Widower stabbed Air Traffic Controller?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
. net...
If you read an understood the report, you know exactly what I meant. I
won't enter your game.
I read and understood the report. I have no idea what you meant, that's
why I asked.

I think the original poster perhaps chose the wrong words. While it can't be
denied that the controller made a mistake, this mistake was an
understandable one given the circumstances in which he found himself
(working multiple desks, with some equipment out of action, etc). It could
be said that he also made a mistake by accepting the workload when he came
on shift and had it handed to him, but I don't know enough about the
circumstances and/or the relationship between staff and management to
comment on that.

He was, however, not the only one who made a mistake. One realisation that
came from this accident, for instance, is that when TCAS and an ATC person
tell you two different things, you go with TCAS - which wasn't the case in
this incident as one pilot went with the ATC command. Similarly, it seems
that the ATC management were at fault by allowing a skeleton staff to run
such a crucial operation.

D.

"David Cartwright" wrote in message
...

I think the original poster perhaps chose the wrong words. While it can't
be denied that the controller made a mistake, this mistake was an
understandable one given the circumstances in which he found himself
(working multiple desks, with some equipment out of action, etc). It could
be said that he also made a mistake by accepting the workload when he came
on shift and had it handed to him, but I don't know enough about the
circumstances and/or the relationship between staff and management to
comment on that.


Priority one in ATC is separation. He lost separation and all the equipment
needed to maintain it seems to have been working.



He was, however, not the only one who made a mistake. One realisation that
came from this accident, for instance, is that when TCAS and an ATC person
tell you two different things, you go with TCAS - which wasn't the case in
this incident as one pilot went with the ATC command. Similarly, it seems
that the ATC management were at fault by allowing a skeleton staff to run
such a crucial operation.


But TCAS and an ATC person weren't telling him two different things at the
time he responded to the controller's instruction to descend. The TCAS RA
came later.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:


"David Cartwright" wrote in message
...

I think the original poster perhaps chose the wrong words. While it can't
be denied that the controller made a mistake, this mistake was an
understandable one given the circumstances in which he found himself
(working multiple desks, with some equipment out of action, etc). It could
be said that he also made a mistake by accepting the workload when he came
on shift and had it handed to him, but I don't know enough about the
circumstances and/or the relationship between staff and management to
comment on that.


Priority one in ATC is separation. He lost separation and all the equipment
needed to maintain it seems to have been working.



He was, however, not the only one who made a mistake. One realisation that
came from this accident, for instance, is that when TCAS and an ATC person
tell you two different things, you go with TCAS - which wasn't the case in
this incident as one pilot went with the ATC command. Similarly, it seems
that the ATC management were at fault by allowing a skeleton staff to run
such a crucial operation.


But TCAS and an ATC person weren't telling him two different things at the
time he responded to the controller's instruction to descend. The TCAS RA
came later.

Indeed...and he should have immediately complied with it instead
of continuing with the instruction from the ATC operator. It was
mentioned that the Russian pilot wasn't well informed about the
operation of TCAS and wasn't aware that when he was instructed by
an RA to climb that the conflict a/c would have been instructed
to descend.
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)

Gord Beaman wrote:


It was
mentioned that the Russian pilot wasn't well informed about the
operation of TCAS and wasn't aware that when he was instructed by
an RA to climb that the conflict a/c would have been instructed
to descend.

Correction...I should have said "The Russian PIC wasn't well
informed..."

The Russian copilot wanted to comply with the RA I gathered but
apparently the PIC over-rode him...that was my read anyway...
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)

"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
...
Correction...I should have said "The Russian PIC wasn't well
informed..."
The Russian copilot wanted to comply with the RA I gathered but
apparently the PIC over-rode him...that was my read anyway...

From the programme I saw on Channel 5 about the incident (which was, perhaps
surprisingly, well compiled and quite balanced) there was certainly a high
level of disagreement between the PIC and his colleague over whether to obey
TCAS or ATC.

D.

"David Cartwright" wrote:

"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
.. .
Correction...I should have said "The Russian PIC wasn't well
informed..."
The Russian copilot wanted to comply with the RA I gathered but
apparently the PIC over-rode him...that was my read anyway...

From the programme I saw on Channel 5 about the incident (which was, perhaps
surprisingly, well compiled and quite balanced) there was certainly a high
level of disagreement between the PIC and his colleague over whether to obey
TCAS or ATC.

D.

Yes, some of the particulars of an air incident certainly don't
get well portrayed when the media or a film making endeavour is
involved do they?...did you ever see he movie made of the Air
Canada incident where a 767 ran out of fuel?...my lord that was
the most sickening flying movie that I've ever seen in my life,
(and I've seen a bunch).
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)