Low fuel emergency in DFW

I'm not saying that ATC didn't have a problem, but by the same token, it is
also unacceptable for the pilot to continue to his destination after he
declared an emergency to avoid the delays and hassles of diverting to a
closer airport.

Mike Schumann

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
e.com...
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 13:06:39 -0800, Brian wrote
(in article . com):

An emergency exists when the pilot declares it; the ATC perspective is
irrelevant from that point.

Not at all true. If ATC's perspective is that a 767 on short final for
runway 35 will not be able Go Around or Clear the Runway with out
creating a collision hazard with the Emergency aircraft landing runway
17, then ATC has every right to deny the pilot runway 17.

If runway 17 was the pilots only option then he need to let ATC know
that.

The Pilot had every right to request it.
ATC had every right to deny it. (in this case it ended here)

Nonsense. The pilot declared low fuel. He is in command of the aircraft.
ATC
had no right to deny anything, especially for the stated reason that it
"might delay some flights," which comes across as downright frivolous.


--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com