ATC failure in Memphis

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either because it needs more people/money, or because it is outdated and needs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).

Sure, but you can spin failures many ways.

Anthony, look at yourself as an example.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
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either because it needs more people/money, or because it is outdated and needs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).

AUTOVON used ordinary phone lines usually, but not always, dedicated to
the military.

The lines used were, for the most part, routed around major cities to
avoid system destruction in a major attack.

Other than that, there wasn't much special about it.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

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outdated and needs to be replaced with Something New (depending on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).

You have no idea hwatsoever of which you speak.

Fjukwit


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Craig Welch writes:

Huh? Failures such as this happen ...

Sure, but you can spin failures many ways.


As we all can see. (not including you fjukkwit)

Bertie

-----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.

Frank F. Matthews writes:

Why would a phone switching failure imply a problem with ATC.

Because a journalist, or some other person with a motive to spin the story,
says so.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Frank F. Matthews writes:

Why would a phone switching failure imply a problem with ATC.

Because a journalist, or some other person with a motive to spin the story,
says so.

The FAA "HAD" microwave link redundancy to all their ARTCC
locations.

In the infinite wisdom of ignorant unqualified FAA bean
counters in Washington with their head up the ass of
contractors they decided to go single threaded with just
big business phone company's for ARTCC communications to
LIVE AIR TRAFFIC

At one time the FAA had communication redundancy at their
major control centers like Memphis. Now they don't. But hey
they got plenty of Diversity and Civil rights staff in the
FAA. But no redundancy for ATC communications in major
control centers.

Just ****ing stupid. No more no less. Typical Government.
Clueless and incompetent and misguided priorities.

See Katrina and FEMA

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