Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 02, 2016, 03:02:04 PM
Home Help Login Register      
News: No coverage in your area? If you are near your local airport contact us to learn about becoming a volunteer


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Air Traffic Monitoring
| |-+  Aviation Audio Clips (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  KJFK Stuck Mic
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Go Down Print
Author Topic: KJFK Stuck Mic  (Read 25530 times)
CntrllrATC
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 33


« Reply #25 on: February 15, 2007, 09:51:45 PM »

But if that tower has core logic systems (operating of course)you do not have to withhold landing clearance. However there is a memo out that this is being reviewed, but I forget the date this would go into effect. My tower, as of the 5th, cannot clear the #1 aircraft to land until you clear the aircraft on the runway for takeoff.
Logged

Pull back on yoke houses get smaller, Push forward and houses get bigger.
Skyhawk890
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #26 on: February 17, 2007, 01:31:56 PM »

Rob-

Just out of curiosity, as a tower controller, what else would you do to issue the go-around after a stuck-mic situation?  Do controllers (normally) call the landing aircraft on guard?  Would they attempt to use light gun signals?  Flash or turn off runway lights??  Some of these questions may sound bizzare, but I wonder what the FAA has given you for last-minute life-saving techniques - or is it up to you to figure it out in an *emergency*?

Thanks

Logged
Studentpilo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« Reply #27 on: February 17, 2007, 02:12:34 PM »

Ya that makes me wonder. Is it an actual FAA regulation that in a stuck mic situation pilots should monitor 121.5 in case ATC comes on that?
Logged
Greg01
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 242


« Reply #28 on: February 17, 2007, 07:55:18 PM »

Pilots should always be monitoring 121.5. It's in the regs somewhere.

Greg
Logged
CntrllrATC
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 33


« Reply #29 on: February 17, 2007, 10:23:43 PM »

Skyhawk, to answer your question I am going to say all of the above. In the situation at JFK and the one I had we were able to overpower the stuck mic to a degree the other aircraft could here our control instructions. The problem is that the aircraft with the stuck mic will never be able to hear anything over the radio. If you needed to communicate with that aircraft then visual means are all you have, for the most extent, such as light gun signals (which are only good if the aircraft is aware of the problem and cannot correct it and is looking at the tower). Or the runway lights which are not very noticable in the daytime and if they are it may take awhile for the pilots to realize what it means (wow....look at the runway lights....never seen them do that before). We can try to transmit over the VOR frequency (this will only work if the pilots have the nav radio volume up enough to hear which is not likely the case) I have sent out the Ops personnel to the aircraft to get their attention (this only works of course if the aircraft are on the ground....lol) The most successful means of preventing a stuck mic is the diligence of the pilots. Being able to realize that they have one in the first place is the biggest hurdle to overcome. Newer radios have an indicator that shows when the radio is transmitting, some have a time limit of how long they will stayed transmitting.
I'm not sure if there is a reg that states you will switch to 121.5 when a stuck mic is detected on the frequency but it is a good idea to monitor guard when able. I have used my ground frequency as a starting point to clear up a stuck mic issue but that would be difficult at places like JFK due to the amount of traffic on ground. But at smaller airports it's an option, but you have to be careful of airborn communications on a ground frequency due to the proximity of other airports that may have the same frequency for ground that would hear the towers tranmissions. This is the reason that airborn communications are restricted from ground control frequencies. My tower does not monitor 121.5 because we have a co-located FSS on the field and they are delegated to monitor guard (sounds silly dosen't it) We do have a portable transciever that we use in such situations if needed. Also, alot of general aviation aircraft only have one radio or only one that works....lol.

Sorry this ended up long winded but I hope I've answered your question. Remember I don't claim to know everthing, after 24 years as a controller I am still learning new ways to control traffic. There may be other opinions on how to handle these situations.

Rob
Logged

Pull back on yoke houses get smaller, Push forward and houses get bigger.
Skyhawk890
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #30 on: February 17, 2007, 10:39:39 PM »

Thanks Rob...good answer.  I take it from your response that controllers are able to exercise "emergency authority" and do whatever is deemed (by the controller) necessary to resolve the emergency, similar to "emergency authority" we have as pilots.

Glad to hear controllers are not (in this instance anyway) restricted to one or two written options only (as defined by the FAA) and therefore prohibited from using their best judgement and experience.

Tony  grin
Logged
flyer_d
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 55


« Reply #31 on: February 20, 2007, 11:49:40 AM »

Pilots should always be monitoring 121.5. It's in the regs somewhere.

Greg

See this post: http://www.liveatc.net/forums/index.php/topic,483.msg11010.html#msg11010
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!