Narrative:

While working a radar handoff position in the jfk sector at new york TRACON; I was witness to the following. We had been landing runway 13L; departing runway 13R. There was an enormous volume of arrival traffic; and we were holding a lot of aircraft because we only had 1 arrival runway. The winds were out of the northwest (040 degrees at 8-10 KTS); which did not allow us to use runway 22L as an overflow runway. Mr X from traffic management came down to the sector and asked why we could not take the aircraft we were holding at camrn intersection to runway 22L. The coordinator stated to him that there was a tailwind on the approach and the winds were 040 degrees at 8 KTS at the time. We had been asking aircraft if they wanted to approach on initial check-in; but made sure to give them the current surface winds. Most aircraft denied the approach. This supervisor then said to the coordinator; 'well then don't tell the aircraft the wind; just assign them the runway.' although I am not sure if this was a direct order; we still gave the surface winds to the arriving aircraft anyway; as it would be unsafe not to. The fact that this particular supervisor wanted us to omit crucial safety related information to aircraft; so we would get more aircraft on the ground and out of a holding pattern was downright scary. This individual (and this unit of the FAA) has a total disregard for aviation safety; and is purely concerned with efficiency; even if it costs human lives.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: N90 CTLR ALLEGED SUPVR DIRECTED CTLRS TO OMIT WIND INFO IN ORDER TO UTILIZE OVERFLOW RWY DURING BUSY HOLDING OPS.

Narrative: WHILE WORKING A RADAR HDOF POS IN THE JFK SECTOR AT NEW YORK TRACON; I WAS WITNESS TO THE FOLLOWING. WE HAD BEEN LNDG RWY 13L; DEPARTING RWY 13R. THERE WAS AN ENORMOUS VOLUME OF ARR TFC; AND WE WERE HOLDING A LOT OF ACFT BECAUSE WE ONLY HAD 1 ARR RWY. THE WINDS WERE OUT OF THE NW (040 DEGS AT 8-10 KTS); WHICH DID NOT ALLOW US TO USE RWY 22L AS AN OVERFLOW RWY. MR X FROM TFC MGMNT CAME DOWN TO THE SECTOR AND ASKED WHY WE COULD NOT TAKE THE ACFT WE WERE HOLDING AT CAMRN INTXN TO RWY 22L. THE COORDINATOR STATED TO HIM THAT THERE WAS A TAILWIND ON THE APCH AND THE WINDS WERE 040 DEGS AT 8 KTS AT THE TIME. WE HAD BEEN ASKING ACFT IF THEY WANTED TO APCH ON INITIAL CHK-IN; BUT MADE SURE TO GIVE THEM THE CURRENT SURFACE WINDS. MOST ACFT DENIED THE APCH. THIS SUPVR THEN SAID TO THE COORDINATOR; 'WELL THEN DON'T TELL THE ACFT THE WIND; JUST ASSIGN THEM THE RWY.' ALTHOUGH I AM NOT SURE IF THIS WAS A DIRECT ORDER; WE STILL GAVE THE SURFACE WINDS TO THE ARRIVING ACFT ANYWAY; AS IT WOULD BE UNSAFE NOT TO. THE FACT THAT THIS PARTICULAR SUPVR WANTED US TO OMIT CRUCIAL SAFETY RELATED INFO TO ACFT; SO WE WOULD GET MORE ACFT ON THE GND AND OUT OF A HOLDING PATTERN WAS DOWNRIGHT SCARY. THIS INDIVIDUAL (AND THIS UNIT OF THE FAA) HAS A TOTAL DISREGARD FOR AVIATION SAFETY; AND IS PURELY CONCERNED WITH EFFICIENCY; EVEN IF IT COSTS HUMAN LIVES.

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.