Sounds like he picked the wrong week to quite sniffing glue.

If only there had been some unified group of ATCs who could have complained to management about the dangers of only having one ATC on alone at night......

Of course, then that'd be socialism.

Cataholic: Millions of people in the US work at night without falling asleep.

Having worked 3rd shift for over 25 years I can tell you that your generalization is incorrect. There is typically more than one person in other jobs, so when you run off to take a nap for your lunch break, they are there to wake you up in an emergency. As I understand it, there is only one ATC in the tower.
This is your budget cutting btw.

Whats an ATC schedule like? do they work rotating shifts or do they pretty much keep to the same schedule for months at a time.

You can't stop humans from needing sleep and falling asleep when over tired. Staffing cuts mean that there is only one controller on duty, and most of the time it is pretty boring... zzzzzzz. You've all done it yourselves. I never fell asleep while driving either, but I know people that did, and I can see how it could happen in a situation where you can't take a break. The more you cut, and the more you goof with their schedules, the more this will happen, there isn't much that can be done about it.

This text is now purple: How much traffic is there on the overnight? Most airports have landing restrictions between roughly midnight and 6am. The only traffic is a handful of overnighting international flights and red-eyes. Considering there's no traffic to avoid either in the air or on the ground, how much do ATCs need to do?

Apparently there is enough for this to be a problem. It does vary airport to airport. My local airport closes around midnight when the last flight comes in, but LAX runs 24/7. I do know a controller, and his airport runs similar to mine.
There should be two controllers on at night for safety reasons. What if one keels over from a heart attack? What if there is some other type of emergency? ATCs are one of the few groups of people who actually earn what they are worth.
The policy should be two ATCs in the tower at all times.

Cataholic: In all the different jobs I've ever held, I never felt the need to take a nap during my lunch break. Work is for working, home is for sleeping.

I'm glad that you've never held a job in which lack of alertness could potentially cause someone their life.

You know, the real issue is the fact they staff the towers that late in the first place. Some airports absolutely need it (think major hubs here) but Reno? If you're handling a plane or two per hour, an operating tower is not necessary.

The problem is that some of the airlines will not operate at an uncontrolled airport, therefore the airport operator has to make the decision to staff 24 hours or jeopardize that revenue. The FAA, in it's infinite wisdom, staffs the cab with one person and allows no "distractions." There's no way I'd be able to stay awake - circadian rhythms, how do they work? Plus, it's dark, quiet and cool. No way in hell.

As to the farker who suggested we automate: there has been a lot of progress toward that, but until the airplanes can separate themselves it won't happen, and because the existing airspace infrastructure relies on aerial "highways," plus the myriad restricted and military operating airspace, there is no practical way as of yet to operate in a "free flight" environment - too much traffic concentrated in narrow corridors.

Long-range, ground-based prediction is next to impossible because flight tracks, while predictable in general route, are chaotic due to wind and weather, ground delays, emergencies, airport capacity, and non-participating aircraft. There isn't a computer in the world that could handle all that and ensure both passenger comfort and fuel efficiency/safety at the same time. Way too dynamic and complex. Trust me, fallible as we are, you want humans on both ends of the loop on this one.

Mr Rusty Shackleford: Charlie Freak: As to the farker who suggested we automate: there has been a lot of progress toward that, but until the airplanes can separate themselves it won't happen, and because the existing airspace infrastructure relies on aerial "highways," plus the myriad restricted and military operating airspace, there is no practical way as of yet to operate in a "free flight" environment - too much traffic concentrated in narrow corridors.

Okay, I get that we might be far off from full automation where in the planes also respond automatically. But, at the least I would imagine it straightforward to implement a system that can observe what ATCs are observing, and programmatically decide, using roughly the same guidelines as a human, where the planes should be. Managing trajectories, altitudes, climb rates, etc... seems very manageable from a computation perspective.

This system could broadcast the same mechanism ATC uses today using some automated computer voice and voice recognition for acknowledgement. Seems quite easy compared to a full scale automation and avoidance system built into aircraft themselves, no?

I can see where you're coming from; unfortunately there are too many dynamics to consider in real-world application using today's computing power.

First of all, an aircraft's performance is highly dependent on atmospheric conditions - wind, temperature, pressure, and humidity. To accurately predict an aircraft's path during, say, the climbout phase, you have to know the exact conditions during each point along that climb - which is not only changing in altitude, but the conditions are changing over time. Also, the aircraft comes in to play - no two aircraft (even of the same model) behave the same, and weight (payload plus fuel load) come into play.

This may seem insignificant, but seconds can mean the difference between an aircraft making or missing a crossing restriction and causing a traffic conflict. This wouldn't be an issue if there were 10 airports in the country, but last time I checked there are well above 10,000, with approach paths that criss-cross each other like the figmentative chemtrails.

