NATCA: CRW Tower Closure Led To 'Complete Chaos' | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-04.29.24

Airborne-Unlimited-04.23.24

Airborne-Unlimited-04.24.24 Airborne-FltTraining-04.25.24

Airborne-Unlimited-04.26.24

Wed, May 16, 2007

NATCA: CRW Tower Closure Led To 'Complete Chaos'

Staffing Shortage Forced 90 Minute Shutdown

Another control tower had to close briefly last week, due to what the National Air Traffic Controllers Association terms a staffing shortage. The union tells ANN the Federal Aviation Administration was forced to close the air traffic control tower at Yeager Airport in Charleston, WV (CRW), for 90 minutes May 11, because it did not have enough controllers to staff the evening shift at the 24-hour facility.

NATCA says during the first hour the tower was closed, there were 18 aircraft that taxied, landed, and departed the airport. Of the 18, nine were air taxis, eight were general aviation and one was a Lifeguard Healthnet Helicopter.

“The pilots were expecting the tower to be open, with air traffic controllers guiding them safely in and out of this airport,” said Jim Ennis, the National Air Traffic Controllers Association’s facility representative at the Charleston tower and terminal radar approach control facility (TRACON). “This was an extremely unsafe situation.”

NATCA states almost every shift at CRW is scheduled with less than the minimum amount of controllers needed to perform the necessary duties. On Friday, Ennis was scheduled to work the evening shift with three other controllers. The shifts require at least five controllers to provide a safe and expeditious flow of traffic, as FAA orders require.

One of the scheduled controllers was forced to call in sick, NATCA says, and a second left the facility due to illness before the end of their shift.

Overtime was authorized for the shift. However, only one controller was eligible to work overtime due to requirements for other shifts. NATCA claims the FAA is using approximately 60-70 hours of overtime a week at CRW, in order to meet its staffing needs... leaving few controllers available for any forced overtime when needed.

The result was that the evening shift crew was down to two controllers after 8 pm, instead of the required five. Against the advice of Ennis, FAA managers ordered controllers to run the shift from the TRACON, thus making the tower uncontrolled.

“We had no procedures and were not trained for this type of operation and some of the safety ramifications,” Ennis said. “I recommended that we release our airspace to Indianapolis Center (making CRW a visual flight rules tower but nonetheless staffed by the two controllers on duty), as we have appropriate procedures and are trained for this type of operation. But I was overruled.

“The next 90 minutes was complete chaos," Ennis continued. "We were short staffed, significantly busy, and now forced to come up with a game plan to do something we had neither procedures nor training to do. Due to closing the tower, many aircraft were put into an unsafe environment that included construction on and around the airport, safety equipment that was not monitored, a change in routine operations, local weather not available to aircraft on the ground nor disseminated via the ATIS (Automatic Terminal Information Service), an inability to adjust the airfield lighting panel, unfamiliar aircraft operating on movement areas, etc.”

In addition to the delay of a Healthnet helicopter (stationed at CRW) on an active rescue flight, another aircraft crossed the active runway while on approach frequency because they were lost and could not find the fixed base operator facility on the airport grounds to which they were trying to taxi. Yet another aircraft, an air taxi, was required to abort its landing because they received an unsafe glide slope indication.

“We had no idea if the glide slope was operating correctly or not,” Ennis said. “The monitor is in the tower cab.”

FMI: www.natca.org. www.faa.gov

Advertisement

More News

Unfortunate... ANN/SportPlane Resource Guide Adds To Cautionary Advisories

The Industry Continues to be Rocked By Some Questionable Operations Recent investigations and a great deal of data has resulted in ANN’s SportPlane Resource Guide’s rep>[...]

ANN FAQ: Turn On Post Notifications

Make Sure You NEVER Miss A New Story From Aero-News Network Do you ever feel like you never see posts from a certain person or page on Facebook or Instagram? Here’s how you c>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (04.29.24): Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VASI)

Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VASI) An airport lighting facility providing vertical visual approach slope guidance to aircraft during approach to landing by radiating a directio>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (04.28.24): Airport Marking Aids

Airport Marking Aids Markings used on runway and taxiway surfaces to identify a specific runway, a runway threshold, a centerline, a hold line, etc. A runway should be marked in ac>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (04.28.24)

Aero Linx: The Skyhawk Association The Skyhawk Association is a non-profit organization founded by former Skyhawk Pilots which is open to anyone with an affinity for the A-4 Skyhaw>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2024 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC