Error Puts 3 Planes on Same Path at LAX

I'll bet in Canada if their ATC kills you, NavCanada would cheerfully refund
your $15.00.

In light of the Administrator's determination to implement user fees
for ATC services, wouldn't now be the time to make the consequences
for ATC errors commensurate with the consequences to those aboard the
flights subject to those errors?

It is true that controllers make mistakes. Pilots make mistakes. Still,
you are safer flying "in the system" (flight following or IFR flight
plan), than just VFR. If you have an activity, you are going to have
accidents. We've all had some near misses (or will if we accumulate any
hours at all). Good to read about others mistakes so I don't make the
same ones, though.

Larry Dighera wrote:
It seems to me, that the most equitable policy would be for individual
ATC personnel responsible for operational errors to have the added
personnel responsibility to make monetary restitution to the estates
and survivors subjected errors they committed.

That giant sucking sound you would hear would be every traffic
controller immediately retiring, quiting, or otherwise exiting.
Furthermore, there would be no job applicants under those conditions.

NOW, who ya gonna call?

Besides, no one ELSE in this country is held responsible for their
mistakes (it sometimes seems like that, anyway...)

I know we treat ATCs like gods, and we do everything they tell us to,
and we pray to them to save our souls when we are stupid sometimes....
but after all, doggone it, they are human. Which means that if they
make a mistake and someone gets hurt, they'll feel real bad for a long
time. I used to know a former ATC guy. His lunch was pepto-bismol,
which he claimed he needed for ATC stress.
I don't like their union much, but all the controllers I've talked to
have been real nice and helpful, even when I was in the middle of a
mistake.

I also observed a tower controller make a couple mistakes in a very
busy pattern. It was still up to us pilots to see the problem and take
proper action.

Other than lawyers getting paid to put the house, cars, and kid's
college money in the wife's name, nothing would change as the US
taxpayers would still be paying damages after the controller sold his
1984 Yugo and declared bankruptcy.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message

It seems to me, that the most equitable policy would be for individual
ATC personnel responsible for operational errors to have the added
personnel responsibility to make monetary restitution to the estates
and survivors subjected errors they committed.

In article ,
says...
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 17:43:55 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote in ::


Seems the controller should be yanked from active duty until the
investigation is complete.

That would be the very least action to be expected.

Just thinking about *most* busy fields... would not: a ground controller
be controlling taxiway traffic? (ie not the rwy controller).

--
Duncan

"Dave Doe" wrote in message
z...

Just thinking about *most* busy fields... would not: a ground controller
be controlling taxiway traffic? (ie not the rwy controller).


Yes, but the local controller (rwy controller) would have to authorize the
crossing of any active runway.

wrote:

I don't like their union much, but all the controllers I've talked to
have been real nice and helpful, even when I was in the middle of a
mistake.

Same here.

I've also met some in person during tours and noted that many of them
are also pilots, some are CFI's and CFII's. So in the long run, many of
them fly in the same system they work on.

They're still people.

Nothing that involves human intervention is infallible, but humans
cross-checking other humans can drive the chance of an error becoming
more serious higher than Powerball odds.

"sfb" wrote in message Other than lawyers getting paid to put the house,
cars, and kid's
college money in the wife's name, nothing would change as the US
taxpayers would still be paying damages after the controller sold his
1984 Yugo and declared bankruptcy.

A Yugo? Maybe an ops inspector, but not a controller. They are the prime
donnas of the FAA. Administrator Blakey made sure of that.

D.

She didn't have much to do with it. It was the union and the Clinton
administration in the mid 90's.



Capt.Doug wrote:

"sfb" wrote in message Other than lawyers getting paid to put the house,

cars, and kid's

college money in the wife's name, nothing would change as the US
taxpayers would still be paying damages after the controller sold his
1984 Yugo and declared bankruptcy.


A Yugo? Maybe an ops inspector, but not a controller. They are the prime
donnas of the FAA. Administrator Blakey made sure of that.

D.

Is there an Usenet icon for tongue in cheek? When your personal wealth
is at stake, the only auto in your own name is a clunker.

"Capt.Doug" wrote in message
...
"sfb" wrote in message Other than lawyers getting paid to put the
house,
cars, and kid's
college money in the wife's name, nothing would change as the US
taxpayers would still be paying damages after the controller sold his
1984 Yugo and declared bankruptcy.

A Yugo? Maybe an ops inspector, but not a controller. They are the
prime
donnas of the FAA. Administrator Blakey made sure of that.

D.