Humans have a powerful need to affix blame and punish individuals. On the internet, you are forever the worst moment of your life.

We set air traffic controllers up to fail, and then when something goes wrong we torture them until they die, and then torture their memory after they die.

Pretty easy!

It doesn't serve us well to act like this administration is anything other than extremely aberrational.

1: https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/cleared-to-collide-the-c...

Deciding to change policies to effect the recommendation isn't their role. That's why you will so often see a safety investigatory body repeatedly recommend the same thing. The UK's RAIB (which is for Rail investigations) for example will often call out why a fatal accident they've investigated wouldn't have happened if the regulator had implemented some prior recommendation, either one they're slow walking or have rejected.

The investigators don't need to care about other factors. Are melons too expensive? Not their problem. Only unfriendly countries grow melons? Not their problem. They only need to care about recommending things that would prevent future harm which is their purpose.

And if it was the role of investigators to change policy, then there would be enormous pressure from industry to reach convenient conclusions, poisoning the investigation process.

https://www.airlinepilotforums.com

You will see many are terrified ( in commercial pilot terms...) of flying into La Guardia or JFK...

Just a quick read/speculation based on the linked forum post...

Short of insane visibility conditions that prevented them from seeing the plane coming, the firetruck operator seems to be the liable party (beyond the airport for understaffing controllers—this seems to be exacerbated by government cuts but that's still no excuse for having a solo controller at that busy of an airport, especially at night).

The controller in question seems to have caught their mistake quickly and reversed the order instead asking the firetruck to stop (but for some reason, this wasn't heard).

Is it common now to have solo operators running control towers?

AC No: 150/5210-20A - "Subject: Ground Vehicle Operations to include Taxiing or Towing an Aircraft on Airports"

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/...

“you must ensure that you look both ways down the runway to visually acquire aircraft landing or departing even if you have a clearance to cross.”

These trucks seem to have pretty good visibility from inside. Not sure if La Guardia model was the same: https://youtu.be/rfILwYo3sXc

[1]https://www.avherald.com/h?article=536bb98e

Says at pag 9:

"While driving on an aerodrome : Clear left, ahead, above and right

Scan the full length of the runway and the approaches for possible landing aircraft before entering or crossing any runway, even if you have received a clearance."

They have mostly glass cabs for exactly that reason. Only thing that would block your view is a passenger in the right seat.

But if your truck has blind spots and vis is poor, you shouldn't be driving as fast if at all.

At Class D airports it’s always been the norm. But KLGA is Class B.

Also first time ATC told the truck to stop it wasn’t too clear who the message was addressed to. It’s a bit hard to hear “Truck1” there, not clear who he wants to stop. The second time, one can argue by the time “stop” command was heard it might have been better to gun the engine. As the truck sort of slowed down in the middle of the runway.

What government cuts? 2025 FAA air traffic budget was up around 7% from 2025

https://enotrans.org/article/senate-bill-oks-27-billion-faa-...

> The crash has raised fears that operations at US airports are under extreme stress. Airports have been dealing with a shortage of air traffic controllers, exacerbated by brutal federal government personnel cuts by Donald Trump’s administration at the start of his second presidency.

Not my opinion, just reading from there.

I'm just looking for: budget was X in <2026 and in 2026 it is Y, where X > Y

I am reminded of the Uberlingen disaster:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_%C3%9Cberlingen_mid-air_c...

Both precedents are applicable, because the Laguardia controller is also going to be savaged.

https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/cleared-to-collide-the-c...

0: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/rwsl

Empowering workers to make safety-critical meta-decisions does not seem to be a feature of actually-existing capitalism.

Well, what you are describing is a strike, and it is currently illegal for ATC to strike, so in theory one possible structural change would be to make it legal for the workers to do what you're describing.

[1] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-doges-cutbacks-at-the-...

