37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 898816 |
Time | |
Date | 201007 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | DFW.Airport |
State Reference | TX |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | PA-31 Navajo/Chieftan/Mojave/T1040 |
Flight Plan | VFR |
Person 1 | |
Qualification | Air Traffic Control Fully Certified |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types |
Narrative:
I was paged back from a break and told to go to one of the unused radar positions to work a photo mission aircraft inside of dfw tower's airspace. I inquired as to why I would be working an aircraft that was never projected to be in D10 airspace and what kind of separation would be used. I was told by a supervisor that we are a service organization and that our manager had decided that we would work this aircraft and provide him with the photo mission requests that he desired. The supervisor then informed me that I would be responsible for separating the photo mission from all dfw arrivals and departures. I told him that would be impossible and illegal; since I would not be talking to the arrivals or departures; nor would I know what kind of clearances they had and that I would have to vector the photo mission off course in order to separate; which would ruin the mission that I was being ordered to accommodate. Apparently; some phone calls happened between our supervisor and and dfw tower management. Once the phone calls were complete; I was told to work the aircraft in tower's airspace; but that tower would provide visual separation between the photo mission and all arrival and departure aircraft. I then asked why I would be working an aircraft that required separation in someone else's airspace; instead of the appropriate tower controller working the aircraft. I was told that nobody knew why for certain; other than some meeting had apparently happened without a TRACON representative and this was the decision that had been reached. I asked what my responsibilities were in this situation and no member of management was able to articulate to me what my responsibilities or authority was in dfw tower's airspace; other than to work the photo mission aircraft. After consulting with supervision; it was determined that I would open the meachum west position (P) and work the aircraft from there. I pointed out to them that if I opened that position; then all hand offs to (P) would come to me; instead of redirecting to the meachum south position (D) who would actually be responsible for that airspace. I also pointed out to management that if I used the meachum west frequency; that would cause problems as well; since that is a heavily used frequency for that airspace. I suggested to them that the only workable solution that I could think of was to 'use' the P radar position to monitor the aircraft without actually opening the position. I also suggested 'stealing' the meachum north high frequency (119.05); since that was an almost never used frequency. It was determined that my suggestion was the best solution for the situation of working an aircraft. During the entire time; nobody else had any ability to reach me via landlines; etc; because I was operating at a closed position. All calls had to go through a supervisor or another controller sitting near me who would then forward the information to me. I placed a recording on the relief briefing recording detailing what all had been happening. I never actually made or received any real relief briefing because of the unusual situation. Periodically throughout this time I asked various management personnel why I could not make a hand off to dfw tower and let them work the aircraft. Each time I was told essentially; 'just because.' I have no idea if there were losses of separation at any given time; because I have no idea how or what kind of separation dfw tower was applying. A heavy jet or B757 departure was launched in front of the photo mission and I have no idea if wake turbulence requirements were met. This entire situation was the most unsafe procedure that I have ever seen FAA management order. Never have I been ordered to work an aircraft in someone else's airspace without defined responsibilities or requirements unless there was an emergency or loss of frequencies or something else very unusual happening. I had no ability to give accurate traffic advisories to the photo mission on departure aircraft; because very often by the time the departure would tag up it would be too late to give a timely traffic call. Later in the day; I was told that right before I was called in to work the photo mission solo; he had been broken off his photo line by one of the meachum satellite controllers because of inbound arrival traffic to dfw runway 17L that was going to be a loss of separation as far as the controller could tell. Again;'if' this happened; it reiterates how poorly planned and unsafe this whole scenario was and it is probably the reason I was given the subject orders. The potential for something very bad or catastrophic happening was extremely high since all of the aircraft were on different frequencies/positions. If the tower had just worked this aircraft themselves; it would have relieved all of the issues involved. Management was made aware that I felt this was extremely unsafe and disagreed with their decisions. The controller responsible for the airspace in which an aircraft is operating should be working the aircraft. Management needs to place safety at a higher priority than service.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: D10 Controller provided a detailed account of a photo mission he/she was directed to handle when in fact the mission was taking place in DFW Tower's airspace; the reporter questions the separation procedures utilized.
Narrative: I was paged back from a break and told to go to one of the unused RADAR positions to work a photo mission aircraft inside of DFW Tower's airspace. I inquired as to why I would be working an aircraft that was never projected to be in D10 airspace and what kind of separation would be used. I was told by a supervisor that we are a service organization and that our Manager had decided that we would work this aircraft and provide him with the photo mission requests that he desired. The Supervisor then informed me that I would be responsible for separating the photo mission from all DFW arrivals and departures. I told him that would be impossible and illegal; since I would not be talking to the arrivals or departures; nor would I know what kind of clearances they had and that I would have to vector the photo mission off course in order to separate; which would ruin the mission that I was being ordered to accommodate. Apparently; some phone calls happened between our supervisor and and DFW Tower management. Once the phone calls were complete; I was told to work the aircraft in tower's airspace; but that tower would provide visual separation between the photo mission and all arrival and departure aircraft. I then asked why I would be working an aircraft that required separation in someone else's airspace; instead of the appropriate tower controller working the aircraft. I was told that nobody knew why for certain; other than some meeting had apparently happened without a TRACON representative and this was the decision that had been reached. I asked what my responsibilities were in this situation and no member of management was able to articulate to me what my responsibilities or authority was in DFW Tower's airspace; other than to work the photo mission aircraft. After consulting with supervision; it was determined that I would open the Meachum West position (P) and work the aircraft from there. I pointed out to them that if I opened that position; then all hand offs to (P) would come to me; instead of redirecting to the Meachum South position (D) who would actually be responsible for that airspace. I also pointed out to management that if I used the Meachum West frequency; that would cause problems as well; since that is a heavily used frequency for that airspace. I suggested to them that the only workable solution that I could think of was to 'use' the P RADAR position to monitor the aircraft without actually opening the position. I also suggested 'stealing' the Meachum North High frequency (119.05); since that was an almost never used frequency. It was determined that my suggestion was the best solution for the situation of working an aircraft. During the entire time; nobody else had any ability to reach me via landlines; etc; because I was operating at a closed position. All calls had to go through a supervisor or another controller sitting near me who would then forward the information to me. I placed a recording on the relief briefing recording detailing what all had been happening. I never actually made or received any real relief briefing because of the unusual situation. Periodically throughout this time I asked various management personnel why I could not make a hand off to DFW Tower and let them work the aircraft. Each time I was told essentially; 'Just because.' I have no idea if there were losses of separation at any given time; because I have no idea how or what kind of separation DFW Tower was applying. A Heavy jet or B757 departure was launched in front of the photo mission and I have no idea if wake turbulence requirements were met. This entire situation was the most unsafe procedure that I have ever seen FAA management order. Never have I been ordered to work an aircraft in someone else's airspace without defined responsibilities or requirements unless there was an emergency or loss of frequencies or something else very unusual happening. I had no ability to give accurate traffic advisories to the photo mission on departure aircraft; because very often by the time the departure would tag up it would be too late to give a timely traffic call. Later in the day; I was told that right before I was called in to work the photo mission solo; he had been broken off his photo line by one of the Meachum satellite controllers because of inbound arrival traffic to DFW Runway 17L that was going to be a loss of separation as far as the controller could tell. Again;'if' this happened; it reiterates how poorly planned and unsafe this whole scenario was and it is probably the reason I was given the subject orders. The potential for something very bad or catastrophic happening was extremely high since all of the aircraft were on different frequencies/positions. If the tower had just worked this aircraft themselves; it would have relieved all of the issues involved. Management was made aware that I felt this was extremely unsafe and disagreed with their decisions. The controller responsible for the airspace in which an aircraft is operating should be working the aircraft. Management needs to place safety at a higher priority than service.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.