We're the government, trust us

After my post on airspace redesign, I felt that I wasn't giving enough credit to J. Mac McClellan. Mr. McClellan penned the pilot perspective on the lack of pavement in New York and Northern New Jersey in his column for www.flyingmag.com. I have no problem giving a pilot some props for being right, but after reading the article for the fifth time, I realized that he's not only right, he's Mike Boyd right! So rather than look a gift horse in the mouth, I'm going to ride that horse for all it's worth. Another except:

To show you how flexible and innovative our present airspace system can be in the face of almost impossible runway conflict and congestion, look at Teterboro Airport just west of New York City. Teterboro's Runway 19 points almost directly at Newark, and the airports are only a few miles apart. When wind direction dictates that Runway 19 be used at Teterboro, the same wind means the parallel Runway 22s will be active at Newark. The stream of airliners crossing Teterboro on final for Runway 22 at Newark are so low they don't allow enough room for standard IFR separation for Runway 19 departures from Teterboro.

The solution for Teterboro departures, at least when the weather is 3,000 foot overcast with three miles visibility or better, is the unique Dalton departure. Pilots who ask for the Dalton — it cannot be assigned without pilot request — take off on Runway 19, but are actually departing VFR. At 800 feet in the climb a pilot flying the Dalton turns right to 280 degrees and continues the climb to 1,300 feet with a maximum speed limit of 190 knots. As soon as the turn is completed and the controllers issue a clearance to climb above 1,300 feet, the flight is automatically converted from VFR to IFR and everything is back to normal ATC procedures.

The Dalton is a bit of a rule beater because it puts the burden to maintaining separation on the pilot departing Teterboro for the first few miles because an airplane approaching Newark may not always have the full 1,000-foot vertical separation IFR standards require. But it's no different than a visual approach where traffic separation obligation transfers to the pilots, and it gets airplanes out of Teterboro without having to wait for a gap in the stream of Newark arrivals.

Rule Beater? Flexible? Innovative? Yes, it's a brilliant weasel move that just begs to be made into an Flight Management System (FMS) or Required Navigation Procedure (RNP) departure. Separation? I'll let you, the users and any NTSB investigators that read this be the judges.

Here's the chart for the Dalton.I haven't seen this much red since the stock market dive in '87. Just some notes: the pilot has to ask for it, maybe because assigning it would make somebody liable, and caution wake turbulence, Newark arrivals descending overhead from 3000 to 1800 feet. Technically, it's all clean and legal. The TEB departure remains clear of the controlled Class B airspace. The pilot asked for it. The 1300 foot restriction on the climb has 500 feet of VFR separation from the promised descent of the EWR arrivals (regardless of weight class). Ahhh, but a funny thing happened on the way to Liberty (International).

The EWR ILS RWY 22L approach.Somehow, someway, the crossing altitude at AYRON got changed from 1800 to 1481 feet without being included on the Dalton Departure plate. What that means is that you now could have 1.7 miles and 181 feet of separation under a heavy jet instead of the printed, and promised, 1.7 miles and 500 feet.

Again, like I said, all clean and legal, technically, because the pilot requested it. Ethically, morally, another falsehood foisted upon the users because of the lie printed there in black and white. The controllers can't do a thing about it. The users can. Stop using this deathtrap procedure now that you have the facts. The NTSB can. Cancel the procedure before our luck runs out. Heck, the FAA can. After-all, "we do the right thing, even when nobody is looking."

Oh, and if you are a pilot at TEB, bear in mind that since Marion Blakey dropped the "schedule less flights" bomb, Continental Airlines (the major user of EWR) has started to consider bigger planes as a means of decreasing the amount of flights. Wake turbulence roulette at its finest.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out

The ink has barely dried on my printed out PDFs of the Northeast Airspace Redesign and the FAA Flight Plan for 2008-2012. As I searched the headlines and came across headlines that dealt with FLeMs at BTV with no experience and trainees leaving Oakland Center, the thing that irked me most was the continued coverage that lame-duck Administrator Blakey continues to garner. She obviously will not go quietly into that good night like some unwelcome house guest or worse yet, an infestation of vermin.

Her speech at the Aero Club on September 11, 2007 contained the following:

To be clear, the airlines need to take a step back on the scheduling practices that are at times out of line with reality. Passengers are growing weary of schedules that aren’t worth the electrons they’re printed on. Airline schedules have got to stop being the fodder for late night monologues. And if the airlines don’t address this voluntarily, don’t be surprised when the government steps in. Drawing down the schedule at Chicago was not my happiest hour, but it could come to that on the East Coast as well.

