|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||1201 To 1800|
|Locale Reference||atc facility : huf.tower|
|Affiliation||government : faa|
|Function||controller : local|
|Qualification||controller : radar|
|Experience||controller radar : 18|
controller time certified in position1 : 18
|Anomaly||other anomaly other|
|Independent Detector||atc equipment other atc equipment : loc alarm|
|Resolutory Action||none taken : anomaly accepted|
Maintenance Human Performance
|ATC Facility||other physical facility|
The localizer at huf went into alarm; indicating that it was OTS. After giving it enough time to reset itself; the alarm continued; so we called mid-states mocc to report it OTS. Upon reporting it to them; we were told that they would not call it OTS until we had a PIREP to verify it. Traffic was slow; so the localizer remained in alarm for approximately 7 hours before we could verify it with a PIREP. Per the 7210.3; paragraph 3-5-1; a PIREP is only required if the monitor equipment is suspect. I can never recall the localizer going into alarm here when it was found to be the fault of the monitoring equipment. Per the 7210.3; paragraph 3-5-2B and B4; I am to discontinue the use of this equipment and report it OTS if it goes into alarm and does not reset on its own. I find this latest instance of the FAA running air traffic on the basis of a business model instead of a safety model to be reprehensible. Since the mocc will not call equipment OTS and issue the appropriate NOTAM when it is in alarm; the next time this happens; I will call FSS myself (if I can even get a hold of them; but I digress...) and issue the NOTAM. The only problem with this plan of action is that I can't go out and actually fix the localizer myself. We'll still need a PIREP to get the equipment back in service; no matter how many hours the restoration may be delayed. Since when does a government agency just get to make up their own rules as they go; supposedly to save a buck; at the expense of safety; in direct opposition to a published order?
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: HUF CTLR EXPRESSED FRUSTRATION REGARDING MAINT REFUSAL TO CONSIDER THE ILS LOC OTS BASED UPON MONITOR INDICATIONS; INSISTING ON A PIREP.
Narrative: THE LOC AT HUF WENT INTO ALARM; INDICATING THAT IT WAS OTS. AFTER GIVING IT ENOUGH TIME TO RESET ITSELF; THE ALARM CONTINUED; SO WE CALLED MID-STATES MOCC TO RPT IT OTS. UPON RPTING IT TO THEM; WE WERE TOLD THAT THEY WOULD NOT CALL IT OTS UNTIL WE HAD A PIREP TO VERIFY IT. TFC WAS SLOW; SO THE LOC REMAINED IN ALARM FOR APPROX 7 HRS BEFORE WE COULD VERIFY IT WITH A PIREP. PER THE 7210.3; PARAGRAPH 3-5-1; A PIREP IS ONLY REQUIRED IF THE MONITOR EQUIP IS SUSPECT. I CAN NEVER RECALL THE LOC GOING INTO ALARM HERE WHEN IT WAS FOUND TO BE THE FAULT OF THE MONITORING EQUIP. PER THE 7210.3; PARAGRAPH 3-5-2B AND B4; I AM TO DISCONTINUE THE USE OF THIS EQUIP AND RPT IT OTS IF IT GOES INTO ALARM AND DOES NOT RESET ON ITS OWN. I FIND THIS LATEST INSTANCE OF THE FAA RUNNING AIR TFC ON THE BASIS OF A BUSINESS MODEL INSTEAD OF A SAFETY MODEL TO BE REPREHENSIBLE. SINCE THE MOCC WILL NOT CALL EQUIP OTS AND ISSUE THE APPROPRIATE NOTAM WHEN IT IS IN ALARM; THE NEXT TIME THIS HAPPENS; I WILL CALL FSS MYSELF (IF I CAN EVEN GET A HOLD OF THEM; BUT I DIGRESS...) AND ISSUE THE NOTAM. THE ONLY PROB WITH THIS PLAN OF ACTION IS THAT I CAN'T GO OUT AND ACTUALLY FIX THE LOC MYSELF. WE'LL STILL NEED A PIREP TO GET THE EQUIP BACK IN SVC; NO MATTER HOW MANY HRS THE RESTORATION MAY BE DELAYED. SINCE WHEN DOES A GOV AGENCY JUST GET TO MAKE UP THEIR OWN RULES AS THEY GO; SUPPOSEDLY TO SAVE A BUCK; AT THE EXPENSE OF SAFETY; IN DIRECT OPPOSITION TO A PUBLISHED ORDER?
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.