ATC failure in Memphis

See

http://us.cnn.com/2007/US/09/25/memp...afu/index.html

Was it truly an accident? It sure happens at a convenient time for those who
want to fuel the argument that there's something wrong with ATC. However, the
incident could be used for both pro and con arguments, depending on how it is
spun, i.e., one could argue that "ATC lacks the resources it needs," or that
"ATC needs to be replaced by something new."

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
See

http://us.cnn.com/2007/US/09/25/memp...afu/index.html

Was it truly an accident? It sure happens at a convenient time for those who
want to fuel the argument that there's something wrong with ATC. However, the
incident could be used for both pro and con arguments, depending on how it is
spun, i.e., one could argue that "ATC lacks the resources it needs," or that
"ATC needs to be replaced by something new."

One, it doesn't matter to you, since you don't fly.

Two, things like this happen. Wildfires in SoCal and Palmdale
come to mind. That's why there are LOAs in place with adjacent sectors
to handle things like this.

IF you do the research you say you do, you'd know and realize
this.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFG+fPayBkZmuMZ8L8RAhLHAJsFMUBODD96Z7KpEiYfDv TVV7Nj2gCg7gtX
7ajfwGmvzzIFfGyUMbCdexc=
=mYK4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

A Guy Called Tyketto writes:

One, it doesn't matter to you, since you don't fly.

True, but many people on these groups do fly.

Two, things like this happen. Wildfires in SoCal and Palmdale
come to mind. That's why there are LOAs in place with adjacent sectors
to handle things like this.

I don't think CNN bothered to mention that.

IF you do the research you say you do, you'd know and realize
this.

I'm not the one who controls or influences the money or the policy of U.S.
aviation. You might want to share your research with those who do.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
A Guy Called Tyketto writes:

One, it doesn't matter to you, since you don't fly.

True, but many people on these groups do fly.

The only true statement you've said in either newsgroup.

Two, things like this happen. Wildfires in SoCal and Palmdale
come to mind. That's why there are LOAs in place with adjacent sectors
to handle things like this.

I don't think CNN bothered to mention that.

You actually think Continuous Negative News is going to go into
that? If so, you take them for granted. They are only going to tell the
public what they need to know. And the commercial flying public don't
give a damn about LOAs between ATC sectors in US airspace. They only
care about if it affects the flight they're on. If it doesn't, it isn't
their concern.

IF you do the research you say you do, you'd know and realize
this.

I'm not the one who controls or influences the money or the policy of U.S.
aviation. You might want to share your research with those who do.

Why should I? You're just going to tell me that it doesn't
square to what you've learned, and when asked about it, you tell us to
do our own research. So why should I share with others what you
wouldn't if you were in my position?

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFG+0KYyBkZmuMZ8L8RAhsoAKDSs2HmF4YamHXl+RH+Xh X5wAepsACfWXqb
vpVmplmyZAXHKlumsNhFzMM=
=U6H+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

A Guy Called Tyketto writes:

You actually think Continuous Negative News is going to go into
that?

No, but since they don't, most people won't know about it--and so it won't
have any effect on the opinions of those who don't know. And a lot of those
people who don't know will vote.

If so, you take them for granted. They are only going to tell the
public what they need to know.

The voting public.

And the commercial flying public don't give a damn about LOAs between
ATC sectors in US airspace. They only care about if it affects the
flight they're on. If it doesn't, it isn't their concern.

That's right. So after watching the report, it will seem to them that ATC
screwed up, which either means that ATC needs more resources, or that ATC
needs to be eliminated, depending on which spin they accept.

Why should I?

Because you may not be able to fly one day if you don't.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

A Guy Called Tyketto writes:

You actually think Continuous Negative News is going to go into
that?

No, but since they don't, most people won't know about it--and so it
won't have any effect on the opinions of those who don't know. And a
lot of those people who don't know will vote.

If so, you take them for granted. They are only going to tell the
public what they need to know.

The voting public.

And the commercial flying public don't give a damn about LOAs between
ATC sectors in US airspace. They only care about if it affects the
flight they're on. If it doesn't, it isn't their concern.

That's right. So after watching the report, it will seem to them that
ATC screwed up, which either means that ATC needs more resources, or
that ATC needs to be eliminated, depending on which spin they accept.

Why should I?

Because you may not be able to fly one day if you don't.




I'll always be able to fly, fjukktard


Mainly because I know how to.




Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

See

http://us.cnn.com/2007/US/09/25/memp...afu/index.html

Was it truly an accident? It sure happens at a convenient time for
those who want to fuel the argument that there's something wrong with
ATC. However, the incident could be used for both pro and con
arguments, depending on how it is spun, i.e., one could argue that
"ATC lacks the resources it needs," or that "ATC needs to be replaced
by something new."


Doesn't matter to you since you don't fly and never will


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote:
See

http://us.cnn.com/2007/US/09/25/memp...afu/index.html

Was it truly an accident? It sure happens at a convenient time for those who
want to fuel the argument that there's something wrong with ATC. However, the
incident could be used for both pro and con arguments, depending on how it is
spun, i.e., one could argue that "ATC lacks the resources it needs," or that
"ATC needs to be replaced by something new."

Huh? Failures such as this happen ...

--
Craig

ATC failed due to commercial phone lines going down, so we need to
replace ATC ????

How simply about replacing the part that failed with something more
robust..

I can see us spending 10 billion dollars for a whole new ATC structure
- that still depends on Ma Bell's 1912 phone lines...

denny

Denny writes:

ATC failed due to commercial phone lines going down, so we need to
replace ATC ????

No, the argument would be along the lines of ATC being fragile and dangerous,
either because it needs more people/money, or because it is outdated and needs
to be replaced with Something New (depending on which ax you are grinding).

I can see us spending 10 billion dollars for a whole new ATC structure
- that still depends on Ma Bell's 1912 phone lines...

Ma Bell built telephone lines to be very robust indeed; its successors are not
so conscientious, unfortunately. In fact, Ma Bell went well beyond that (cf.
AUTOVON).