"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"d&tm" wrote in message
...

So if the pilot chose to land on R17 and crashed into a fully laden 747
that couldnt be moved in time, and 600 people died, are you saying the
pilot
was in his rights to ignore ATC telling him not to land? ATC have to
take
into account the safety of all aircraft in their control, and if they
had
to
balance the risk of one aircraft versus another , surely they have to
err
in
favour of the aircraft who has done nothing wrong. The pilot has a
duty
of
care to other people apart from his own aircraft and pax.
terry


Was there a fully laden 747 on the runway that couldn't be moved in time?

Not relevant. Mxmanic was trying to make the point that the pilot could do
anything he wanted and to hell with ATC. I was trying to point out that
this is not logical and used a hypothetical example to make the point.
I wonder how many people see the irony in this thread , of how mxmanic is
continually pilloried for thinking he knows something about flying without
ever taking the controls, yet how many pilots here think they know more
about ATC than the controllers.
terry