I have voted based on getting particular people nominated within a federal agency, requires the President to pick someone who will 100% be from their party, and a Senate committee that will confirm them

people tend to think "I'm voting against my best interests" without knowing that the agency control was my best interest as it will most likely continue shaping an industry far beyond any particular administration

I could see that happening again with your abstract, vague, and ambiguous idea. Just say what you mean specifically, use your words, so I know if it's something that could steer my vote or not

So the odds I’m talking about the current administration are low

I wrote that I have voted for an agency appointment before, and the person I replied to also is suggesting to do that again

yes, only democrats use the meme “voting against their best interest”, sometimes this voting pattern includes or excludes them

vote in your local elections if the feds aren't involved the way you wish

The way I think about it is this: substandard ATC staffing is just as bad as lacking jetways or damaged runways. When the airport can't land planes because of physical capacity constraints, flights get cancelled or delayed (literally happening today at LGA, flights are getting canceled because they're down one runway). The carriers need to eat the costs of forcing too much demand on ATCs.

Running ATC (and limiting flights if necessary) seems like the job of the government to me.

Why put this on the carriers?

The idea that waste must be reduced is killing society, and this mindset must be addressed first before any other safety-critical system can be made reliable again.

Its previous head had a term that didn't expire until 2028 but he resigned after pressure from Elon Musk (who didn't like that he got fined), now a Trump-friendly head has been installed. What, realistically, would be the consequences if he lied? Likely none. Government officials lying on record is an every day occurrence these days.

That’s literally it. Anything else is speculation and extrapolation.

But don’t let that stop you if you already know what caused the tragedy.

It's scary that so many don't seem to know the difference. This is how misinformation starts and spreads.

The concept most certainly exists.

According to whom? Management, or controllers?

Certainly does not seem like controllers agree:

https://old.reddit.com/r/ATC/

The evidence that he was overworked seems pretty damned obvious. He forgot about an entire airplane and put a fire truck in its path. The evidence of overwork is strewn all around LGA.

What we are seeing here is the normalization of deviance.

I don't think people saying this stuff quite understand how busy LGA is even at night. I'd even go as far as to say that three minimum on duty with two in the tower at all times (for a ground/air split), would be the bare minimum for any hour or situation at LGA.

One last meta point. We live in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, and the highest air travel prices (some part is a function of longer distances I know). We should expect that we have ample coverage, if not over-coverage, at all times for one of our major metropolitan airports. Pay them.

ATC should never work alone at any of the "Core 30" airports. https://www.aspm.faa.gov/aspmhelp/index/Core_30.html

Often Approach will take over the "tower" and operate in crippled mode (no clearances to cross active runways, you must go down to the end kind of thing).

Some airports are uncontrolled at various times and would revert to that. Some airlines would require the pilot execute a missed approach and deviate to a towered airport, others may allow them to land.

However despite the downvotes I still haven't seen evidence that they were running understaffed at that moment.

What I do know is that the developing emergency on the tarmac due to an apparently hazardous smell in another plane is likely the cause of the confusion that led to this incident. That's a trigger that could have been exacerbated by fatigue but we don't have any evidence of that yet.

I think the disagreement you see is based on the definition of what "understaffed" means. Having one ATC to do ground and air control simultaneously seems like an under-staffing situation to begin with, regardless of whether it's a common practice.

Do we have evidence that one controller did all ground and air? The only evidence I've seen was the NY Times said that, according to a source, two controllers were working and two more were in the building.

In situations like this there is as lot of disinformation. The best thing to do is not add to it - a pile of bad information is not improved by piling more on. The best thing is to patiently find reliable info and stick to it.

> The best thing is to patiently find reliable info and stick to it.

No disagreement here

Why do you (or why does anyone) think that? My point in the GP was, I have yet to see evidence that there was only one controller, and I have seen evidence that there were two.

What happens when they need the bathroom, or have some kind of medical problem? If it's really a common case for one controller to handle things, the system itself needs to be fundamentally rethought.

So if said controller has a medical episode?

I'm going to pretend to know exactly what would happen in that precise scenario but I'm confident most commercial pilots get enough training to be able to handle it.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_cheese_model

You are defeating your own argument :-) Its exactly because every accident is an example of multiple things going wrong at the same time...that you need...multiple layers of control and safety to catch it through each hole of the cheese.

Like...another controller?

You need to recognize when something is out of the ordinary and treat it as an emergency (perhaps not a literal pan-pan/mayday emergency) sooner rather than later, and do things that may end up to have been unnecessary (like executing a go-around because emergency vehicles were on the move).

One controller on two frequencies is another example - that works fine in normal situations, but during an emergency response, perhaps the channels should be mixed; giving the pilots in the air a chance to hear the incorrect clearance onto their runway.

