 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Atl controller voiced concern regarding operations conducted with weather all around and no consideration given to the possibility of go-around's.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1099149 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201307 |
| Local Time Of Day | 0001-0600 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ATL.Airport |
| State Reference | GA |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | No Aircraft |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Ground |
| Qualification | Air Traffic Control Fully Certified |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types |
Narrative:
Atl was east departing runway's 8R and 9L at M2. We were running simultaneous ILS prm approaches to runway's 10; 9R; and 8L. I was working ground. We had a wall of moderate to heavy precipitation about 3 miles off the departure end. This caused departing aircraft to not want to depart. Local 3 was instructed to issue a 160 heading; which is ok because local 4 and local 5 have standard procedures to that would still allow separation with a departure which is heading 180 for both and local 4 issues 4;000 ft and local 5 issues 3;000 ft. At this point safety is a little compromised but still can be done safe. The supervisors at A80 and atl coordinated to use a 190 heading for runway 9L departures. Weather is all around; moderate to heavy precipitation about 1-2 miles from the departure end and supervisors want a 190 heading. I'm on ground and made comments a few times to both controllers at locals 3;4; and 5 that it wasn't safe because there is no out if there is a go-around. All 3 locals agreed with me including local 3 which still ended up departing aircraft on the 190 heading. I made a comment to the supervisor that safety is a 0 for this and we should stop departures. In this situation; management should have stopped departures until we could depart safely in the event that we might get a go-around.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ATL Controller voiced concern regarding operations conducted with weather all around and no consideration given to the possibility of go-around's.
Narrative: ATL was East Departing Runway's 8R and 9L at M2. We were running simultaneous ILS PRM approaches to Runway's 10; 9R; and 8L. I was working Ground. We had a wall of moderate to heavy precipitation about 3 miles off the departure end. This caused departing aircraft to not want to depart. Local 3 was instructed to issue a 160 heading; which is OK because Local 4 and Local 5 have standard procedures to that would still allow separation with a departure which is heading 180 for both and Local 4 issues 4;000 FT and Local 5 issues 3;000 FT. At this point safety is a little compromised but still can be done safe. The supervisors at A80 and ATL coordinated to use a 190 heading for Runway 9L departures. Weather is all around; moderate to heavy precipitation about 1-2 miles from the departure end and supervisors want a 190 heading. I'm on Ground and made comments a few times to both Controllers at Locals 3;4; and 5 that it wasn't safe because there is no out if there is a go-around. All 3 Locals agreed with me including Local 3 which still ended up departing aircraft on the 190 heading. I made a comment to the Supervisor that safety is a 0 for this and we should stop departures. In this situation; Management should have stopped departures until we could depart safely in the event that we might get a go-around.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.