USA Air Traffic Controllers - Still safe to travel to the USA?

[Quickstatus]

As for income...only if they obeyed #1 rule of 'pilots' financial advice'.

 

[jb747]

#1. Keep your first wife.

#2. Don't marry a hostie.

There were a couple of other rules, as told by a female FO (now long time Captain) to a new starry eyed SO, but I was too busy laughing to take them on board.

 

[QF WP]

Well this has certainly been an interesting read. Renato01, well he and his wife are entitled to watch whatever programs they want and make their own decisions based on whatever information they obtain. I may disagree with his opinion, but I respect his right to say it.

I'm off to the USA in a couple of weeks with my family - have some internal flights as well. If I am to believe the Fox report, then I should find some way to find out who is doing the ATC for each sector (both arriving and departing airports, as well as the Centres along the way), so I can decide whether they are good enough in their job so I can make an informed decision about whether my family and I should take the flight.

We rely on some many people who operate machines in our everyday life, I'll put my faith in those unknown ATC and pilots (as well as their equipment and training) over a similar driver of a bus, train, car (uber, taxi etc). In fact, we are using all of these modes of transport as well in our holiday, so I'll make sure to rate all of them and report back.

jb747, agree that it's not easy for a pilot to marry a hostie - just ask my neighbour . But I daresay that his wife will have a similar thought in reverse. Similarly, a cousin in the USA and a number of friends (none of whom are pilots) have married hosties. Happily...

 

[Renato1]

Sorry for my tardiness in getting back to you. I underwent minor surgery and have been half zonked out with the anaesthetic since, and sleeping a ridiculous amount of time.

Any link between the fees charged by medical specialists and the quality of outcome has been pretty much 100% debunked. There is no link! Some very good surgeons charge high fees, and some poor ones charge high fees. And the same for the reverse. You cannot forecast the outcome based on the fee you pay.

The Inspector's report is a more balanced review into the hiring practices of the FAA. You'll see from that there were thousands of applicants, but only a few made it though. So whether they are ex military, or from the general pool, you are still getting the best of the applicants. You'd have to check, but I think it is quite different from university - a 50% mark isn't going to get you a pass to get into the control tower.

Many airlines hire from the air force. While the skill is not in doubt, it was known on occasion to cause problems with chain of command. It was likely a contributing factor to at least one major accident, involving loss of life, when 'juniors' did not challenge their seniors during an emergency. That's one of the examples of why we had a whole body of work on crew resource management.

The evidence that is lacking is a link between the hiring policies and the effect on safety. Is there any?

If there is no link, that would mean that the GPs doing the referrals to the high priced specialists are misleading their patients.

As I pointed out, graduates from University courses are often graded with honours - and many companies are happy to pay a premium for their services. I picked medical specialists as an example, but I could just as easily have picked engineers.

Are you really saying there is no difference between graduates?
Regards,
Renato

It's not generally the job of public servants to go on political programs with a political agenda.

Heads of Agencies aren't typical public servants. Directors of the FBI and CIA often answer questions. Carlson himself has had acting Directors on his program answering questions about their Agency. The Secretary of a Department could be called on to answer questions, but why should he or she do so, when they have Agency heads paid big money to adminsiter their Agency.
Regards,
Renato

Then she can apply to work on a short-haul roster that brings her back to home base each day. And note there are strict requirements for commercial pilot hours - IIRC 90 to 100 hours a month. That will give time to be at home with the family, perhaps more so than shift work in a tower.

True. But this doesn't really address the issue of Merit Selection where in this corrupted process one discriminates against people for their merit.
Why suggest a woman with merit do something else and be excluded from becoming ant ATC if she wants to become one?
Regards,
Renato

 

[Renato1]

There are plenty of good flying jobs around where people/pilots go home every night.
Never say never but pilots do not transfer to become ATC.

Ex pilots generally “ex” because of an age cutoff. When they reach this cutoff they are usually of “retirement” age.

Most who reach this age tend to have enough passive income to retire on so I can’t see them wanting a 2nd career in another part of the airline industry which is quite stressful and involve weird hours.

True, many Pilots may not want to become ATCs.

But is that a reason to arbitrarily effectively exclude them from the selection process of becoming ATCs, should they wish to become one?

Rest peacefully. US ATC has not been materially changed by this.

It was always horrible.

That's reassuring .......... I think.
Cheers,
Renato

 

[MEL_Traveller]

If there is no link, that would mean that the GPs doing the referrals to the high priced specialists are misleading their patients.

As I pointed out, graduates from University courses are often graded with honours - and many companies are happy to pay a premium for their services. I picked medical specialists as an example, but I could just as easily have picked engineers.

Are you really saying there is no difference between graduates?

