" instructions, which direct the plane to taxi out onto the runway and get ready, but not take off just yet. The following instruction will be "clear for takeoff," which the kid issued. After takeoff, the plane's initial actions are pre-determined. There aren't any control instructions to issue because the departure is standard. The tower doesn't have anything to do but relay any changes the departure controller has issued or, lacking that, just hand off the departing aircraft to the departure controller.

I'm not saying this was a good idea, I agree a (short) suspension might be in order just to satisfy the public, and a stern warning issued department-wide saying "HEY DONT DO THAT," but that's it.

True - no one was at risk in *this* situation, thankfully.

But this poses several what-ifs that need to be considered - because obviously this isn't the only time this has happened.

What if, for example, the child threw a temper tantrum and Daddy couldn't hear an incoming distress signal or tend to other such important things? What if child got sick and had to be taken to the bathroom immediately? Everyone knows these things happen - and they happen often with children.

There is no child who is problem-free or any parent who has absolute 100% control over their child.

If that *did* happen and a child did throw a temper tantrum and distracted Dad from doing his job - then everyone would be screaming "why did he have a child in the control room with him!"

I think it's a bit hypocritical (not of everyone, but of some) -because if something bad did happen everyone would be crying for his head on a plate.
 
I see what you're saying. Someone is feeding the kid lines. I get it. But when the employee parent is feeding the kid lines, is the employee parent giving the situation his undivided attention? Nope. Hey, I can drive my car while talking on the phone (speaker or ear piece) or talking to someone else that is present in the car with me, is my concentration affected? ABSOLUTELY. So this business that the child repeating his father's words has no impact on his father's concentration is BS, IMO.

Actually Im guessing...just guessing mind you...that the father was at one shoulder and supervisor the other both with big ol smiles on their face giving the kid their undivided attention. Thats just my guess. either it went down that way, or this kid is the smartest kid ever and they should fire the dad and supervisor and put the kid on the payroll...:2razz:
 
Did anyone crash? Did you hear any of the pilots screaming HOLY FU## but the real guy back on...oh my god we're all gonna die!!!!?

Oh, so only if someone or a plane has a near death experience should this be deemed inappropriate? Yeah, okay.
 
Actually Im guessing...just guessing mind you...that the father was at one shoulder and supervisor the other both with big ol smiles on their face giving the kid their undivided attention. Thats just my guess. either it went down that way, or this kid is the smartest kid ever and they should fire the dad and supervisor and put the kid on the payroll...:2razz:

Feeding someone lines takes away your concentration. I know it does mine. See Aunt's post above yours. She lays out an excellent argument for why it was wrong.
 
aps said:
I don't see how a child directing air traffic poses no risk. But that's me. People can disagree with me and tell me how wrong I am, but I stand by my assesment. The suspension was proper--the employee was an idiot, IMHO.

I asked you to point out where you see a risk. You never answered that question.

I see what you're saying. Someone is feeding the kid lines. I get it. But when the employee parent is feeding the kid lines, is the employee parent giving the situation his undivided attention? Nope. Hey, I can drive my car while talking on the phone (speaker or ear piece) or talking to someone else that is present in the car with me, is my concentration affected? ABSOLUTELY. So this business that the child repeating his father's words has no impact on his father's concentration is BS, IMO.

Air traffic control doesn't require "undivided attention". Does a truck dispatcher require "undivided attention"? Your analogy sucks because directing air traffic is nothing like driving a car; sure, you can compare flying a plane to driving a car (although not completely, as flying a commercial airliner is much easier and much lower risk), but directing traffic is completely different.

As I said earlier, the hysteria surrounding this event is due to the two reasons I outlined above.

Aunt Spiker said:
What if, for example, the child threw a temper tantrum and Daddy couldn't hear an incoming distress signal or tend to other such important things?

Do you really think this is how air traffic control works? That there is only one set of headphones where pilots can be heard, and that if the child is wearing them then nobody else can hear? Seriously?

What if child got sick and had to be taken to the bathroom immediately?

What the hell does that have to do with anything???? :confused:

What do you think happens if an air traffic controller gets sick and has to go to the bathroom? Answer: He goes to the bathroom.

Like I said, air traffic control is not performed at an airport by one single individual who is the only person that knows what is going on and without him all of the planes would crash. There is a chain of command and a set of policies and redundancies in place that deal with these circumstances, which is what facilitates airports to function.

If that *did* happen and a child did throw a temper tantrum and distracted Dad from doing his job - then everyone would be screaming "why did he have a child in the control room with him!"

If that happened then someone else in tower would be listening in anyways and would be able to take care of anything that comes up. Saying that if an air traffic controller "gets distracted" all hell will break loose is downright silly and merely supports my assertion that most people don't understand how air traffic control works.

EDIT: Everyone that thinks there was a "risk" posed here should read this.
 
Last edited:
Oh, so only if someone or a plane has a near death experience should this be deemed inappropriate? Yeah, okay.

That was a joke...smiley inserted too late...

I think the point is there is absolutely nothing to indicate that at any time anyone was at risk or danger. bad decision? OK...I'll accept that. but worthy of all THIS???

I counseled some of our military ATCs...incredibly high stress and pressure...I dont have any recent experience but back a dozen years or so agao EVERYONE smoked and most of them drank. 'Healthy' amounts. this just really seems like a mountain/molehill situation...
 
I asked you to point out where you see a risk. You never answered that question.



