ATC supervisors have admitted the organization errored in how this
flight was handled and are retraining the DFW controllers.


It is quite incorrect to suggest they are not players -- their
specific responsibility is to make it as safe as possible for the PIC
who has declared an emergency to do what he deems necessary to resolve
the emergency.


On Feb 23, 7:41 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
d&tm writes:
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?

If he felt this was necessary to ensure the safety of his flight, yes.

In practice, of course, fully laden 747s can be moved in a few seconds.

A pilot with an emergency has the right to do whatever is necessary to
maintain safety, no questions asked. ATC has nothing to say in this matter.
They just listen to the pilot's intentions and route other traffic
accordingly.

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.

ATC is not a player here. Once the pilot has declared an emergency, ATC has
no authority at all. It still has to try to keep other traffic safe, but the
pilot of the aircraft with the emergency does whatever he wants, irrespective
of anything ATC might think.

The pilot has a duty of care to other people apart from his own
aircraft and pax.

His first and overriding duty is to his own flight, because he is the pilot in
command of that flight. The other flights are commanded by other pilots.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.