Latest News

Records show that Sydney airport near miss involved controllers flagged for high-fatigue risks.

According to internal records, and a recording of a phone call, several air traffic controllers were flagged for a high fatigue risk when two Qantas planes nearly collided in July at the?Sydney Airport. One shift manager called this situation "a little insane".

The incident on July 27, in which a Qantas turboprop narrowly missed a Qantas Boeing 737, that was cleared to cross runway, was one of six near misses at Sydney Airport within a month. This brought further attention to the air traffic control staffing shortages around the world.

According to an internal review of the log, five of the 10 controllers at the time were rated as "H" under Australia's fatigue management system for high risk. One controller was rated as "M" or medium risk, and another was "L" (low risk). Three other workers were not considered at risk for fatigue.

We've got five high-fatigues this morning. In an internal call, a controller's shift manager said to the air traffic director that it was "a little insane".

He said, "Thankfully, they did not hit, but it's pretty close, and everyone here is pretty shaken by it," in a recorded interview.

The shift manager stated that two of the three controllers directly involved in the incident had "high fatigue" and the other was "medium-fatigued".

Both the fatigue-risk rating and the internal request, which were not previously reported, took place as aviation authorities around the world grappled with concerns over the risks of accidents and an overstretched workforce in air traffic control.

Airservices Australia (the government agency which employs the air traffic controllers in the country) declined to comment on the incident, citing an ongoing investigation. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has begun an investigation into all six near misses in order to determine if they have 'common safety issues' or other contributing factors.

FATIGUE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

The system does not determine whether a controller has actually become fatigued. It uses automated assessments of factors like workload and scheduling to estimate fatigue risk.

According to the rating, controllers could be subjected to mitigation measures that are approved by local shift supervisors or an air traffic director who is based in a different city. These measures may include longer breaks, limiting the traffic volume handled by a control, or terminating a shift earlier.

Civil Air President Scott Nugent told reporters that in recent years, an increasing number shifts had been assessed to be at high risk of fatigue, due to controllers working longer hours and getting less sleep.

Nugent stated that if a controller felt they were fatigued they should not follow safety regulations.

He said that short staffing led to more overtime work, fewer holidays, more pressure, and increased fatigue.

According to the presentation slides of a Canberra meeting last week, Airservices reported that in the six-week period ending August 28, there were unusually large short-term absences from Sydney. This had a major impact on their ability to fill operational shifts.

Two Australian controllers said that "staff are regularly permitted to continue work despite high fatigue risk ratings" and that staff shortages and heavy traffic can make it hard to implement mitigation measures. One of them, who is based in Melbourne said that he has 'never seen any controllers removed from duty due to being too tired to work.

Controllers are also under pressure to work extra hours, with calls and messages encouraging them to do so, knowing that their absence would put already stressed colleagues even more pressure.

There are no global uniform rules that govern how long air traffic control operators can be on duty. Instead, each country is required to create their own fatigue management?programs. Scheduling limits are therefore widely varied.

Airservices Australia has an enterprise agreement that allows controllers to work up 10 consecutive shifts. This includes additional and emergency duties, but is limited to 80 hours in a single run. According to union officials, controllers can work up eight consecutive days in Canada and six in the United States.

Civil Air and three Australian controllers said it was not uncommon for controllers working 10 days straight to receive a day off.

In countries such as Australia, Canada and United States, there is a chronic shortage of staff. This has led to controllers working long hours.

According to the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, the amount spent on overtime by air traffic controllers in the U.S. increased more than 300 percent between 2013 and 2024. Last year, the total was $200 million.

(source: Reuters)