 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
ZTL controller voiced concern regarding headings assigned to atl departures by supervisor decision; apparently to avoid WX.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 778003 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200803 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : atl.airport |
| State Reference | GA |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | government : faa |
| Function | controller : departure |
| Qualification | controller : radar |
| Experience | controller limited radar : 0.5 controller military : 5 controller non radar : 0.5 controller radar : 12 |
| ASRS Report | 778003 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | inflight encounter : weather |
| Independent Detector | other controllera |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | FAA Weather Environmental Factor |
| Primary Problem | Weather |
Narrative:
During dual departures on a west operation the flm and tower coordinated the use of 3 departure headings which do not coincide with the noise tracks. The north controller was getting aircraft on a 280 degree heading; the south controller was getting the south departures on a 260 degree heading and the east departures on a 240 degree heading. To the best of my knowledge A80 does not have a procedure for these headings. And by putting the aircraft on these headings the controllers cannot utilize the RNAV departures as they are designed. There was a lot of WX in the area and there were several unusual airspace use arrangements already made. Adding more complexity does not sustain our decree of safe; orderly; and expeditious movement of aircraft. I'm all for doing what we can to get aircraft moving; but not at the expense of safety. I would suggest that unusual procedures be submitted to the correct personnel for approval prior to implementation.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ZTL CTLR VOICED CONCERN REGARDING HEADINGS ASSIGNED TO ATL DEPS BY SUPVR DECISION; APPARENTLY TO AVOID WX.
Narrative: DURING DUAL DEPS ON A W OP THE FLM AND TWR COORDINATED THE USE OF 3 DEP HDGS WHICH DO NOT COINCIDE WITH THE NOISE TRACKS. THE N CTLR WAS GETTING ACFT ON A 280 DEG HDG; THE S CTLR WAS GETTING THE S DEPS ON A 260 DEG HDG AND THE E DEPS ON A 240 DEG HDG. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE A80 DOES NOT HAVE A PROC FOR THESE HDGS. AND BY PUTTING THE ACFT ON THESE HDGS THE CTLRS CANNOT UTILIZE THE RNAV DEPS AS THEY ARE DESIGNED. THERE WAS A LOT OF WX IN THE AREA AND THERE WERE SEVERAL UNUSUAL AIRSPACE USE ARRANGEMENTS ALREADY MADE. ADDING MORE COMPLEXITY DOES NOT SUSTAIN OUR DECREE OF SAFE; ORDERLY; AND EXPEDITIOUS MOVEMENT OF ACFT. I'M ALL FOR DOING WHAT WE CAN TO GET ACFT MOVING; BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF SAFETY. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT UNUSUAL PROCS BE SUBMITTED TO THE CORRECT PERSONNEL FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 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.