Air traffic control doesn't require "undivided attention". Does a truck dispatcher require "undivided attention"? Your analogy sucks because directing air traffic is nothing like driving a car; sure, you can compare flying a plane to driving a car (although not completely, as flying a commercial airliner is much easier and much lower risk), but directing traffic is completely different.

As I said earlier, the hysteria surrounding this event is due to the two reasons I outlined above.



Do you really think this is how air traffic control works? That there is only one set of headphones where pilots can be heard, and that if the child is wearing them then nobody else can hear? Seriously?



What the hell does that have to do with anything???? :confused:

What do you think happens if an air traffic controller gets sick and has to go to the bathroom? Answer: He goes to the bathroom.

Like I said, air traffic control is not performed at an airport by one single individual who is the only person that knows what is going on and without him all of the planes would crash. There is a chain of command and a set of policies and redundancies in place that deal with these circumstances, which is what facilitates airports to function.



If that happened then someone else in tower would be listening in anyways and would be able to take care of anything that comes up. Saying that if an air traffic controller "gets distracted" all hell will break loose is downright silly and merely supports my assertion that most people don't understand how air traffic control works.

EDIT: Everyone that thinks there was a "risk" posed here should read this.

When you can address me in a respectful manner, then I will answer your question. Have a nice day.
 
Feeding someone lines takes away your concentration. I know it does mine. See Aunt's post above yours. She lays out an excellent argument for why it was wrong.

Im not even saying it wasnt a bad idea...just not that big of a deal.

And Ive already learned never to argue with Aunt...she has a *****! ;)
 
Feeding someone lines takes away your concentration. I know it does mine. See Aunt's post above yours. She lays out an excellent argument for why it was wrong.

I don't see anything wrong outside of giving the dispatcher a warning.

No one at any time was in any danger.

Typical overreaction.
 
I did address you in a respectful manner. Stop whining.

I asked you to point out where you see a risk. You never answered that question.



Air traffic control doesn't require "undivided attention". Does a truck dispatcher require "undivided attention"? Your analogy sucks because directing air traffic is nothing like driving a car; sure, you can compare flying a plane to driving a car (although not completely, as flying a commercial airliner is much easier and much lower risk), but directing traffic is completely different.

As I said earlier, the hysteria surrounding this event is due to the two reasons I outlined above.

I think that I can decide what I find is showing ME disrespect. Have a nice day. :2wave:
 
Me telling you that you didn't answer my question and then showing how your analogy makes no sense is engaging you in discussion; it's not my fault that you can't defend your absolutely stupid position, and have to resort to this silliness.

And yes, that was meant to be disrespectful.
 
I think that I can decide what I find is showing ME disrespect. Have a nice day. :2wave:

That is a cop out, nothing disrespectful in that. A little strong language, but no ad-hom etc.
 
The media is freaking out. Nobody was placed in danger. Listening to the complete audio, the father even clicks in and makes several of the more complicated calls. An ATC position has more than one mic jack, usually used for training. The "instructor" jack can override the "student" jack at any time. The planes the kid was talking to already had their instructions for departure, so no actual clearances were issued besides the takeoff, which obviously occurred at the time coordinated by the Tower Dad and the departure control.

God damn I hate the media.
Heard this on BBC radio. Much ado about nothing. People need to get a grip.
 
I don't see anything wrong outside of giving the dispatcher a warning.

No one at any time was in any danger.

Typical overreaction.
The warning should be something along the lines of, "hey, a bunch of people are flipping out over this so think twice before doing it again." Any sort of formal warning is an overreaction.
 
Get a grip?

How many issues have we had in the last 10 years due to pilots and other personnel not doing their job right, drinking, falling asleep, talking to each other when it's not allowed, failing to maintain aircraft . . .and so on?

Time and time again we're shown that people die and are seriously injured when the pilot or others aren't 100% focused when they need to be.

So, no, I don't think anyone's overreacting.
 
Get a grip?

How many issues have we had in the last 10 years due to pilots and other personnel not doing their job right, drinking, falling asleep, talking to each other when it's not allowed, failing to maintain aircraft . . .and so on?

Time and time again we're shown that people die and are seriously injured when the pilot or others aren't 100% focused when they need to be.

So, no, I don't think anyone's overreacting.
Yes, get a grip. The kid was basically sitting on his dad's lap parroting his dad into the mic during a down time at JFK. If there was a near miss or anything of the sort, you'd have a point.

Hell, even with a kid in the tower it is still safer to fly to your destination than to drive to the airport to board your plane.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
How many issues have we had in the last 10 years due to pilots and other personnel not doing their job right, drinking, falling asleep, talking to each other when it's not allowed, failing to maintain aircraft . . .and so on?

See? This is what I mean. The security culture surrounding flying has led to the extreme hyping up of these types of issues, which in turn exacerbates the security culture and makes people more paranoid than before. The reality is that flying is the safest form of travel possible, but unfortunately that the opposite seems to be true simply because the media puts the airline industry under a microscope and blows every single issue out of proportion. Every single plane crash makes the news because of how rare they are, whereas car crashes are hardly reported on because they're so common; because of this, public perception is opposite of reality.

Time and time again we're shown that people die and are seriously injured when the pilot or others aren't 100% focused when they need to be.

Except that pilots are constantly not "100% focused" simply because of the fact that flying a commercial airliner is pretty much automated nowadays. Yes, accidents happen when mistakes are made, but that doesn't imply the opposite is true, which everyone knows is a blatantly ridiculous statement.

EDIT: BTW, pilots eat, sleep and use the bathroom while flying.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom