Federal Aviation Administration to cut more air traffic controllers

"Mike Fergione" wrote in news:1Yn6h.269117
:

Not at a controlled field, it's not irrelevant. Try landing on the wrong
runway at a controlled field and see what happens. All of a sudden, the
controller takes control of everything.

The controller may take control and attempt to continue to properly
separate traffic. But if you are short final on a runway at a towered
airport, and another plane lands on your runway, you do a go around
regardless of whether you were cleared by the tower. You don't wait for the
tower controller to tell you to go around.

But if they let you taxi onto the wrong taxiway, or issue confused
directions because they've been working double shifts, it all of a sudden
becomes 'the pilot's responsibility'???

If the directions are too confusing for the pilot to understand, it is his
responsibility to ask for proper directions. If a controller issues an
instruction to taxi on an incorrect taxiway, if the pilot sees another
plane coming at him, the pilot's responsibility is to stop or divert, not
to blindly follow the instructions of the tower.

Or if you break out on an ILS 1/4 mile out and find a Cessna 172 right
underneath you, that's not controller responsibility either, is it?

What are you proposing is controller responsibility here? That there was a
Cessna 172 right underneath you when you broke out on the ILS? Was the
Cessna 172 under ATC control? Did it violate the FARs by flying too close
to the clouds? Did it have a working transponder?

In visual conditions, the pilot is responsible to see and avoid other
traffic, regardless of whether he is under ATC control or not.

ATC is responsible for separation of IFR traffic. But that was not an issue
in LEX.