Fire in Chicago ARTCC... Again....

Greg Bockelman said:
What or where is ZAU?

FWIW, on Sunday on my commute to work, the RJ I was on was at 10,000 feet from Kansas City to O'Hare.
Click to expand...

ZAU is the identifier for Chicago Center.

ZMP is Minneapolis Center, ZID is indianapolis Center, etc.
 
Approach_controller said:
How do you propose we standardize? Do you dynamite the Rockies to form a universal MEA? Do we change naming conventions on airports so they are now Alpha Bravo Charlie etc based on counter clockwise from the sector center? Do we just roll with the same 50 fix names (ie Airport Bravo ILS IF is FIXER)? What is the standardized runway configuration for all airports in the US? What is the standard LOA that works for both Pudunk approach and NY approach? Which frequencies are standard (I get to hear the ATIS from an airport 500 miles away) without bleed over? Which sector size do we choose that works both at NYC and Western Montana?

Maybe you know something controllers don't and I'd welcome your input. Its like saying standardizing airplanes just in case. I recall a gentleman who hadn't flown more than a skylane landing a king air a few years back. To any pilot on this board, that was a HUGE DEAL and rightfully so. Airspace is airpace just like an airplane is an airplane.

Honestly though I see what you're getting at. Some emergency center with all the maps and feeds ready to go just in case. Here's how I see that playing out. "News at 6, the FAA spent a billion dollars on a vacant ATC facility and employs guards and maintainers and it hasn't been used in 30 years."
Click to expand...

If controllers would just learn the airspace of the entire country they could just fill in when things go down. Someone from ZAU could fill in down at ZJX if a guy is out sick??? :D

Some people on here seriously need to take a tour of a facility to understand the complexities of ATC. While there about the training requirements to get signed off on each position. Then ask about the requirements for monthly currency on each position. Then look through their library at all the letters that outline procedures at that facility.

You simply cannot substitute one controller from a separate facility and fill in at a moments notice. It would be like requiring airline pilots to be type rated in all the airline's aircraft and staying current in all of them. Just impossible.
 
denverpilot said:
Huh. Look at that. A bunch of nearby Centers handling the traffic. Pure magic.
Click to expand...

ZAU controllers traveled to those nearby centers and worked the airspace. They arrived on Tuesday following shutdown. Using vacant scopes, and thru some technician magic even a few ZAU frequencies. It's how we were able to work up to 100% capacity at ORD and 90% capacity at MDW for five days running.

The local controllers at the neighboring ARTCC's did an amazing job awaiting the ZAU guys arrival. It was a lot to ask of someone who has never worked, never seen, and never dealt with the intricacies of a foreign (to them) airspace.

Anyone who thinks that ATC can be standardized ala "cookie cutter" sectors is either trolling or in serious need of an education on how the NAS works.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
What or where is ZAU?
Click to expand...

Z = Center. ZAU = Chicago Center, because it's in AUrora. That's why Cleveland Center is ZOB - It's in OBerlin, OH. Most of the rest of them are pretty obvious - ZMP for Minneapolis, ZKC for Kansas City, ZFW for Fort Worth, etc.

nddons said:
Doh!

(You may want to check Greg's profession.)
Click to expand...

Well, you'd think he would know what ZAU is then. ;) I only know that sort of stuff from doing things like reading Center Weather Advisories, FDC NOTAMs, etc.:

ZID CWA 101 VALID UNTIL 142205
FROM 45NE APE-15W EKN-15NNW PSK-30S LOZ-30NE ROD-45NE APE
MOD ISOL SEV TURB 060 AND BELOW. MAINLY AFFECTING SMALLER
AIRCRAFT. =
Click to expand...

!FDC 4/3003 FDC ROUTE ZDC ZID ZME ZTL. Q39-Q50-Q52-Q54 ROUTES ARE NA UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. 1410031730-1504031730EST
Click to expand...
 
MarkZ said:
ZAU controllers traveled to those nearby centers and worked the airspace. They arrived on Tuesday following shutdown. Using vacant scopes, and thru some technician magic even a few ZAU frequencies. It's how we were able to work up to 100% capacity at ORD and 90% capacity at MDW for five days running.
Click to expand...

