Circumstances in which a “controller” is not in control. What possible confusion could arise from that?
That is the problem. The pilot thought that ATC was in control. ATC are
never in control of your aircraft and the way it is operated. If thats the prevailing attitude in GA then good luck you are going to need it. If your attitude towards a BFR is that it is just a box ticking exercise then it is your attitude that is the problem not the rules. I am in the simulator 4 times a year and never do I take the attitude that it is a box ticking exercise and that I have nothing to learn. If you think you have nothing to learn then "its your attitude stoopid" If you think getting a weather forecast is a waste of time then"its your attitude stoopid". If you think that technology has made proper flight planning redundant then "its your attitude stoopid". If you think that safety is all about the system then...you know the rest. Safety starts with your attitude towards flying. Your attitude to obtaining information, your attitude towards using a mandated check flight as a learning opportunity, your attitude towards applying the fundamentals of operating an aircraft i.e planning, weather, fuel. This report states that ATC could have handled the original clearance request differently and Airservices are addressing that through additional training of its controllers. It also very clearly states the PIC was not required to or issued a clearance to descend into the ground. Once he decided that he was required to descend
because ATC told him and did not clarify that instruction then the outcome was inevitable. I hope that GA pilots will take some important lessons from this tragedy but from some of what I have seen posted I don't think they will.