controller killed

check this out, a ATC was possibly killed by a relative in a plane crash

http://news.independent.co.uk/europe...p?story=495147

It's a terribly sad story.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
check this out, a ATC was possibly killed by a relative in a plane crash

http://news.independent.co.uk/europe...p?story=495147

I am not moved. From the above article you all can see that the media
already sets themselves to blure the facts and start inventing a story where
the controller was not guilty from any wrongdoing. The recorded
conversations between the ATC and the aicraft involved in the accident
clearly show that the controller erroneously instructed the russian pilot to
change altitude and that's exactly the cause for the accident. IT WAS HIS
FAULT, HE IS A MURDERER. I doubt that the swiss court could have found him
guilty as charged though. After seeing that the swiss society will protect
their own, even if they have made a mistake, I can understand someone taking
the law into their own hands...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:k0n%b.24737$AL.460609@attbi_s03...
It's a terribly sad story.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
check this out, a ATC was possibly killed by a relative in a plane crash

http://news.independent.co.uk/europe...p?story=495147

angry wrote:

The recorded conversations between the ATC and the aicraft involved
in the accident clearly show that the controller erroneously
instructed the russian pilot to change altitude and that's exactly
the cause for the accident. IT WAS HIS FAULT, HE IS A MURDERER.

That's absurd. The controller's instruction was not an error on his
part. It was necessary to separate the aircraft and avoid a collision.
However, combined with other events, which he was unaware of, it did
result in the accident.

Murder is premeditated. He did not plan on killing anyone.

I doubt that the swiss court could have found him guilty as charged
though. After seeing that the swiss society will protect their own,
even if they have made a mistake, I can understand someone taking
the law into their own hands...

That is also absurd. The Germans are investigating the accident and
preparing the accident report, since the aircraft collided over their
territory. Therefore, you don't have to concern yourself with the Swiss
covering anything up. As far as taking the law into his own hands, there
is never an excuse for that.

Hi,

The recorded conversations between the ATC and the aicraft involved
in the accident clearly show that the controller erroneously
instructed the russian pilot to change altitude and that's exactly
the cause for the accident. IT WAS HIS FAULT, HE IS A MURDERER.

Wrong. Why was the altitude change erroneously? Two planes, same FL,
collision course - what else is he supposed to do?

The tapes do show that the controller tried to separate the two planes
correctly - only he did it too late. A big part of the fault lies with the
Skyguide company (Swiss ATC). They allowed one controller to work a scope
alone, they shut down a collision alert feature for servicing AND they
simultaneously shut down a huge part of the phone system, also for
servicing. The controller had to work TWO scopes at that time (his fault: he
sent his colleague into the break) and was trying to contact a tower by
phone to advise him of incoming IFR traffic in one sector. In the other
sector, the two planes were approaching - unnoticed by the (not working)
collision alert feature and the controller. A German ATC guy saw the
conflict and tried to contact him by phone - the line was busy (see above
why).

The collision avoidance instruction was too late, but in itself correct. The
russian pilot was the one to add the final mistake: he did not follow his
TCAS RA, but the controllers instruction.

So, no, that's a lot of mistakes, but definately no murder.

Patrick

Absurd is to see people like you believe in the newspaper stories.
The ATC did made a mistake by choosing wrong altitude to advice as so to
avoid the collision. You are saying that he was unaware of the other
aicraft - that's absurd - he was the only one on duty and he had ALL the
aicraft in his vicinity, their course, and their altitude displayed for him
to make a decision. He made the wrong one. He further in a tone not allowing
any questioning instructed the russian pilot to obey him and ignore the
onboard TCAS instructions. The poor pilot did (contrary to what he should
have done) and a lot of people died as a result. That's because of the ATC's
mistake and attitude.
Did you get it this time?

