The Lexington ATC was NOT doing traffic count after he cleared Comair 5191 for takeoff

Mxsmanic wrote:
Sam Spade writes:


Before folks here reject or support the message of the original poster
you should listen to the ATC tape recording while following along on the
official transcript, then draw your own conclusions as to the sole
controller's workload during the few minutes that count.


Even if he was hopelessly overworked, the final responsibility rests
with the flight crew. And it doesn't appear that he did anything
wrong, anyway, however overworked he might have been.

Why are so many pilots so quick to cry that it's not their fault when
they are actually held accountable for their mistakes?


You're missing my point.

Matt Barrow wrote:

"A Lieberma" wrote in message
. 18...

Dave S wrote in news:T%_uh.16106$yx6.10555
:


Is this really about making things safer, or is this about exploiting
tragedy to advance an agenda?

While we pilots shouldn't depend on "safety nets", in my opinion, ATC is
our safety net for when we make mistakes.


ATC's job is separation. If they catch something, that's dandy. As such, if
a passenger catches something, that's dandy, too.


ATC provides separation when working IFR aircraft. The local
controllers' duties are different. They provide sequencing and safe use
of runways and takiways. "Separation" in the context of IFR separation
is not part of the local job when the Class D area is VFR.

The ATC handbook references I provided earlier certainly are pertinent
to some extent.

Matt Barrow wrote:

"chickenlittle92071" wrote in message
ups.com...

To Whom It May Concern:


And Bush flew those missles into the WTC, right?


Is that why he looks the way he does?

Sam Spade writes:

You're missing my point.

Perhaps; what is your point? Since the pilots ultimately screwed up,
what else is there to say? No matter what the problems of the
controller may have been, it wasn't his actions that caused the
problem, and it wasn't his responsibility.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Sam Spade writes:

ATC provides separation when working IFR aircraft. The local
controllers' duties are different. They provide sequencing and safe use
of runways and takiways. "Separation" in the context of IFR separation
is not part of the local job when the Class D area is VFR.

The controller did all of that here. Where's the problem?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Matt Barrow" wrote in
:

ATC's job is separation. If they catch something, that's dandy. As
such, if a passenger catches something, that's dandy, too.

Safety / Security is in layers :-)

Note, I said ATC was a safety net, not their job for ensuring our safety
EXCEPT in IMC where we depend on ATC to maintain seperation.

Under VMC, it's our job to ensuring seperation, but ATC would be our safety
net should we miss something. Just like passengers spotting another plane,
always nice to have that handy, though IMC that's not possible (plane
spotting that is).

Allen

Mxsmanic wrote:
Sam Spade writes:


You're missing my point.


Perhaps; what is your point? Since the pilots ultimately screwed up,
what else is there to say? No matter what the problems of the
controller may have been, it wasn't his actions that caused the
problem, and it wasn't his responsibility.


There is a theory both in law and accident investigation called
comparative negligence. Have you read the 7110.65 excerpts I posted
earlier today?

Matt Barrow wrote:

ATC's job is separation. If they catch something, that's dandy. As such, if
a passenger catches something, that's dandy, too.


Towers do darn little separation as well.

"A Lieberma" wrote in message
. 18...
"Matt Barrow" wrote in
:

ATC's job is separation. If they catch something, that's dandy. As
such, if a passenger catches something, that's dandy, too.

Safety / Security is in layers :-)

Note, I said ATC was a safety net, not their job for ensuring our safety
EXCEPT in IMC where we depend on ATC to maintain seperation.

Under VMC, it's our job to ensuring seperation, but ATC would be our
safety
net should we miss something. Just like passengers spotting another
plane,
always nice to have that handy, though IMC that's not possible (plane
spotting that is).

A safety net exists to catch mistakes.

Under your scenario, you're relying on ATC as a backup. I'd say that's a bad
idea to have that notion in that back of ones head. This, though, in no way
takes away from asking for specific assistance as a situation warrants.

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
...
Matt Barrow wrote:

ATC's job is separation. If they catch something, that's dandy. As such,
if a passenger catches something, that's dandy, too.
Towers do darn little separation as well.

Okay, separation and sequencing.

But they are NOT a safety net, which as I point out in another post, exists
to catch mistakes. ATC is NOT our co-pilot.