Narrative:

At XX15Z, the runway 27 GS started to alarm, the WX at dlh was M1 overcast visibility 1 mi fog, wind 270 at 15 KTS, dlh af was notified that we were getting an intermittent alarm, it was logged as such at XX15Z. By XX27Z, the GS would not come back on so we notified dlh af and told them it was OTS. The dlh af sfo manager took the call and asked 'if it could be logged out to maintenance, it would save us an outage.' his concern seemed to be with whether or not he would have an outage rather than fixing the problem, while air carrier X inbound to dlh held for 15 or 20 mins because the WX was too bad to try a localizer approach and the winds were too strong to try an approach to runway 9. Ultimately the WX improved to do the localizer only approach before the GS was returned. On sep/xx/93 at YY35Z, the runway 27 localizer alarmed. After attempting to recycle it, the localizer would not work. We called dlh af to advise. Again the technician who took the call asked if it could be logged to maintenance to save an outage. He said that he had been told to ask if it can go to maintenance by his supervisor. Even though he felt it was wrong to do so, this was the policy that they should follow. Again, concern is not where it should be. In this instance the WX was good and did not impact air traffic. The problem noted here is that it seems that some of the people at the dlh sfo seem to be more concerned about not having an official outage rather than restoring the equipment to service, including the sfo manager. The af personnel are put in this position because the outages will reflect poorly on their appraisals and performance reviews. They are also in competition with other sfo's on best performance and fewest outages and sector of the yr awards. If this is the case, then this system of awards and appraisal should be done away with because the priorities are not correct. This situation puts us, as controllers, in a tough situation. In the instance of air carrier X, he was told that the GS was OTS, but in reality in our log it was out to maintenance. If he would have been told that, the pilot would have asked to have maintenance turn it on. It creates a situation where controllers are lying to the flying public just to make someone in af look better. This is not right.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ATC NAV EQUIP PROB ILS GS OTS.

Narrative: AT XX15Z, THE RWY 27 GS STARTED TO ALARM, THE WX AT DLH WAS M1 OVCST VISIBILITY 1 MI FOG, WIND 270 AT 15 KTS, DLH AF WAS NOTIFIED THAT WE WERE GETTING AN INTERMITTENT ALARM, IT WAS LOGGED AS SUCH AT XX15Z. BY XX27Z, THE GS WOULD NOT COME BACK ON SO WE NOTIFIED DLH AF AND TOLD THEM IT WAS OTS. THE DLH AF SFO MGR TOOK THE CALL AND ASKED 'IF IT COULD BE LOGGED OUT TO MAINT, IT WOULD SAVE US AN OUTAGE.' HIS CONCERN SEEMED TO BE WITH WHETHER OR NOT HE WOULD HAVE AN OUTAGE RATHER THAN FIXING THE PROB, WHILE ACR X INBOUND TO DLH HELD FOR 15 OR 20 MINS BECAUSE THE WX WAS TOO BAD TO TRY A LOC APCH AND THE WINDS WERE TOO STRONG TO TRY AN APCH TO RWY 9. ULTIMATELY THE WX IMPROVED TO DO THE LOC ONLY APCH BEFORE THE GS WAS RETURNED. ON SEP/XX/93 AT YY35Z, THE RWY 27 LOC ALARMED. AFTER ATTEMPTING TO RECYCLE IT, THE LOC WOULD NOT WORK. WE CALLED DLH AF TO ADVISE. AGAIN THE TECHNICIAN WHO TOOK THE CALL ASKED IF IT COULD BE LOGGED TO MAINT TO SAVE AN OUTAGE. HE SAID THAT HE HAD BEEN TOLD TO ASK IF IT CAN GO TO MAINT BY HIS SUPVR. EVEN THOUGH HE FELT IT WAS WRONG TO DO SO, THIS WAS THE POLICY THAT THEY SHOULD FOLLOW. AGAIN, CONCERN IS NOT WHERE IT SHOULD BE. IN THIS INSTANCE THE WX WAS GOOD AND DID NOT IMPACT AIR TFC. THE PROB NOTED HERE IS THAT IT SEEMS THAT SOME OF THE PEOPLE AT THE DLH SFO SEEM TO BE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT NOT HAVING AN OFFICIAL OUTAGE RATHER THAN RESTORING THE EQUIP TO SVC, INCLUDING THE SFO MGR. THE AF PERSONNEL ARE PUT IN THIS POS BECAUSE THE OUTAGES WILL REFLECT POORLY ON THEIR APPRAISALS AND PERFORMANCE REVIEWS. THEY ARE ALSO IN COMPETITION WITH OTHER SFO'S ON BEST PERFORMANCE AND FEWEST OUTAGES AND SECTOR OF THE YR AWARDS. IF THIS IS THE CASE, THEN THIS SYS OF AWARDS AND APPRAISAL SHOULD BE DONE AWAY WITH BECAUSE THE PRIORITIES ARE NOT CORRECT. THIS SIT PUTS US, AS CTLRS, IN A TOUGH SIT. IN THE INSTANCE OF ACR X, HE WAS TOLD THAT THE GS WAS OTS, BUT IN REALITY IN OUR LOG IT WAS OUT TO MAINT. IF HE WOULD HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT, THE PLT WOULD HAVE ASKED TO HAVE MAINT TURN IT ON. IT CREATES A SIT WHERE CTLRS ARE LYING TO THE FLYING PUBLIC JUST TO MAKE SOMEONE IN AF LOOK BETTER. THIS IS NOT RIGHT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.