"James Robinson" wrote in message
...
angry wrote:

The recorded conversations between the ATC and the aicraft involved
in the accident clearly show that the controller erroneously
instructed the russian pilot to change altitude and that's exactly
the cause for the accident. IT WAS HIS FAULT, HE IS A MURDERER.

That's absurd. The controller's instruction was not an error on his
part. It was necessary to separate the aircraft and avoid a collision.
However, combined with other events, which he was unaware of, it did
result in the accident.

Murder is premeditated. He did not plan on killing anyone.

I doubt that the swiss court could have found him guilty as charged
though. After seeing that the swiss society will protect their own,
even if they have made a mistake, I can understand someone taking
the law into their own hands...

That is also absurd. The Germans are investigating the accident and
preparing the accident report, since the aircraft collided over their
territory. Therefore, you don't have to concern yourself with the Swiss
covering anything up. As far as taking the law into his own hands, there
is never an excuse for that.

angry wrote:

Absurd is to see people like you believe in the newspaper stories.

And just where are you getting your information, considering that no
official accident report has been released? I have enough knowledge to
know that information from the media is suspect, particularly their
opinions about what happened and who is at fault.

The ATC did made a mistake by choosing wrong altitude to advice as so to
avoid the collision.

If the Russian plane had followed the ATC instruction, and the DHL plane
had continued without descending, there would have been no collision.
The ATC instruction was incorrect in hindsight, but given the
conflicting information from the collision warning system, the Russian
pilot should have ignored the ATC instruction. Had the pilot done so,
there wouldn't have been a collision.

You are saying that he was unaware of the other aicraft - that's
absurd - he was the only one on duty and he had ALL the aicraft in
his vicinity, their course, and their altitude displayed for him
to make a decision.

He was late in asking the Russian plane to change altitude. That was
part of the problem. However, the collision warning systems are
installed on aircraft for just that eventuality, and the Russian pilot
did not use it correctly.

As far as the altitude display available to the ATC, it is not
necessarily that accurate, since it is only updated on the radar screen
about once every 12 seconds, and relies on the altimeters in each of the
aircraft for data, which can be out of calibration by a couple of
hundred feet. That is why flight levels are at least 500 feet apart, and
automatic TCAS warnings are made earlier at high altitudes.

Beyond that, yes the aircraft were flying at essentially the same
altitude, since they had entered Swiss airspace at the designated
altitudes, which were the same. The controller eventually made the
choice to ask one to descend to avoid the collision. There was nothing
wrong with that instruction by itself, other than it was a bit late.

He made the wrong one.

The ATC likely made the right one, based on the information he had at
hand. However, neither of us can be sure of that, since the official
report has yet to be released.

He further in a tone not allowing any questioning instructed
the russian pilot to obey him and ignore the onboard TCAS
instructions.

Nonsense. Pilots are routinely told to ignore ATC instructions if
following them would endanger their aircraft. In fact, the European
traffic control rules specifically state that pilots are to obey TCAS
advisories over any conflicting ATC instructions. The pilot did not
follow that rule. Pilots have absolutely no obligation to follow ATC
instructions if safety is involved.

The poor pilot did (contrary to what he should have done) and a
lot of people died as a result.

So you are now saying the pilot was primarily at fault?

That's because of the ATC's mistake and attitude.

No. In the first place, the ATC's mistake was in not asking the aircraft
to change altitude sooner. He did not make a mistake in asking the
Russian aircraft to descend, based on the information available to him,
nor was the urgency of his instruction an error, since he was trying to
avoid an imminent collision.

In saying the ATC instruction was a mistake is a gross
oversimplification of a complex set of interactions. The ATC was
certainly involved in the events that led up to the collision, but there
were many other events, such as inadequate support from the ATC's
employer, equipment that was out of service, and questionable training
of pilots on the part of the Russian airline. The ATC was likely not
even primarily to blame. This is where the official accident report will
sort out many of the conflicting events.

Did you get it this time?

I seem to have a much better understanding of the situation than you do.