After all, an active runway is really more of an "air" control thing than a ground one.

“If we remove regulation and safety controls, things will be safer because everyone will be more careful.”

Because the parties involved would be more careful if there were no ATC?

In practice? It depends. Delays have a tendency to cascade in the air travel system and the Port Authority can curtail or cancel the curfew at their discretion. How frequently do exceptions to normal ops have to happen for it to be unreasonable to use "normal ops traffic" as a justification for scheduling a single controller? Ultimately, controllers have to control the traffic that they get, not the traffic that they want/expect to get, and a system that is overly optimized becomes brittle and unable to deal with exceptions to the norm.

Ever?

Mandatory scaffolding for roofing contractors would save some amount of deaths/injuries (and the related expenses) but add expenses to each job.

Some roofing firms refuse to operate without scaffolding; you pay for it or you find someone else.

A painter who does a bad job setting up a ladder is going to have a bad time, a lone ATC operator having a heart attack potentially puts multiple large aircraft full of people in danger...

How many fatal accidents are reasonable in your opinion?

Do you really think it's appropriate to have zero margin for handling unusually high ATC workloads? Because we just saw what happens when you have zero margin for handling unusually high ATC workloads: people start dying.

"2384, it is oder like a smoke odor ...like from fire?" - Control

"No, it was a weird odor. I don't know exactly how to describe it. But yeah... we can't get a hold of anyone at the ops for a gate assignment." - United pilot

"Ground, United 2384 is declaring an emergency. The flight attendants in the back are feeling ill because of the odor. We will need to go into an available gate at this time." - United pilot

"... the fire trucks are over there. They're going to bring a stair truck just in case you guys do want to evacuate. Let me know if you do." - Control

"Copy, yeah, we prefer to wait on a gate, but I mean, again, we only got so much time here because there's still a bit of odor in the back of the airplane." - United pilot

"646, number two, clear to land 4." - Control

"Truck one and company, cross four Delta." - Control

"Truck one and company, crossing four at Delta." - Truck 1

"Stop, stop, stop, stop, Truck 1. Stop,stop, stop. Stop, Truck 1, Stop." - Control

"That was - that wasn't good to watch." - Frontier pilot

"Yeah, I know. I was here. I tried to reach out to [inaudible]. We were dealing with an emergency earlier... um, I messed up." - Control

"No, man, you did the best you could." -Frontier pilot

Currently over 41% of facilities are reliant on mandatory overtime, with controllers frequently working 60-hour weeks with only four days off per month.

Counterpoint. It's Regen's fault. He's the guy who decided that a high priority of the government was making sure air traffic controllers had no power to fight back against being horrifically overworked (because unions are evil you see)

  1. outdated equipment
  2. staffing levels
  3. workload and fatigue

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1981_Professional_Air_Traffic_...

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/7311

originally passed as

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?edition=2023&num=0&req=g...

So arguably if Reagan had not fired them he would be failing to uphold the laws of the United States.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g95fiZCzjlo

Union rules that say only a particular classification of employee is allowed to pick up a small package from a loading dock and move it twenty feet are also bad.

The blame can go to the top, for not managing correctly.

The bottom line is: don't break things that are difficult or impossible to fix.

You could spend a ton of time and money automating the process, and probably should especially in the future with the proliferation of drones.

But in the meantime there are simple solutions. Tunnels. No ground vehicles should be crossing runways when then could go under.

Also, ground vehicles typically need to be on the ground for a reason. Why seperate them?

Was in three different unions. Union didn't do squat for me. Mainly kept my wages down and gave the friends of the union rep the best shifts.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47495739

I place no blame on the ATC as they were doing everything they could given the shit sandwich they were handed. I see this happening all over with staffs getting pared down to minimums, more (sometimes unpaid) over time, prices going up, and no raises.

Not many fatalities but nevertheless a spectacular collision. At a major hub airport in a major city. It’s hard to look away from, the cause is obvious, and all that without hundreds of deaths.

Imagine how good the next wake up call will be!

See also Preemptive Memorial Honors Future Victims Of Imminent Dam Disaster: https://theonion.com/preemptive-memorial-honors-future-victi...