Yup - Someone actually asked that on frequency with Quad Cities Approach the other day while I was monitoring them. The controller said they had gotten 7 controllers from ZAU, some of whom used to work at Quad Cities.

I'm guessing the reason they were still keeping everyone low was due to limitations of TRACON radar... Most of the outer facilities are probably still on ASR-9. Anyone know what sort of limitations that system has?
 
The only limitation to ASR is range. The radars can look from the ground to infinity.

I forgot to mention ZAU controllers also traveled to every TRACON in ZAU airspace to aide in manual coordination.
 
MarkZ said:
ZAU controllers traveled to those nearby centers and worked the airspace. They arrived on Tuesday following shutdown. Using vacant scopes, and thru some technician magic even a few ZAU frequencies. It's how we were able to work up to 100% capacity at ORD and 90% capacity at MDW for five days running.



The local controllers at the neighboring ARTCC's did an amazing job awaiting the ZAU guys arrival. It was a lot to ask of someone who has never worked, never seen, and never dealt with the intricacies of a foreign (to them) airspace.



Anyone who thinks that ATC can be standardized ala "cookie cutter" sectors is either trolling or in serious need of an education on how the NAS works.
Click to expand...


So you're saying the exact plan a number of us recommended, was implemented. Spare workstations, same people. Duh.

(I've never claimed anything about cookie cutter and few others here have. That's your add-on to the DR story that nobody suggested.)
 
denverpilot said:
So you're saying the exact plan a number of us recommended, was implemented. Spare workstations, same people. Duh.

(I've never claimed anything about cookie cutter and few others here have. That's your add-on to the DR story that nobody suggested.)
Click to expand...

Those suggestions weren't bad at all and as you stated, were in fact, the plan. If I can extrapolate your thought, adjacent centers can see some ways into a neighboring center, but not all the way in. Perhaps distribute those blind spot feeds into neighboring centers. If that's the idea, its a good one and not something I think any controllers in this board were attacking. I could be wrong though. I think the crux of the matter is the ZAU radar feeds seem to have been cut, so in our minds the entire radar network was inop so any suggestion requiring their use is looked at askew.
 
Approach_controller said:
Those suggestions weren't bad at all and as you stated, were in fact, the plan. If I can extrapolate your thought, adjacent centers can see some ways into a neighboring center, but not all the way in. Perhaps distribute those blind spot feeds into neighboring centers. If that's the idea, its a good one and not something I think any controllers in this board were attacking. I could be wrong though. I think the crux of the matter is the ZAU radar feeds seem to have been cut, so in our minds the entire radar network was inop so any suggestion requiring their use is looked at askew.
Click to expand...

So the problem becomes that even if you do feed the blind spots to adjacent centers, there is STILL a single point of failure somewhere, and this communications contractor would have still been able to take them out. The only thing that changes (after billions of dollars have been spent) is the location of the scene of the crime.

Now, if you add extra radar sites solely to fill the blind spots and ONLY feed them to an adjacent center, maybe this would work. But is the ROI there to justify that expense for an extremely rare occurrence? IMO, no. Nate, you like to complain about government waste, this would be a good example of it.

I would not support spending a whole lot of money building backup facilities. Frankly, I think the FAA did a good job here, and the controllers did an exceptional job.
 
The backup for the Romeoville (Chicago) NWS facility is Scott AFB. Might it be feasible to have a military role in the backup procedures for ATC, too?
 
gprellwitz said:
The backup for the Romeoville (Chicago) NWS facility is Scott AFB. Might it be feasible to have a military role in the backup procedures for ATC, too?
Click to expand...

Not unless the military facility is an approach facility below the ARTCC. In that case they could help pick up the center's load just like the civilian TRACONs did in this case.

In the portable tactical side, it would take too long to fly thèm in and get setup. It would take several days to get it up and then flight checked to get approved for IFR ops. Also, there wouldn't be any automation so somone would be on the phones constantly doing manual handoffs to adjacent facilities.

I thnk considering the circumstances the ZAU guys did the only thing they could've done and did a fine job in getting back to business. I agree with the FAA Administer though in that their needs to be a more efficient plan in place in the future. How much will that plan cost is the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top