Originally Posted by
Alteburger
It is clear that it is absolutely essential to query any reds prior to crossing them and of course, particularly with respect to reds protecting runways. However, to quote chilli monster:
With respect to paragraph c) above, do ATC actually have the discretion to instruct an aircraft to cross reds which protect an active runway when it would appear to be in direct contravention of MATS? Is MATS a legal document such as the ANO which must be complied with?
The first element is that of the legality of MATS. It is not a legal document which must be complied with, that is the ANO. However, deviations from the ANO may actually be required in order to comply with other legal expectations, particularly that of "as low as reasonably practicable". There is adequate guidance from HSE that ALARP overrides legal standards if ALARP is the implied lower operating risk. HSE and CPS would be the prosecuting authority for the type of accident considered.
The second element is the pointer to the "Aerodrome Authority". ATC are subcontractors to the aerodrome operator. There is plenty of case law to indicate that this would be the interpretation. Therefore, ATC MATS 2 must reflect the Aerodrome Manual. There should be nothing in the MATS 2 which is not directly traceable to the Aerodrome Manual, with the exception of turning it into ATC speak.
The airport operator owns the lighting control panel and has design authority over it. The airport operator owns the lights out on the aerodrome, the switchgear and the power supplies etc. Also maintenance similarly. So, the airport writes the procedures for what happens when a stopbar is locked red, ATC just carry it out. A subcontractor may refuse to carry the procedure out if their Safety Management System indicates that the risk is too high for their corporate risk exposure.
If the aerodrome authority has not supplied written a procedure, then ATC management should point this out. There must be an ATC contigency procedure for each item of aerodrome infrastructure which could fail. Of course, the Aerodrome Manual should not be accepted by SRG if this is the case, but under a SMS approval for the airport operator, it could happen.
If there has been a locked red stopbar, and there are no procedures for it and the controller clears the aircraft across it without following the procedures in MATS 2, then the controller has violated the MATS 2 regulations. The controller may then have a case to answer. However, the case would be moderated by the management failures to provide adequate procedures.
As clear as mud?
Happy landings.