Decided not to PM that one, then?
Hooray, I can continue doing the crossword whilst descending below MSA, (as long as I am on a radar vector!) safe in the knowledge that I cannot possibly hit terrain, and even if I do, it's not my fault!
Yippee! Thank you for making my days at work so much easier.
PS I'll think you'll find MATS Pt1 (UK ATC Manual) says the same thing - and that doesn't change my argument.
If you are Norwegian (or just a non-native english speaker) then I will give you a break; an ATCO's responsibility to provide safe vectors/descents (as required by regulation) and a pilots responsibility to the aircraft in ensuring those vectors/descent clearances are safe are not the same thing - and are not mutually exclusive.
Perhaps the confusion arises because we use the word 'responsible' to mean merely 'given the task of' as well as in the legal, overriding, 'in charge of' sense.
As a little aside, I refer you to an incident involving a B737-200 near Cape Town, S. Africa in July 1993 (sorry I can't be more specific).
The aircraft was being vectored for ILS 01 and was cleared down to 4500' MSL, then 3500' MSL just as they passed what was the actual minimum safe vectoring altitude (6500'). The FO remarked "...that seems a bit low...", to which the Captain replied "...on radar - it's OK!".
The first GPWS warning sounded at approximately 15 seconds to impact with a 5211' mountain. The aircraft managed to climb away safely.
They were on radar vectors. Do you see what I'm getting at?
I stand by what I have written to you previously.
Last edited by Gary Lager; 20th Nov 2005 at 14:15.