Why I Don’t Want a Child Talking to My Pilot

Most of the time, parents tend to make the correct choices about what's safe for their children to be doing and what isn't, and I actually believe this is one of those times. If the pilots thought their lives were in danger, I don't think they would be laughing about it. When the plane was ditching in the Hudson, the controller was doing a good job by not doing much at all and letting the pilot work. As for the surgeon, the comparison is nothing alike. The surgeon is the person responsible for the life, not the person in the other room saying it's ok to start. Plus the surgeon makes significantly more so they can afford day care and almost likely has the option to use the day care at the hospital. If we wanted to panic about something, lets start with JFK's children playing in the oval office, then we can pick on a controller.

ON THE SURFACE, WITH THE FATHER WATCHING SEEMS TO NO PROBLEM. CUTE

NO.
NOT A PLACE FOR CHILDREN PERIOD.
FATHER USED BAD JUDGEMENT.

FATHER SHOULD GET A STRONG REPRIMAND AT THE LEAST

This whole situation has been blown way out of proportion. The kids were not "directing" the traffic. They were simply saying what the father was telling them to. If the father had gone out for a cigarette break and let the kids give clearance, there would obviously be a problem. I had listened to the recordings numerous times before the media coverage, and thought it was cute; it was certainly not dangerous. They weren't looking at radar and making the decisions. I bet at the time they felt real special, by doing such a simple thing. Now their Dad is suspended. Such a shame. From the recordings, it sounded like it made the flight deck officers day too.

The father used NO JUDGEMENT, and should get reprimanded or fired! His actions show a total lack of common sense and professionalism. A child does not belong in the control tower anymore then in the cockpit.

>>"Most of the time, parents tend to make the correct choices about what's safe for their children to be doing and what isn't."

I strongly disagree with you there. Have you seen American parenting lately? It's getting worse.

The reason people are getting so defensive is because nothing bad happened on that day. What if it had? What if that traffic controller had been so distracted trying to show his son a good time that he made a small mistake that cost two hundred people their lives? I agree with the author; this is comparable to a surgeon letting his child participate in the operating room. It is unprofessional, unacceptable, and just because nothing bad happened doesn't mean the risk for it wasn't greatly increased. Sure, the kid said exactly what his dad told him to, but his dad, the pilots, and everyone in the room were distracted while hundreds of people were trusting them with their lives.

People need to wake up and realize that they only got lucky nothing bad happened, because if it had, those same people would be in an uproar about how bad of an idea it was to let a child control air traffic.

Let me repeat that: a child... control air traffic. Wake up.

I got to drive a train when I was a kid. It was a tremendously memorable experience.

People are over-reacting. If the kid made a mistake, the father would have stepped in to correct. Not to mention, the pilots were deftly aware that it was the son. There was no danger.

Everyone should get their heads out of their asses and lighten up.

It's simple a matter of resposbility. No matter what the outcome was, but this is a serious transgression on AT controller's part and he must be reprimanded for this intentional carelessness. It is not just a matter between Air Traffic Controller and Pilots, it involves severe consiquencies for all those poeple sitting in the plane and assuming every person involved in this chain of events is doing their job seriously. If you want to lighten-up take a break, but when you report back to job ... better get serious and start paying attention.

Our air transport system stays safe only when people obey the rules. As soon as you start overstepping boundaries - regardless of how innocent and harmless it seems - you're showing disrespect for those rules. It doesn't matter that 'nothing happened'. The rules are there to maintain a maximum distance between safe and unsafe conditions, not to provide wiggle-room for unprofessional idiots.

I once worked at a place where people not only brought their kids to work when they couldn't find a sitter, but they also brought their dogs in too! It may not be a distraction for the parent or pet owner, but it sure is a distraction to others who are trying to concentrate on their work. THAT is the real problem here. These controllers and supervisors should not only have been suspended, they should have been TERMINATED.

Maybe, those people who think this is okay should get on the plane and have the airport controllers' son/daughter directing their flight. Now...are you relaxing, yet! These are the people that need to wake up. It is a professional job but a daycare.

For those who say we should lighten up about kids and air travel, google Aeroflot Flight 593. I'm sure the father didn't think it was a big deal to let his kids in the pilot's seat either.

The kids themselves should have realized they were not qualified to do what they were being asked to do. The fact that they did it anyway...inexcusable. They should be hanged, along with the father and the supervisor and probably the pilot who didn't put a stop to it.