She later added for www.bloomberg.com:

"You've got schedules that simply can't physically be operated accept under the most optimal of circumstances,'' Blakey said of Newark and JFK. "We don't have optimal days that often.''

Wait a second, wasn't the Airspace Redesign shoved, er, sold to any eager listener because of its proven ability to cut delays by 20%? I didn't find anything regarding the drawing down of schedules at EWR, JFK, LGA and PHL.

So I checked the Flight Plan and a few other choice quotes from the outgoing Inquisitor. Twice the amount of today's traffic (maybe more) by 2025. She sold the users and Congress some line of garbage, er, promise regarding NextGen and its ability to grow with, and meet, the demand. The Flight Plan mentions reliever airports but doesn't get specific. The only definite promises I read are about reducing separation BEFORE the NextGen implementation. And it will, like the Nontract, be an implementation.

The remarks at the Aero Club only back up what everyone outside of the beltway already knows. The smoke and mirrors carnival barking has opened the door for funding, but the truth is that today's amount of pavement and terminal gates can't meet the schedules in use now. It's a damned embarrassment that she waited until there were only two days left in her term to start telling the truth but I guess you have that "luxury" after spending 5 years setting up where your next paycheck is coming from.

James C. May, President of the Air Transport Association, wrote in USA Today on August 8, 2007:

...ensure that operations at the New York airports meet the hourly rates the Federal Aviation Administration says they can handle safely. This well-documented reduction in ATC operational productivity must be corrected.

Sorry, James, looks like you got hoodwinked by a bad promise too.

Separated at Birth

The FAA recently released their Flight Plan for 2008-2012. While it would take about 30 blog entries to identify and condemn all of the falsehoods, it is important to note that the FAA continues to foist the illusion that staffing has nothing to do with capacity, delays or errors. I hate to rehash old material but:

FAA spokesman Ian Gregor…asserts there is no historical correlation between staffing levels and OEs (operational errors), based on numbers recorded over the past 8 years.

(from http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=3f94dc5f-8b3b-40fd-80ac-408e348dbb8e)

Okay, how’s this Ian. Take one of your pencil-pushing, bean-counting weenies and investigate what the “culture change” and management control of staffing have done for capacity and delays. Here’s a portion of an old entry:

In June of 2005, the FAA (at NY TRACON) vowed to take back the work schedules as part of It’s missive to restore Management’s Rights (5 U. S. C. 7106). Although they failed to present any type of reasonable argument above and beyond the claim that they would sacrifice training days for the sake of cutting scheduled overtime, the higher skill set plowed on in violation of Title 5 because they needed to send a message to the controllers. Any change to the basic watch schedule must be accomplished in accordance with 5 USC 6131 with a burden of proof attached to it regarding the efficiency of service and the realized cost reduction. Naturally, none of these rules were ever followed and don’t fool yourself, let’s not call them laws because lawbreakers go to prison, rule-breakers move up unless your boss decides to throw you under the bus to save him/herself.

Anyway, the disingenuous fallout of all of this was that the FAA would put out a schedule that It knew wasn’t capable of satisfying the operational needs of the system. The “promise” was that Management would “augment” the staffing for any particular shift as needed as It determined need for personnel for said tour of duty…Management’s rights. However, they forgot to tell the controllers their intent was to cut staffing by 15-33% and the process to “augment” the schedule would be initiated with only minutes (not hours, not days, not weeks) of advance warning. How easy would it be to claim that controller’s were refusing overtime when the FAA gave them a 45 minute warning to come to work on their day off?

The NY TRACON (N90) and their 3 major airports top the list of “most delayed” for the first quarter of 2007. ORD is 4th and PHL is 5th, hence the PHL/NJ/NY Airspace redesign. This, naturally, just before the (previous) worst year on record for delays. What would you expect from a facility where the ATM impregnates a trainee and a former supervisor found guilty of sexual harassment returns as an OM?

The FAA and Its corporate model took control of the work schedules, shift and facility staffing for every facility beginning in 2005 and we are now in the second, and worst, full year for record aircraft delays. I’ll allow you to connect point A and point B. You get what you pay for, or maybe you don’t get what you don’t pay for. Delays and staffing are conjoined twins, untimely ripped apart for the benefit of the FAA.

Because, "I said so," isn't a reason.

The FAA rolled out their final decisions on the planned redesign of the airspace for PHL/NJ/NY on September 5th. While James C. May, President of the Air Transport Association, and his band of sycophantic suck-ups are applauding the measures, people that will be affected by the changes and people that actually know what is going on are efforting to let this plan fly by like a lead balloon.