But I digress... now, throw in an aircraft-killing thunderstorm, or for more fun a line or clusters of them - spawning or dying at random moments, moving this way then that. The WSR-88D weather radar system does not have the resolution nor the speed for accurate avoidance, so once again it's up to the onboard weather radar or the good old Mark I eyeball to avoid those things in 3-D.

Oh sure, you could throw in large safety margins, but that will go to hell the first time the automated ATC system sends a plane bound from Minneapolis to Denver all the way to New Orleans to avoid cells over Nebraska and all the other airplanes diverting around them. No, you need the human instinct and ability to quickly adapt to find a way through (or whatever).

Same goes for turbulence. What would the imagined computer do when an area of airspace is suddenly invalidated? How about a large, moving, dynamic, invisible block of airspace?

How about when an airport gets a wind shift and has to change runways? How is a computer going to knock everybody out of the pattern (each of them with differing performance capabilities and none of them at a predetermined point!) and start over?

All that said, an aircraft itself is much better at calculating where it's going to be than a computer on the ground because it only needs to know where it's going to be, as opposed to every aircraft in the sky. Today's computers (along with the pilots that program them) are up to that task, but that's about it.

Throw in aircraft-mounted datalink and predictive systems like ADS-B and TCAS and each aircraft can form its own protective "bubble" of airspace.

That's the best we're going to do until we have the technology to not only datalink every aircraft's flight management system, but the ability to pinpoint and predict atmospheric conditions and areas of significant weather down to the mile.

Nothing can replace the human abilities of instinct and improvisation.

In short, it ain't happening any time soon.

Post all the ironic .jpgs you can find of Rand and Reagan and whoever else gets your rocks off, but one fact remains: it has been almost ten years since the last major passenger airline crash.

That means these guys are either (a) whining; (b) unnecessary; or (c) both.

Charlie Freak: I can see where you're coming from; unfortunately there are too many dynamics to consider in real-world application using today's computing power.

Meanwhile, JPL can drop a dime on Titan from orbit, and then land on it using tech from 20+ years ago.

Man On Pink Corner: Charlie Freak: I can see where you're coming from; unfortunately there are too many dynamics to consider in real-world application using today's computing power.

Meanwhile, JPL can drop a dime on Titan from orbit, and then land on it using tech from 20+ years ago.

True that, though there is a lot less chaos in that problem.

Most of the problems in our ATC system are due to variables. You could likely come up with a system that does prediction well enough in the cruise phase of flight, but it's departure and arrival at the myriad airports, and the resulting backups that are going to flummox the attempt.

JPINFV: This text is now purple: How much traffic is there on the overnight? Most airports have landing restrictions between roughly midnight and 6am. The only traffic is a handful of overnighting international flights and red-eyes. Considering there's no traffic to avoid either in the air or on the ground, how much do ATCs need to do?

As I understand it, the problem with the overnight landings is that a lot of airports have a lot of ground activity with vehicles doing maintenance and positioning aircraft for the next day. Take out all of the vehicles and, yea, pilots should be able to land safely treating it as an uncontrolled aircraft. However the first time a plane lands and takes out a work crew or a plane being ferried across the active runway, and you're going to see the lawsuits fly.

Good point.

washburn311: xl5150: borg: Whats an ATC schedule like? do they work rotating shifts or do they pretty much keep to the same schedule for months at a time.

We call the schedule "the rattler." Two swings, two days, and a mid. In my case, this equates to:

Friday and Saturday off

3pm - 11pm Sunday
2pm - 10pm Monday
7am - 3pm Tuesday
6am - 2pm Wednesday
off 8 hours, then back for 10pm - 6am

This is probably the most common ATC schedule. That last day is a real in kick in the sack. I can usually only get a couple hour long nap and then have to go back in to work until the sun comes up. You build up a pretty big sleep deficit by the end of the week.

With all the studies out there on sleep patterns and their effect on physical and mental health, you'd think we wouldn't still be doing this in 2011.

I'm sure the word "safety" is plastered all over these places. Management talks about safety being the number one priority, holds safety meetings regularly, gives out safety awards, and withholds raises and bonuses for safety violations.

But when it costs them money, safety all of the sudden takes a back seat.

Sleeping on an eight or ten hour night shift shouldn't be tolerated. But it happens. I've been working rotating shifts for twelve years now, and I take a lot of pride in not sleeping on the job. However, some of the guys I work with are in their late fifties and early sixties, and have no such pride issues.

I work in an environment like air traffic control where people's lives are at stake if I do not respond in a timely manner, so I know what kind of pressure they are under. It is unconscionable that management in these types of occupations put people at risk by under-staffing during the night shifts. We have only been dealing with this for about a year, and so far it has not come back to bite us in the ass. But it's only a matter of time before someone passes out, has a heart attack, or is taking a dump when something life-threatening happens. It is inevitable. But the powers that be would rather save a hundred grand or so in salary and benes per year then have adequate coverage during the night.

It's all about money, and money trumps safety every time, no matter what the company preaches.

Until someone gets killed.