Not really. Get a grip people. Has no one ever visited their parent at work and been allowed to throw the lever or do some small task. It is still the employee who is dictating what is being done, he is just telling someone else how to do it briefly. The fact that there was no problem with this should be plain evidence that this is nothing more than harmless fun.

Not really. Everyone involved should be slowly tortured to death. Except the kids, who should be skinned alive.

Check out Aeroflot Flight 593

Send this kid to Gitmo!

I would just like to thank the author for finally admitting what every working mother has been dying to have a man say. Finally the admittle that suggests that any working mother who doesn't make enough money for daycare but works harder than any man and has to bring their child to work for a short period of time, is unprofessional and will never be. And certainly they should lose their jobs over it, who cares that now they are making less amounts of money and now can't get daycare to even interview for a new job much less feed their children.

I just thought I should share how utterly brain dead you all sound. He should not have been terminated maybe suspension without pay or something of the such but certainly not termination. The child did no harm. I trust our pilots and air pilot controllers enough to think they would be cautious enough that if their was impending danger they could handle it accordingly even with a child in the room. God knows there are thousands of people who multi-task with kids in the room all over the world.

'Get a life' commenters should realize there are examples of accidents caused by letting children to the controls in an apparently harmless situation.
This was fun, yes, and no, probably there was no danger. Still, this is a breach of security, and I don't want that when I am on the plane, thanks for asking.

Once again the media ruined a perfectly memorable moment for both the father and the children. I hate to waste my time with this nonsense, but I need to show my point of view somehow. Personally, I feel that yes – there may have been a slight lack of professional judgment from part of the ATC. However, we need to remember that no lives where EVER in danger. As a matter of fact, I believe the child was talking to aircrafts already on the ground. It’s not like he was advising an airplane to turn right heading 160 and descend and maintain 10,000.

The general public in all there ignorance allows the media to control the way they think. Had the media not become involved – the FAA might have handled this in a different way and the ATC might have most likely not lost his or lose his job. As far as breach of security – come on… are they serious?

This is another perfect example why the United States is in the shape it is with little or no love among family members. People complain that fathers today with there busy schedules don’t spend much time with their children…. Well, this father wanted to impress his kids by allowing them to do something which they would remember forever.

The ATC knew that no lives were going to be in danger by what his kids where going to do. However, I am sure that some policies were in place regarding what happened. I believe that yes – he should be reprimanded in some way… However, the ATC should NOT lose his job/career due to the ignorance of the public and the exploitation of his story by the media in order to gain ratings. Someone’s job is at stake here – and in these times that is tough… Have some decency to not exaggerate with your stories.

When I was a child, I was allowed to take controls of an airplane during take-off and while in mid-air; how is that any different from a child being allowed to simply talk to pilots and hand them advise them to contact other towers….

That is my point of view…. Let’s see how this story pans out…. Wish you luck ATC/family.

By the way - I thought they reviewed these comments... WHY is McBean's ridiculous comment allowed to be posted here...

Eltee - do you really believe that letting a 15 year old actually FLY an airplane is comparable with letting a 10 year repeat instructions over a radio? The 10 yr old was not directing air traffic, he was simply relaying instructions that a trained professional gave him.

VIA FAX: 1-866-418-0232, U.S. MAIL, and E-MAIL:
fccinfo@fcc.gov
Chairman Julius Genachowski
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street SW, Room: 8-B201
Washington, DC 20554 USA

Re: Demand For Enforcement Action Against FAA “Supervisors” Shawn Simms and Dana Rose[-]Kelly

Dear Chairman Genachowski:

I am an attorney in New York. I am a former Communications Law student of Charles Firestone. Although you and I know other folks in common, we have not spoken previously.

I am herewith demanding that your Federal Communications Commission (FCC) take immediate enforcement action against the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), against JFK Airport (JFK), against the Port Authority of NY & NJ (PA) - and specifically, against FAA so-called “Supervisors” Shawn Simms (“Simms”) and Dana Rose[-]Kelly (“Kelly”).

“Supervisors” Simms and Rose[-]Kelly should be fined, and then thrown in jail.

As for FAA, JFK, and PA – their respective radio licenses to transmit on aviation frequencies at JFK should be pulled - and the oafs like FAA ATO “Head” Hank Krakowski and FAA “Administrator” Randy Babbitt who let this happen, should be fired by President Obama.

