Comments on: American Cliche #226

By: Brian Cribb

Brian Cribb — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 01:21:11 +0000

If the security at JFK was that slack, then the reaction should reflect that. Instead of just slamming the air traffic controller and forgetting about the whole thing afterward, deal with him objectively and tighten up security. In other words, solve before blame.

That being said, I was pretty painfully surprised to find out that anybody could be okay with this. Even if the kid was just playing around in the room, it was a terrible risk. What if he went near some controls and Dad had to stop him from touching anything? Now Dad isn’t watching the radar. The end result would be similar to letting Controllers play World of Warcraft while occasionally checking the locations of various aircraft.

Having a child in the control room seems harmless when nothing is going wrong, but during an emergency we need our Air Traffic Controllers to respond instantly.

Geez, I don’t even want my morning subway train controlled by some little kid…

By: Scott Parent

Scott Parent — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:15:15 +0000

@Jeff S – You made me smile with that “notes off the hand comment.” What can I say, I’m a sucker for a good Sarah Palin joke.

@Martin – agree with you. I think the FTC will take a closer look at procedures and rules going forward.

-S

By: Martin

Martin — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 14:59:33 +0000

My uncle’s an air traffic controller (at a smaller airport, not like JFK). I’ve been in the control tower several times, from a young age, but never got to direct planes. They are totally professional and calm all the time. It’s quite impressive to watch, and probably a good thing for a young child to see.

There should really be rules in place for visits, as I think it’s quite common among the controllers to show their family where they work. That this guy thought this was ok probably indicates a failing in the rules being clear. That or he was just stupid, which is unlikely.

By: Jeff S

Jeff S — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 06:03:40 +0000

Ok, so I am lightweight. I think that suspending people is an over reaction, especially where there was a no harm, no foul type of sitch. I can see where people were get worried. Me, I think that it is best to pull professionals aside and say, “hey the kid thing was fun” don’t do that no more, then a memo.
If you were punked you would have known it… (mental note to punk Scott) IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER.

The “F”ox thing was my opinion that you seemed to be pandering to public knee jerk reaction. Sorry that I used the F(ox) word. That was a bit of a low blow, I was reading notes off my hand,:-)

By: Scott

Scott — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 06:13:31 +0000

Are you listening to yourself? “This kid had it under control?”

Seriously, am I being punk’d here? You can’t really be condoning this?

If it’s blown out of proportion why has the controller and his supervisor been suspended? Why is the Transportation Secretary outraged?

Fox News? Gimme a break. That was a stupid-ass thing for you to say.

By: Jeff S

Jeff S — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 06:02:14 +0000

Nobody was in danger. Professionals were at hand at all times. You overplayed this. The kid was obviously instructed to say what hey said. Did you hear the response of the pilots. THE WERE NOT OFFENDED. Why were you. Are you trying to get on the FOX network.

I have personally mentored a lot of kids who I would NEVER have handed the microphone. This kid had it under control.
The whole thing was just a fun diversion, nothing more.

By: Scott Parent

Scott Parent — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 03:40:52 +0000

Really Jeff? Are you serious? So rules are just guidelines? As long a “pro” is OK with it, it’s cool to put the lives of hundreds of passengers in the hands of an elementary school child?

The child was “vetted?” Tell me how an elementary aged child is “vetted” to give air traffic control instructions?

As far as my outrage being “silly” – the Transportation Secretary of United States doesn’t seem to think I’m being silly:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dcnow/2010/03/lahood-promises-probe-of-kiddie-chatter-at-jfk.html

I’m not opposed to role modeling for children. I am opposed to kids trying their hand at tasks that put other people’s lives in danger.

-S

By: Jeff S

Jeff S — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 00:12:39 +0000

Scott, you are dead wrong on the traffic control thing. These people are pros, none of them were bothered. You should respect their decisions. “What if there was a glitch in the communication?” I would agree with you if that was a common problem, but it is not. They know more than you do, and made a decision that this was not dangerous. And it was not dangerous. No problems were made. Your outrage silly. Inspiring children is important. The child was obviously vetted and coached. Sounded like this was an esprit de corps builder for all who were there. That os not a bad thing.

By: Scott Parent

Scott Parent — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 22:43:37 +0000

I hate making mistakes like that! I’m usually a very detail-oriented person, but sometimes stuff like that slips thru.

Thanks for your contributions. So appreciated.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 22:42:08 +0000

No problems at all, I was posting that comment as giving you a hard time!

By: Scott

Scott — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 22:39:02 +0000

Mike – My apologies. Fixed.

-S

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 22:36:43 +0000

I love your show and I occasionally make donations because I enjoy the content, you’re a very interesting and entertaining host. I am certainly not seeking public acknowledgement (spelling?), buuuuuuuuut you listed me as “Mark H,” on the show notes, the name’s Mike H.

But irregardless, I love the show and keep up the good work.