Back to Squawk list
  • 25

Florida controller, Southwest crew suspended . . .

제출됨
 
Controller asked the crew of Southwest 821 on Sunday, to check on a SR-22 that had been out of contact - controller and crew were suspended for allowing the passenger aircraft to fly too close to another aircraft. (www.cnn.com) 기타...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


bovineone
Looks like it was between [http://flightaware.com/live/flight/SWA821/history/20110327/1705Z/KPHX/KMCO SWA821] and maybe [http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N1487C/history/20110327/1820Z/KMJD/KISM N1487C]
bizjets101
biz jets 0
Personally, you have a professional ATC, and a professional crew - rules or not - I don't see a difference from sending F-16's to check out Payne Stewarts' Learjet, or a Professional Southwest crew to check on the well being of a fellow aviator.
Not only that, but what negative affect might this have on the next emergency, when the professional flight crew has to say no - and the guy in trouble could be you or me.
BS red tape - kudos to the professional crews for looking out for a fellow aviator.
sheka
mark tufts 0
with heightened everything i would have reather have done a commercial aircraft over an f-16 because an f-16 would have scared the daylights out of everybody also the 737 has the speed to leave the scene if any threating manuver would have been made then the crew could have called the tower 2 request the f-16
atlwatchdog
Watch Dog 0
There was no loss of separation because the SWA Pilots reported the aircraft in sight, and probably was told to maintain visual separation by the controller before moving inside the 3 miles and 1,000' separation minimums between IFR aircraft in terminal airspace.
wdhearrell
wdhearrell 0
I'm with the FAA on this one, boys. Don't put the lives of 100+ people at risk checking on some inattentive private pilot who doesn't yet realize that he hasn't heard the radio in over an hour. The F-16 boys know better how to handle that situation that the Southwest pilots. That's what they're paid for.
bizjets101
biz jets 0
That's great if it turns out to be an inattentive pilot, I don't think seriously that for one second the pilots or crew were at any risk.
The ATC is a professionally trained person who made a judgement call based on a lifetime of experience. Equally the skilled pilots have may hours behind them to be where they are.
The Cirrus crew could have been incapacitated, could have been suffering an emergency - fortunately it was not the case.
Now next time there is a pilot in real trouble, and ATC attempt to send the nearest jet, there going to be told policy sorry - and someone may truly be at risk - and die.
atlwatchdog
Watch Dog 0
You ever stop to think the lives the "inattentive" private pilot was putting at risk? Sure, the TRACON could vector aircraft around this guy, but when you go blasting through a Major Class B airspace, expect to get intercepted.

I think people overreact to certain things. There is no less risk in this than two aircraft being vectored to an ILS PRM approach.
bizjets101
biz jets 0
Better still, I would like to see the professional credentials of the FAA paper pusher that made the decision to suspend.
There is also no reason the Southwest Pilots could not have kept flying while this paper pusher's decision is investigated.
I fully, 100 percent support the flight crew and ATC based on the details so far released, and I'd like to see their perspective associations support them. Could be quite the fight ahead.
bizjets101
biz jets 0
Inattentive pilots happen all the time. I'm not even concerned about the Cirrus pilot.
The fact is the ATC, and Southwest are professionals - as such they both made a judgement call to check on the well being of a fellow aviator.
The fact it turned out to be a 'inattentive pilot' very fortunate, as a fellow aviator, and user of ATC services - I fully respect the professional decisions they - as professionals made. I don't think they took this lightly at all, kudos for looking out.
homedepo20
Ronnie Mc 0
No harm no foul
jqsimmons
jqsimmons 0
I hate to get all political but this is what happens with government agencies. Common sense goes right out the window. It sounds like the 737 was probably told to maintain visual seperation if he said traffic in sight. How much would it cost to scramble the military planes? The controller and the pilots did the right thing, and more than likely they did it safely. No reason to make every problem into a big deal by scrambling military fighters. It's all just in another days work. Leave it to the feds to blow it out of proportion.
kadriver
kadriver 0
Watchdog is correct. When SWA called them in sight they became resposible for seperation. Whats gonna happen when we decline to help ATC relay radio freq changes and such.
earendil
earendil 0
Despite the fact that the ATC perhaps should have called an F-16 but isn't the reason of "loss of separation" is not appropriate when they are in visual separation?
LancairESP
LancairESP 0
No good turn goes unpunished!
RGibson259
Are you guys really pilots? Are you saying your personal judgement is better than the regulations you fly under?
airclaxon1
All a bunch of BS. You have to have a lawyer with you to take a physical
any more.
JCONVXL
Wait 'til the new healthcare rules come out.... made up by the same mindless burrocrats who run the FAA. Doc to be suspended for getting too close to patient, er, client. Sorry for the political comment, but the mindless folks are taking over. jc
crusader2009
Robert, I think they are saying that there is a "book way" and then theres the real world way. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with the request by ATC or the response by the SWA crew. I will say that a single engine has taken down a jumbo jet before because of a mid air collision. There are plenty of what-ifs we can create-- what if the guy was oblivious to the jet too and suddenly began a climbing bank? In the Army we say trust your pace count. Don't rely on what you think, rely on what your training has taught you to know. I've never done the wrong thing when I did what the book said, but I have sure lost many a night of sleep thinking I should have done what my heart was saying instead.
ffdriver
Crusader.. I really don't think that SWA was 36" wingtip to wingtip away. As the pilot I would creep up close enough to protect my plane/passengers and relay to ATC what I saw and attempt to contact the pilot of the other craft.... By radio; not by knocking on his canopy. As a former Army ATC, had we not left the book in the states when we went to Vietnam there's an awful lot of choppers that would have littered the hillsides. There's a time and a place for everything; and "Common Sense" the final judgement.
panzerturbo
Im partly with Robert on this one, the regulations are the regulations, but given the outcome I think that the FAA has over re-acted, whats next, what if the elt of that cirrus had gone off, or it had skwaked a problem then what the faa would have pulled the licence of the swa crew for de-routing to go and put eyes in the skies.