Every right-thinking American was disgusted to learn that a misguided air traffic controller named Glenn Duffy allowed his 9-year old twin children to play air traffic controller – making live radio calls - on live frequencies - working live air traffic - on two successive work-days circa February 16, 2010:
http://www.1010wins.com/Boy-Caught-Directing-JFK-Traffic/6485851
http://wcbstv.com/local/kids.in.jfk.2.1536569.html

Even more disgusting is the way that misguided other controllers and pilots have now sought to come to Duffy’s “aid”, seeking to PR-minimize the danger inherent in Duffy’s aero-transgressions, for their own purely partisan reasons:
http://indictsturgell.blogspot.com/2010/03/then-those-pilots-are-idiots-and-so-are.html
http://gettheflick.blogspot.com/2010/03/i-cant-forget.html
http://gettheflick.blogspot.com/2010/03/when-daddy-let-me-drive.html
http://www.faafollies.com/?p=1576

According to the audio recordings of the subject multiple events, the two Duffy kids worked live air traffic in at least 7 or 8 different separate situations at JFK Airport in February 2010. Any passenger on one of the planes would want to grab Duffy by the lapels, or worse. Imagine if a surgeon operating on a family member were to bring his kids to work to make incisions.

But the FAA management bozos ultimately responsible for needlessly risking hundreds of lives in the air, and on the ground below, those two successive Duffy-incident days, are so called FAA “Supervisors” Shawn Simms and Dana Rose[-]Kelly, according to the New York Daily News:
http://indictsturgell.blogspot.com/2010/03/then-those-pilots-are-idiots-and-so-are.html

As for United States Code, Title 18, Sections 32 and 1464, both of which are felony statutes:

Section 32 provides, in pertinent part :

(a) Whoever willfully…

(6) communicates information, knowing the information to be false, and under circumstances in which such information may reasonably be believed, thereby endangering the safety of any aircraft in flight; . . .

shall be fined not more than (US)$100,000 or imprisoned not more than twenty (20) years, or both.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000032----000-.html

Section 1464 provides :

Whoever utters any obscene, indecent, or profane language by means of radio communications shall be fined not more than (US)$10,000 or imprisoned not more than two (2) years, or both.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00001464----000-.html

The false information under Section 32, was the very pair of 9-year-old kids feigning to be an air traffic controllers while working live air traffic. FAA Supervisors Simms and Rose[-]Kelly caused the communication of that false information. Additionally, FAA “Supervisors” Simms and Kelly in their dereliction of duty at minimum clearly caused indecent radio communications to be transmitted on the airwaves. By my calculations, your FCC should fine each of these FAA management clowns at least US$110,000, and then you should throw each of them in jail for no less twenty (22) years apiece. Of course, you could comfit yourself instead, in the fact that FAA and USDOT Secretary Ray LaHood just gave them a televised tantrum and a slap on the wrist. I am sure that that will prove to be a very powerful deterrent militating against future willful violations of the Federal Communications Act and your own jurisdiction.

Your FCC professes to care about prohibiting unauthorized radio transmissions in other contexts:
http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/files/phantom.pdf

And your FCC professes concern about the growing Homeland Security threat of “intrusion” on the supposedly federally-protected airwaves - e.g.,
http://www.tpub.com/content/istts/14222/css/14222_88.htm

You have an obvious continuing major Homeland Security concern at New York’s JFK Airport, coupled with the fact that FAA has made this particular airport significantly more dangerous to the traveling public and the overflown due to the recent closure of one of JFK’s major runways:
http://gettheflick.blogspot.com/2010/02/paying-attention-march-edition.html

So my question to you, FCC Commissioner Genachowski, is - why has FCC seemingly done nothing to date regarding the February 2010 unauthorized Duffy family, Simms and Rose[-]Kelly sanctioned radio transmissions?

Are you just going to let it ride?

Are you just going to let FAA “handle it”?

Very truly yours,

John J. Tormey III, Esq.

Regardless this action is save or not, rules are rules, I agree with with action. If I am knownly run a red light while driving, even I did not cause any accident, I will have a ticket, Try to same logic with the cops.

Next thing you know, Homer Simpon is going to sit Bart behind the controls at the ol' nuclear power plant!

The incident in question does not alarm me. It is not comparable to the surgeon allowing a child to assist. It is more like an executive having an office assistant take an important dictation, and then watching as the words are recorded.

The only sensible objection I've seen here is that kids in the control tower could be a general distraction to the other personnel.