There may or may not be a difference between graduates. It all depends on the pass mark required. If the pass mark is 95%, just about every graduate is going to be the same, otherwise they simply don't pass. If you are talking about a law degree or an arts degree, well, you can 'pass' those with a 50% mark. So there will be a wide difference in the academic outcomes, some will be on 50%, others will be on 99%.

Regarding specialists - GPs aren't being misleading. They're just referring you. If you are a private patient you need to do your research and find the best specialist. If you base your decision solely on price, it is clear you may not get the best outcome as there is no guaranteed link between the fee charged and quality of outcome.

 

[straitman]

True, many Pilots may not want to become ATCs.

But is that a reason to arbitrarily effectively exclude them from the selection process of becoming ATCs, should they wish to become one?

Cheers,
Renato

But it is a reason to not specifically include them.

 

[Quickstatus]

But is that a reason to arbitrarily effectively exclude them from the selection process of becoming ATCs, should they wish to become one

Nor anyone else...

 

[Renato1]

But it is a reason to not specifically include them.

For what reason should a person with aviation experience, namely a pilot, specifically not be included for selection as an ATC?

I do not follow your logic.
Regards,
Renato

Nor anyone else...

Sorry, I don't follow.
Regards,
Renato

 

[straitman]

For what reason should a person with aviation experience, namely a pilot, specifically not be included for selection as an ATC?

I do not follow your logic.
Regards,
Renato



Sorry, I don't follow.
Regards,
Renato

You have totally missed me he points with this discussion. When I have a chance I’ll explain.

 

[BAM1748]

I have an ATC friend in Australia at a capital city airport, he has driven taxis in the early days.

Renato, should I not fly in Australia, rhetorical.

 

[TomVexille]

I have an ATC friend in Australia at a capital city airport, he has driven taxis in the early days.

Renato, should I not fly in Australia, rhetorical.

Definitely not, stick to trains

 

[drron]

I have an ATC friend in Australia at a capital city airport, he has driven taxis in the early days.

Renato, should I not fly in Australia, rhetorical.

I cleaned hotel toilets.
Probably should give medicine here a miss too.

 

[TomVexille]

I cleaned hotel toilets.
Probably should give medicine here a miss too.

You’re a country doctor so clearly your opinion is wrong

 

[Hvr]

Definitely not, stick to trains

The only problem with trains is that you cross over lots of points but can't keep them.

 

[BAM1748]

The only problem with trains is that you cross over lots of points but can't keep them.

Crossing the diamonds

 

[straitman]

You have totally missed me he points with this discussion. When I have a chance I’ll explain.

There are a bunch of occupations including pilots who don’t need a mention in the advertising in either a positive or a negative sense.

It’s as simple as that.

 

[p--and--t]

Ex pilots generally “ex” because of an age cutoff. When they reach this cutoff they are usually of “retirement” age.

Most who reach this age tend to have enough passive income to retire on so I can’t see them wanting a 2nd career in another part of the airline industry which is quite stressful and involve weird hours.

Maybe I am reading the House committee report incorrectly, but I think it says that they increased in the recruitment age to 35 in the second improved selection criteria. Presumably it was lower before?

How many "retiring" pilots or any other career (other than sport) for that matter would be under this age?

Also harking back just a few years now, but when I embarked upon my studies for my career, it appeared to me that the "wastage" rate by the end of the first year exceeded 50% in nearly all streams of learning due to incorrect choice of path, lack of capability, immaturity, ill heath, change of circumstance (resulting in needing any job right now), loss of enthusiasm, et al.

It seems to me if this very exacting career (ATC) path, with poor hours of work and high stress levels, ended up with a retention rate over 50% from the learning process, then perhaps things are not as bad as it seems on the surface.

 

[straitman]

Maybe I am reading the House committee report incorrectly, but I think it says that they increased in the recruitment age to 35 in the second improved selection criteria. Presumably it was lower before?

How many "retiring" pilots or any other career (other than sport) for that matter would be under this age?

Also harking back just a few years now, but when I embarked upon my studies for my career, it appeared to me that the "wastage" rate by the end of the first year exceeded 50% in nearly all streams of learning due to incorrect choice of path, lack of capability, immaturity, ill heath, change of circumstance (resulting in needing any job right now), loss of enthusiasm, et al.

It seems to me if this very exacting career (ATC) path, with poor hours of work and high stress levels, ended up with a retention rate over 50% from the learning process, then perhaps things are not as bad as it seems on the surface.

It has been discussed previously but by comparison the washout rate on Military pilots course was (and probably still is) around 67%.
In our case that included 1 instructor and 2 students being killed in aircraft crashes.

 

[drron]

Might have to reconsider Tassie.Launceston last month was without ATC for 4 hours when one called in sick.Under MEL radar control.