The populace is upset about noise. Congress is upset about the voracity of the FAA. Users are concerned about what is being touted as the biggest sham since Robert Preston tried to rook River City in "The Music Man." Probably too dated on that one, so maybe its the biggest sham since Phil Hartman sold Springfield a monorail on "The Simpsons."

The New Canaan Advertiser (http://www.acorn-online.com/news/publish/newcanaan/22395.shtml) reports:

"The federal government is not above the law,” Attorney General Richard Blumenthal proclaimed from the steps of Town Hall Wednesday, August 29. Mr. Blumenthal went on to criticize the FAA, calling it a “lawless government” for not disclosing an environmental impact statement to the public, which he said can be viewed as a violation of the law.

Congressman Christopher Shays then stepped up:

“With all due respect, the FAA is the most arrogant agency I’ve dealt with,” said Fourth District U.S. Rep. Christopher Shays, who has had a bill to block FAA redesign funding defeated 65-360 in the House and has been denied requests to meet with FAA officials.

Heck, they even got an attorney to explain the skullduggery:

Retired attorney Michael G. Kroposki explained how the FAA has been able to circumvent this requirement. He said environmental concerns are determined by the total amount of delays causing planes to stay in the air, thus raising pollution levels. Calling the Fairfield County (Stamford) study a “blue-sky analysis,” Mr. Kroposki said that the study was performed on a fair-weather day — one that would have the least amount of planes in holding patterns around the area.

Things aren't going much better in the empire state, as reported at http://www.midhudsonnews.com/News/airspace_Engel-08Sep07.html:

Engel takes FAA to task over new airspace plan

Washington – Westchester-Rockland Congressman Eliot Engel took to the floor in Congress Friday to criticize the Federal Aviation Administration’s action in approving a new airspace redesign for the northeast area saying the FAA “misled as well as stonewalled, used bureaucratic resistance, vague and extremely complicated maps, and deliberately manipulated information.”

The FAA this week announced the selection of a new airspace plan for the New York-New Jersey-Philadelphia airspace.

Engel said he is “deeply disturbed” by the agency’s actions that could place up to 600 airplanes a day over Rockland and Westchester counties.

“The FAA created their proposal with zero input from the people whose lives would be most harmed by the proposal. There was no adequate notification for elected officials or the public throughout the process,” Engel said in remarks on the House floor.

He called the agency’s action “unconscionable” and said his constituents “expected better, and they deserved better.”

Engel warned his House colleagues that if the FAA got away with behaving this way in the northeast corridor, other sections of the country could suffer the same fate.

The Garden State is also getting involved (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/06/washington/05cnd-flights.html?hp):

The town of Elizabeth, New Jersey, said it filed suit in federal court to block the F.A.A. plan.

United States Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, opposes the plan.

The Times did manage to sneak a peek beyond the smoke and mirrors:

The F.A.A. plan is not designed to make room for more air traffic, merely to handle existing flights and expected growth more efficiently. But if the skies are unknotted somewhat above the New York area, airlines could be encouraged to add flights that increase delays.

“One could draw that conclusion,” said Leo Prusak, an F.A.A. official overseeing air traffic in the New York area.

I could give you more from New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Delaware, but let's get a pilot's take on it (from http://www.flyingmag.com/article.asp?section_id=12&article_id=838&page_number=1):

The point of this — other than the obvious, that New York is a pain in the butt at rush hour — is that pavement, not airspace, is the fundamental congestion problem. There was plenty of space in the air, but only one airplane could use the runway at a time, and it was being used for landings. If Westchester had a parallel runway, takeoffs could have been conducted as soon as the landing airplane was down and rolling. Without that extra runway, there was no way capacity could be increased. Pilots were doing an excellent job of spacing themselves on the visual approach, and the airplane ahead was turning off the runway as the next one was nearing the numbers. Only formation landings could have increased capacity, and nobody is ready for that.

Every pilot knows that it is concrete, not airspace, that puts the final limit on capacity, but to hear the airlines argue for new fees and limits on business aviation, you would think it is the opposite. And the FAA sides with the airlines. The administrator has repeatedly said that without an overhaul of the airspace system, and without implementation of a new automatic dependent surveillance system based on GPS, air travel will become impossible. I, too, favor the precision of an ADS-B airspace system, but I know that it can't solve the real problem, which is lack of runways where we need them.