What I really have a problem with is the reply from John J. Tormey III, Esq. Good Grief! "Every right-thinking American" who reads that piece of lawyer-speak should be alarmed at what lawyers have done to this country. He starts out by asserting that anyone who does not think his way is not "right-thinking", and moves on to demand that those responsible for air traffic control should lose their radio transmission licensing. So, his reaction is to address this error in judgment, by removing the air traffic control all together! He isn't interested in a useful, sane, or common sense response. He is interested in forcing some legally supported overreaction that serves no-one, and costs the tax payer millions of dollars in legal defense, and forced procedural encumbrance. Let's watch how much money ends up in the hands of lawyers if this becomes a legal issue.

The comment of one-named-James misleads. Tormey's Quiet Rockland slammed FAA for free for the last 3 years. I transmit. They'd pull my radio license for doing that. Sims and Rose Kelley SHOULD get fined and arrested. And by the way, re anonyjames: is it Rise Kelley, thatvylling fo

Query if AnonyJames knows Simms, or Rose Kelly.

I agree with those who agree that safety was compromised with this incident. FAA Orders were ignored. The news media should not be blamed for blowing the story out of proportion. They are simply doing their jobs. Since we live in an information age, the controllers had a responsibility to assure that, because of the extensive availability of taped tranmissions to the public, those transmissions be "clean", correct and professional.

John Tormey III is right to address the USC codes, because that and other FAA Orders are going to be the basis for the FAA's disciplinary action. However, I question his referral to the FCC, as I never held an FCC license as a controller. Just trying to be correct.

1. My March 12 demand letter to FCC carefully avoided any call to pull the "radio license" of, [or bash], any individual air traffic controller. That was because to my knowledge “MY” is correct insofar as individual ATC's don't need an individual FCC license to do their work. Yet with all due respect, MY is incorrect to question the referral to FCC. FCC still requires a radio license from the aviation facility itself, as opposed to the individual. Have a look at the many pages of Port Authority (PA) licenses at the FCC website. This below link, for example, takes you to a PA license for JFK Airport itself:
wireless2[dot]fcc[dot]gov[slash]UlsApp[slash]UlsSearch[slash]license[dot]jsp?licKey=1285146

2. FCC has now opened a file and commenced inquiry into the kiddie-on-the-radio ATC JFK incident - at my request. If the “James Gang” spent less time sniping on message-boards, and spent more time making government work to protect the people instead, then this big blue marble would be much safer a place.

3. Victor’s post attempts are appreciated. Quiet Rockland has lawfully attacked FAA since 2007 for FAA’s failure to maintain aviation safety. All of our time and efforts are donated to the cause, period. I wouldn’t doubt that the James Gang itself includes FAA Supervisors Simms and Rose-Kelly. In any event their weak attempt at lawyer-bashing is a pedestrian irrelevant yawn. The fact is, kids on aviation frequencies poses a legal and security problem whether you like it or not. It requires a legal and secure solution. If FCC drops the ball on the investigation, Justice will be the next Department asked to pursue criminal charges against Simms and Rose-Kelly. I promise you that. “Removing air traffic control all together[sic]” was not contained anywhere in my March 12 demand letter to FCC. Once Simms and Rose-Kelly pay the fines and do the time, and FCC pulls the facility licenses, FCC can re-issue new licenses in its discretion at the very next moment thereafter – once we know that new and different people run those FCC-licensee air-traffic facilities. But the point is, FCC shouldn’t be licensing Homeland Security-sensitive frequencies to facilities where perps like Simms, Rose-Kelly, and other FAA mis-managers can mangle them. That detritus clean-out won’t cost the “tax payer[sic] millions of dollars in legal defense”. License revocation is a letter. License issuance is a letter. And nailing Simms and Rose-Kelly is easy. Exhibit “A” is already on audiotape, on virtually every news organization server in the world. “Lawyer-speak[sic]”? Sounds like common sense to me. A first-year prosecutor could put those jokers away. For that matter, maybe even a 9-year-old kid could do it.

Thanks for the info. I suspected that the FCC license might be a collective thing but didn't get to a web search. Your viewpoint, as an attorney, is very important for the public to understand, as controllers are taught from day one that transmissions on frequency and application of procedures can at anytime come back in the form of a lawsuit from an airport user. FAA rules are spelled out on that and are not negotiable.

James, your comment about distraction is the key word. Distraction is a safety issue.