Narrative:

This is a situation that I witnessed; and do not think a [report] was filed. I feel it pertinent to bring up. Aircraft X was flying at the lowest assignable attitude (16000 feet) over the sierra nevada. The minimum IFR altitude (mia) in that area is 15200 feet. The aircraft experienced serious downdrafts; and lost over 1200 feet of altitude in only 2-3 radar returns. The aircraft asked for help; and the controller working the sector initially responded with 'you're below my mia; I can't vector you below the mia.' the controller asked if he was getting icing; but the pilot said negative. When he finally gave suggested headings; the controller was saying things like maybe this heading or maybe that heading. Nothing concrete that would invoke any sort of confidence in the pilot. I feel that the controller did a terrible job helping the pilot. He did not issue a low altitude alert or even find out if he was IMC until 10 minutes after the issue started. It took another controller to make him ask the pilot if he was IMC; and issue a safety alert. The controller gave a much better service to another aircraft that was not in an emergency situation than he gave this aircraft. When the operations manager came in the area he asked if the pilot was getting carb icing (a very good question); and the controllers response was 'he is not getting icing.' the controller never asked the pilot if he was getting carb icing. While this was probably not a contributing factor; this was pertinent information that could have helped the pilot get more power out of his engine. This particular controller has many difficulties working normal traffic; and a situation like this put him over the edge. This was a very unsafe situation; and I feel that if the pilot had not kept his cool he may have crashed. I feel that situations like these; that do not show up as a loss of separation; airspace violation; or incident are not looked at very seriously at our facility. Management filed an incident report but it was very vague and did not properly narrate the situation. I don't even think management listened to the tape. I do not want someone to be penalized; but I think we need to engage this controller; and offer him more training on these types of situations. In fact; every controller; including myself should be 'called out' if they do not provide enough service to an aircraft in need. We do run simulations with scenarios like this during our 'recovery' training; but I feel this exact situation should be re-created. We need to focus on all safety issues; not just separation loss or airspace violations.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZOA Controller reported observing another Controller work an aircraft in downdrafts over mountains; but did not handle the situation according to standards.

Narrative: This is a situation that I witnessed; and do not think a [report] was filed. I feel it pertinent to bring up. Aircraft X was flying at the lowest assignable attitude (16000 feet) over the Sierra Nevada. The Minimum IFR Altitude (MIA) in that area is 15200 feet. The aircraft experienced serious downdrafts; and lost over 1200 feet of altitude in only 2-3 radar returns. The aircraft asked for help; and the controller working the sector initially responded with 'you're below my MIA; I can't vector you below the MIA.' The controller asked if he was getting icing; but the pilot said negative. When he finally gave suggested headings; the controller was saying things like maybe this heading or maybe that heading. Nothing concrete that would invoke any sort of confidence in the pilot. I feel that the controller did a terrible job helping the pilot. He did not issue a low altitude alert or even find out if he was IMC until 10 minutes after the issue started. It took another controller to make him ask the pilot if he was IMC; and issue a safety alert. The controller gave a much better service to another aircraft that was not in an emergency situation than he gave this aircraft. When the Operations Manager came in the area he asked if the pilot was getting carb icing (a very good question); and the controllers response was 'he is not getting icing.' The controller NEVER asked the pilot if he was getting carb icing. While this was probably not a contributing factor; this was pertinent information that could have helped the pilot get more power out of his engine. This particular controller has many difficulties working normal traffic; and a situation like this put him over the edge. This was a very unsafe situation; and I feel that if the pilot had not kept his cool he may have crashed. I feel that situations like these; that do not show up as a loss of separation; airspace violation; or incident are not looked at very seriously at our facility. Management filed an incident report but it was very vague and did not properly narrate the situation. I don't even think management listened to the tape. I do not want someone to be penalized; but I think we need to engage this controller; and offer him more training on these types of situations. In fact; every controller; including myself should be 'called out' if they do not provide enough service to an aircraft in need. We do run simulations with scenarios like this during our 'recovery' training; but I feel this exact situation should be re-created. We need to focus on all safety issues; not just separation loss or airspace violations.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.