Being an air-traffic controller anywhere in the world is a very intense job at times, and needs a huge amount of proficiency that only a small number of people are capable of doing. Couple that with:

- the FAA expects you to move to where ATCs are needed, so many of the qualified applicants give up when they hear where the posting is. You can't force them to take the job!

- the technology is decades out of date and the Brand New Air Traffic Control System (it's seriously called that) won't roll out until 2028 at the earliest

- Obama's FAA disincentivised its traditional "feeder" colleges that do ATC courses to "promote diversity", net outcome was fewer applicants

- Regan broke the union in the 1980s

- DOGE indiscriminately decimated the FAA like it did most other government departments

Not saying this is the right number of controllers to have, just sharing what I read in NYT.

Expecting a single person to consistently keep their mental picture clear and perfect for their entire career is asinine and irresponsible.

We need systems and tools to eliminate such errors and support people, not use them as a person to blame when things inevitably go wrong.

> But he [Sean Duffy] denied rumors that the tower had only one controller on duty.

The PATCO Strike of 1981 was a union-organized work stoppage by air traffic controllers (ATCs) in the United States. The Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO) declared a strike on August 3, 1981, after years of tension between controllers and the federal government over long hours, chronic understaffing, outdated equipment, and rising workplace stress. Despite 13,000 ATCs striking, the strike ultimately failed, as the Reagan administration was able to replace the striking ATCs, resulting in PATCO's decertification.

The failure of the PATCO strike impacted the American labor movement, accelerating the decline in labor unions in the country, and initiating a much more aggressive anti-union policy by the federal government and private sector employers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1981_Professional_Air_Traffic_...

Actually, you might be able to try this. Live ATC and radar is available.

Were they not operating correctly, or did the driver ignore them is one of the questions the investigation will answer.

The system is called Runway Status Lights. And in case there is a disagreement between the ATC clearance and the lights the drivers are supposed to not enter the runway.

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/rwsl

> When activated, these red lights indicate that ... there is an aircraft on final approach within the activation area

This pdf talks more about how it is implemented: https://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/default/files/WEB_Final_RWSL.p...

“RWSL is driven by fused multi-sensor surveillance system information. Using Airport Surface Detection Equipment-Model X (ASDE-X), external surveillance information is taken from three sources that provide position and other information for aircraft and vehicles on or near the airport surface. RWSL safety logic processes the surveillance information and commands the field lighting system to turn the runway status lights on and off in accordance with the motion of the detected traffic.”

When did this lunacy become an arguable position?

We have TCAS/ACAS in air, but no similar automatic safety guards near/on the field?

I'm just tired of bullshit rhetoric. 33 is less than 37, that's "understaffed" not "very well staffed". Fuck Sean and our "leaders"... they speak with unauthority and spiritlessness.

Aeronautics, yes, but I was still surprised to see NASA and not the FAA here. But folllowing up here https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/overview/immunity.html

> The FAA determined that ASRP effectiveness would be greatly enhanced if NASA, rather than the FAA, accomplished the receipt, processing, and analysis of raw data. This would ensure the anonymity of the reporter and of all parties involved in a reported occurrence or incident and, consequently, increase the flow of information necessary for the effective evaluation of the safety and efficiency of the NAS.

Very neat. It's by design. Well done.

0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlocking

0: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/rwsl

Is it definitely safe to cross the runway in a vehicle moving a normal speed up to the moment before the lights turn red? Is it safe for a little bit afterward? Or is it unsafe even a little before the lights turn red?

I wonder if it'd even be reliable to see such a plane coming fast enough.

Now multiply that by the dozens of planes in your vicinity, and by the 100ish big US airports.

That isn't even beyond the top speed of a car, which non-trained humans are very well capable of tracking by sight - to talk of airport workers that are specifically trained to look for air traffic. It really is not that hard to tell that an aircraft is on short final if you are actually looking at it.

With four miles of visibility in light rain at night, the aircraft should have been perfectly visible (in a vacuum); what remains to be determined is why the ARFF crew did not see it. The answer to that could range from "they didn't look at all" to "the orientation of the runway relative to the surrounding neighbourhoods meant that the CRJ's lights got lost in the city lights".

Yes we know. There was an other airplane who declared an emergency and was about to evacuate the passengers on the tarmac. The other plane in question had two aborted takeoffs, and then they smelled some “odour” in the aft of the plane which made some of the crew feel ill.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html