10/28
10/28, I've just read your, by now, imfamous posts, as their legacy resound through the halls of our ACC.
Words fail to describe the utter distain that I, and many other feel towards you.
The ATCOs that night did what they felt to be the best thing given the hand they had been dealt.
Any decisions that were taken by them were taken on the grounds of safety. When dealing with live traffic this can be the only consideration. Our current industrial relations situation cannot be dragged into live traffic situations.
Our ATCOs had to make a call on the grounds of safety that night. Is it safer to land or divert?
Remember, as soon as an aircraft is diverted from it's original flight, it's safe passage begins to erode. Fuel and familiarity with the alternate become potent considerations. Pilot workload increases. This is no longer a routine flight.
There is a tangible safety factor in any diversionary decision, and the AMC that night would have had a far greater insight into that than most other ATCOs.
The ATCOs that night took the decision to allow the flight to continue in the safest manner. They kept this flight as safe as the situation would allow, given the hand they had been dealt.
The safety of our live traffic is paramount. I would have done exactly the same as my esteemed colleagues. It would have been pure instinct to know that this was the safest option, and no IR situation would have diverted me from this course.
10/28, if you are a controller, remember when you work live traffic you are a controller first, a union member second, conduct all live traffic in the safest possible manner and leave IR matters for another time.
I do hope that you have to face the same situation, so that those lowly ATCOs that you find so offensive, can bow to your superior decision making skills.