37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 282117 |
Time | |
Date | 199409 |
Day | Fri |
Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | atc facility : geg |
State Reference | WA |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | artcc : zlc tracon : geg tower : boi |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | government : faa |
Function | controller : radar |
Qualification | controller : radar |
ASRS Report | 282117 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | government : faa |
Function | controller : approach |
Qualification | controller : radar |
Events | |
Anomaly | other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other controllera |
Resolutory Action | none taken : unable |
Consequence | Other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Navigational Facility |
Air Traffic Incident | other |
Situations | |
Navigational Aid | Unspecified |
Narrative:
In the latter part of august, approach control services (radar) began to be provided at mso airport, mt, by means of a recently commissioned ASR-9 providing data remoted to the approach control facility at spokane, wa. This service replaces the previous nonradar approach control service provided at the airport. While it is a new operation for all concerned, a number of issues have created a less than stable work environment for providing high quality air traffic control services. Here is a brief summation of some of the issues: 1) a computer interface must exist between spokane ATCT, seattle ARTCC, salt lake ARTCC, and mso ATCT, both for air traffic data and airway facilities data. Very complex. 2) airway facilities support capabilities are not present when needed. The data line providing ARTS handoff capability went OTS on sep/fri/94 thus requiring manual handoffs between spokane ATCT (approach) and salt lake ARTCC (center providing service around and over mso). Though inconvenient, a manageable situation for a short period. However: 3) when airway facilities (FAA) was asked to correct the problem, the single assigned field technician was unavailable (for 4 days!) and no one else was available to pursue the required correction. In addition: 4) not only was the technician not available, but there was no way for the line to be logged OTS on the national problem reporting system (naprs) for the FAA. Field technicians have multiple problems with accessing the system to report outages or conditions. And this is when they are available. 5) it is estimated that field technicians in the northwest mountain region of the FAA are staffed at approximately 60 percent of the authority/authorized levels, with a hiring freeze in place for almost 2 yrs, and no end in sight. An earlier example of future outages occurred in ZLC last spring. The tph NAVAID was out for almost 2 weeks while the single assigned technician the NAVAID was assigned to, was gone for training.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ATC EQUIP PROB RADAR ARTS INTERFACE WITH ARTCC. FAA POLICY TECHNICIAN STAFFING TO FIX EQUIP.
Narrative: IN THE LATTER PART OF AUGUST, APCH CTL SVCS (RADAR) BEGAN TO BE PROVIDED AT MSO ARPT, MT, BY MEANS OF A RECENTLY COMMISSIONED ASR-9 PROVIDING DATA REMOTED TO THE APCH CTL FACILITY AT SPOKANE, WA. THIS SVC REPLACES THE PREVIOUS NONRADAR APCH CTL SVC PROVIDED AT THE ARPT. WHILE IT IS A NEW OP FOR ALL CONCERNED, A NUMBER OF ISSUES HAVE CREATED A LESS THAN STABLE WORK ENVIRONMENT FOR PROVIDING HIGH QUALITY AIR TFC CTL SVCS. HERE IS A BRIEF SUMMATION OF SOME OF THE ISSUES: 1) A COMPUTER INTERFACE MUST EXIST BTWN SPOKANE ATCT, SEATTLE ARTCC, SALT LAKE ARTCC, AND MSO ATCT, BOTH FOR AIR TFC DATA AND AIRWAY FACILITIES DATA. VERY COMPLEX. 2) AIRWAY FACILITIES SUPPORT CAPABILITIES ARE NOT PRESENT WHEN NEEDED. THE DATA LINE PROVIDING ARTS HDOF CAPABILITY WENT OTS ON SEP/FRI/94 THUS REQUIRING MANUAL HDOFS BTWN SPOKANE ATCT (APCH) AND SALT LAKE ARTCC (CTR PROVIDING SVC AROUND AND OVER MSO). THOUGH INCONVENIENT, A MANAGEABLE SIT FOR A SHORT PERIOD. HOWEVER: 3) WHEN AIRWAY FACILITIES (FAA) WAS ASKED TO CORRECT THE PROB, THE SINGLE ASSIGNED FIELD TECHNICIAN WAS UNAVAILABLE (FOR 4 DAYS!) AND NO ONE ELSE WAS AVAILABLE TO PURSUE THE REQUIRED CORRECTION. IN ADDITION: 4) NOT ONLY WAS THE TECHNICIAN NOT AVAILABLE, BUT THERE WAS NO WAY FOR THE LINE TO BE LOGGED OTS ON THE NATIONAL PROB RPTING SYS (NAPRS) FOR THE FAA. FIELD TECHNICIANS HAVE MULTIPLE PROBS WITH ACCESSING THE SYS TO RPT OUTAGES OR CONDITIONS. AND THIS IS WHEN THEY ARE AVAILABLE. 5) IT IS ESTIMATED THAT FIELD TECHNICIANS IN THE NW MOUNTAIN REGION OF THE FAA ARE STAFFED AT APPROX 60 PERCENT OF THE AUTH LEVELS, WITH A HIRING FREEZE IN PLACE FOR ALMOST 2 YRS, AND NO END IN SIGHT. AN EARLIER EXAMPLE OF FUTURE OUTAGES OCCURRED IN ZLC LAST SPRING. THE TPH NAVAID WAS OUT FOR ALMOST 2 WKS WHILE THE SINGLE ASSIGNED TECHNICIAN THE NAVAID WAS ASSIGNED TO, WAS GONE FOR TRAINING.
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.