PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - CAGRS now established at BNK
View Single Post
Old 25th Mar 2017, 07:46
  #66 (permalink)  
renegade154
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: melbourne
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dick Smith
Clearly giving traffic info is not an ATC function in FAA speak. Note a Unicom can even pass on an ATC clearance ( which has normally been provided by phone )


Unfortunately Dick, if you dig into the FAA regs a little further you will see references to ATC's passing Traffic Information.


The FAA regs specifically state that a UNICOM can not carry out ANY of the functions of an ATC. Exceptions to this are noted in the Regs, as per you alluding to UNICOM's being able to pass a clearance.... this can ONLY be done when requested to be relayed by an ATC. And if it is like our third party communicators then it must be relayed verbatim so that the UNICOM is purely a relay station.

The FAA regs are vague in relation to UNICOM's passing traffic information but if I apply your logic, of using the phraseology example, to reinforce that a UNICOM can pass traffic, then I can use my logic of Traffic Information being passed by ATC's, which is mentioned in the FAA regs, to reinforce that UNICOM's cannot legally carry out an ATC function of providing traffic advice.
However, this is all academic as I know that some UNICOM's in the States do pass traffic. If you care to research you will find, however, numerous articles on the problems caused by untrained, but probably enthusiastic, UNICOM operators providing incorrect/inadequate information which has led to incidents occurring.

Just to let you know Dick, I do not work for CASA but have been a professional in the industry for over 38 years. Yes I have worked within the restrictive regime of regulation in this country and I have also seen some of the ATC/FS operations overseas.


I actually don't care if UNICOM's are allowed to pass traffic as long as, THEY HAVE ADEQUATE TRAINING, unfortunately Dick your idea of an untrained person providing traffic information is fraught with danger.


One question I would have is who is going to protect the UNICOM operator from litigation when they cock up and are deemed to have contributed to deaths from an accident! Do UNICOM operators understand their duty of care, and the potential risk's to them. Every ATC and, in the past, FSO fully understands their liability and work to ensure their duty of care is fully and properly acquitted every working day.
I know you will be thinking I am being alarmist and a regulatory flunky but Dick, have you ever heard of safety systems and risk mitigation. If you understand the James Reason model of accident/incident development, occurrence and chains of events leading to them then I think you might just consider that an "untrained" operator passing traffic could just be the final hole in the barrier to stop an accident occurring.
renegade154 is offline