makes no scence to me
dmanuel
dmanuel 0
People with no aviation (pilot – Air Traffic Control) licenses/certificates, giving assessments without all the facts (or a grasp of what is or is not hazardous) on flight related media stories, is probably on a par with relying on your plumber for advice on surgery.
ffdriver
Well OK.. I'm Army ATCS GCA '67-70, FAA ATCS '72-86. OXR Twr, ONT TRACON, LAS Twr/TRACON, MCC TRACON. Commercial Pilot, ASMEL, Inst, CFI ASMEL IA, GI Adv, Inst. Never finished the A&E license though..
crusader2009
Carl, I'm not arguing with you. On the contrary, I'm the first to admit that in my career I have almost always chosen to do the real world way. But you have to be conscious that someone may catch a case and call you out. No one can say what they would do until the are in the situation. This was the point of my comment.
ffdriver
Crusader. I'm cool with you. As a former ATC and now retired cop I can assure you that under great stress you'll react autonomically according to your training. This subject really goes far outside the scope of the article, but to summarize; there are those who take the attitude that unless its specifically approved, its forbidden; and those who say "unless its specifically forbidden, its approved". When your willing to push the envelope to do the right thing to the best of your ability, it's a real letdown when "management" stabs you in the back instead of supports you.
dmanuel
dmanuel 0
I don’t think there are any DFC commendations with the terms,’ followed procedures to the letter’, ‘took no risk’, ‘showed no initiative’, but I could be wrong.
RGibson259
Crusader,I'm not saying I've not done a few things that are not by the book (I even flew under a bridge in an Aronica 11AC) but those were in my younger days before I became responsibke (?). With a load of chickens I doubt if I could satisify the controllers request today.
ffdriver
While its a different subject, RE: my last sentence, interupted a kidnapping of a 4 year old once. In the melee' I was stabbed twice but rescued the child and arrested the suspect. While it was a lawful arrest, since I "went outside the department General Orders", I received a written reprimand. Two years later a new Sheriff rescinded the reprimand from my records and awarded both a Purple Heart and Award for Valor. That's what I'm getting at regarding spineless management and REAL Management!! ARE YOU LISTENING, FAA???
JCCasebeer
No good deed goes unpunished.
YNGController
An inspection by another aircraft worked real well for John Heinz.

로그인

계정을 가지고 계십니까? 사용자 정의된 기능, 비행 경보 및 더 많은 정보를 위해 지금(무료) 등록하세요!
이 웹 사이트는 쿠키를 사용합니다. 이 웹 사이트를 사용하고 탐색함으로써 귀하는 이러한 쿠기 사용을 수락하는 것입니다.
종료
FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?
FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..
종료