PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Some truth about the ML incident
View Single Post
Old 10th Dec 2003, 13:28
  #12 (permalink)  
Here to Help
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Here
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Snarek,

In your first post it appears that you are trying to piece together what happened in the incident using information only gleaned from the VFR pilot's point of view. You also, in your now edited second post, implied that you had a transcript obtained through FOI. You removed that reference. Do you have a transcript of the events or was that a misleading comment?

I'm more inclined to believe that you have the VFR pilot's account: You give his type, rego, altitude, exact position north of CANTY, and only approximate transmissions heard from ATC (eg: "or words to that effect", and "Cessna hears Virgin decent modified to 18,000" etc).

With respect to the other aircraft you have very sketchy details, again they were probably from what the VFR pilot could relate.

You do not give the flight number, rego, positive position or anything about the Virgin aircraft. Your comment "normal approach for Virgin at that point would be 22,500' " is speculative. Also, an RFDS aircraft "was in the area" - again no rego or positive position or height. All of this shows that you don't have any information about the actual positions of the other aircraft.

The only new information that you seem to offer is that "7 minutes" took place between the recycling of the transponder and the TCAS alert. Interesting. If the information you have is only from the VFR pilot, then how do you know exactly when the TCAS went off?

The rest of your post is speculation ("the turn was probably to get more lateral separation") and what you admit to be your interpretation. In other posts you accuse others of beating up a story for union purposes. Your comments in recent posts show that you are guilty of the same thing you accuse others of doing, except it's for anti-union/pro-NAS purposes.

You still have not answered repeated genuine questions about where the savings are in NAS, or how it is safer, or how see and avoid is a valid first and last line of defence, or even how it is a union (both pilot and ATC) issue at all.

How about you rise above what you perceive to be unreasonable posts, not respond in kind, and contribute positively and responsibly to the debate as a publically visible member of AOPA? I can only ask.
Here to Help is offline