Still not convinced? How about a quote from NATCA President Pat Forrey at www.cbsnews.com:

"You wanna double the aircraft in the sky? Do it," said Patrick Forrey, president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. "We just need more controllers and more runways to land 'em. Otherwise, it doesn't matter what whiz-bang stuff you got."

Okay, let's be fair and get fair and balanced statement from the FAA. Who better than Steve "Wrong-Way" Kelley?

“There are people who will have a different noise experience,” said Steve Kelley, manager of airspace redesign at the F.A.A. Of opponents, Mr. Kelley said, “many of them are the same ones who say, ‘Do something about the delays.’ ”

Didn't anyone read page 15 of the official Record of Decision (at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/nas_redesign/regional_guidance/eastern_reg/nynjphl_redesign/media/ROD_FINAL_FINAL_090507_LK.pdf)?

Noise reduction is not a Purpose and Need for Airspace Redesign. In the case of the national airspace redesign (NAR), reduction of noise is not appropriately identified as a Purpose.

This is the FAA doing this. The imposed work rules FAA. The cut and run, find yourself another job while still working with the, FAA. They can do whatever they want.

10 years worth of misappropriated funds and I'm still not sure if the promised 20% reduction in delays means that 20% less aircraft will be delayed, or maybe we can just get one JetBlue flight out of JFK on Valentine's Day in less than 14 hours.

A Real, Stand Up Guy

A year has come and gone since the FAA implemented it’s “contract” upon the Air Traffic Controllers represented by NATCA. The “contract” was supposed to be about how management took back management’s right’s and imposed the rules that would effect their “culture change” and be economically viable for budgetary concerns that will eventually encompass the implementation of “NexGen,” the twisted pipe dream which is imagined to increase capacity by reducing the airborne separation requirements. All nice, if we can just survive to get to a workable model.

The FAA cancelled another Kool-Aid convention this year because, at the time, there was very little to add to the mass brain washings that took place in August of 2006. Ahhh but performance appraisals are coming up and the world wouldn’t be safe without a stupid, extremely futile, gesture on behalf of the FAA as a means of further punishing it’s workforce. The POS has found such a gesture.

The manager at Teterboro Tower has decided that effective September 28, the Local and Ground controllers must stand while on position from 0700 to 2300. Without embarrassing too many people, let’s just say that the decision has Agency support about as high up as one would care to ask. Said support is based upon the types of errors that have been occurring recently so as “to ensure that we are providing the operational service that is expected.” So there you have it, the FAA’s final solution and the tower actually got 30 days of advance notice for this unilaterally imposed change in working conditions. Let's all goose-step over to the bonfire, we're burning Title V of the United States Code!

Some background. Teterboro is located less than 10 miles from Newark Liberty International and is a part of the FAA’s 35 facilities used in the daily delay report at www.ato.faa.gov. On any given shift, the tower will staff a Local, Ground and Clearance Delivery position. Outer Local, LRAC (radar), Sequencer, Cab-Coordinator and Flight Data are secondary considerations based upon how many people show up. This hardly constitutes any initiative to staff to traffic, as with most facilities. The policy is more like, “let’s see who shows up and go from there.”

The point being that it would not be outside the realm of possibility for someone to be forced to stand for up to six hours of any given eight hour shift. BTW, Teterboro still has a mandatory one person midnight shift. TEB did almost 189,000 operations in 2006 (an off year actually) and if anyone can get some LEX stats, I’d like to see them.

So, NATCA controllers, your choice is to wait for this tripe to reach your facility, or implement it on your own. Stand up for the stand up people at Teterboro tower. Stand up as a means to reduce errors. Stand up so as to ensure that we are delivering the operational service that is expected. Stand up to shout out your passive resistance in support of your brethren. And if you become fatigued, ask for a break. If it gets denied conduct your operation in a safe and efficient manner. Stand for as long as you can stand it and when it becomes too much, promise that you’ll go another five minutes.

But, if you have an error, make sure you document that you were standing. Make sure you document that you were dress code compliant. Make sure that you document that you were on a combined position. Make sure that you document that you got zero help from the Front-Line Manager that was trying to shake off another CRU-ARTS induced trance back at the desk. Make sure that you document your overtime, time on position, lousy breaks, denied leave and your fear of being counseled for speaking up. Give them the truth and get a copy. The truth shall be the only thing that sets us free.

Moving on up?

I may be shutting down as I have been approached by the gang at www.faafollies.com to join their staff. The agreement here is mutual since they can get me to 1000 hits per day and I might be able to get them back to a slam a day on the FAA. I'm registered there as "Stranger Than Fiction," because that is what the truth is. Check back in week to see if I'm too abrasive or combative for them.