And further to your earlier suggestion that the ATC instructed the
Russian plane to descend even though he knew that it was contrary to the
advisory from the aircraft's own collision avoidance system, here is a
link to the transcript of the flight data and voice recorders prepared
by the German investigators:

http://www.bfu-web.de/olderinfo/aktuinfo-e28.htm

As you can see, the controller would only have known about the DHL
aircraft descending after the pilot announced it over the radio. This
was 30 seconds after asking the Russian aircraft to descend, and less
than 13 seconds prior to the collision.

angry wrote:

I am not moved. From the above article you all can see that the media
already sets themselves to blure the facts and start inventing a story where
the controller was not guilty from any wrongdoing. The recorded
conversations between the ATC and the aicraft involved in the accident
clearly show that the controller erroneously instructed the russian pilot to
change altitude and that's exactly the cause for the accident. IT WAS HIS
FAULT, HE IS A MURDERER.

He's not, ICAO DOC. 8168 Volume 1, Part VIII:

3.2 Use of ACAS indications
....
c) in the event of an RA, pilots shall:
1) respond immediately by following the RA as indicated, unless doing so
would jeopardize the safety of the aeroplane;
2) follow the RA even if there is a conflict between the RA and an air
traffic control (ATC) instruction to manoeuvre;
3) not manoeuvre in the opposite sense to an RA.

[end quote]

Now whoever carved him up - he is.


Dima

And unfortunately the Russian crew didn't study this requirement well
enough, or hadn't been trained adequately in regard to this
requirement. The Russina First Officer pointed out that the RA said
climb more than once to the Captain. The whole concept of Crew
Management Resource training was intended to teach crews to work
together better, and to keep the Captain from making the First Officer
irrelevant in an emergency.

Dima Volodin wrote in message ...
angry wrote:

I am not moved. From the above article you all can see that the media
already sets themselves to blure the facts and start inventing a story where
the controller was not guilty from any wrongdoing. The recorded
conversations between the ATC and the aicraft involved in the accident
clearly show that the controller erroneously instructed the russian pilot to
change altitude and that's exactly the cause for the accident. IT WAS HIS
FAULT, HE IS A MURDERER.

He's not, ICAO DOC. 8168 Volume 1, Part VIII:

3.2 Use of ACAS indications
...
c) in the event of an RA, pilots shall:
1) respond immediately by following the RA as indicated, unless doing so
would jeopardize the safety of the aeroplane;
2) follow the RA even if there is a conflict between the RA and an air
traffic control (ATC) instruction to manoeuvre;
3) not manoeuvre in the opposite sense to an RA.

[end quote]

Now whoever carved him up - he is.


Dima

Yes, that's what I ment - the ATC put unnesesary pressure to the poor pilot.
By playing the "authority" too much, he forced the pilot into taking his
advice as one that is overriding, so the russian pilot flew into the other
aircraft - this is why I call the ATC murderer. If the russian pilot had
made a mistake, be it because of CRM issues or other, I could have said that
he is a fool - but he is not. That's sad!

"Dima Volodin" wrote in message
...
angry wrote:

I am not moved. From the above article you all can see that the media
already sets themselves to blure the facts and start inventing a story
where
the controller was not guilty from any wrongdoing. The recorded
conversations between the ATC and the aicraft involved in the accident
clearly show that the controller erroneously instructed the russian
pilot to
change altitude and that's exactly the cause for the accident. IT WAS
HIS
FAULT, HE IS A MURDERER.

He's not, ICAO DOC. 8168 Volume 1, Part VIII:

3.2 Use of ACAS indications
...
c) in the event of an RA, pilots shall:
1) respond immediately by following the RA as indicated, unless doing so
would jeopardize the safety of the aeroplane;
2) follow the RA even if there is a conflict between the RA and an air
traffic control (ATC) instruction to manoeuvre;
3) not manoeuvre in the opposite sense to an RA.

[end quote]

Now whoever carved him up - he is.


Dima