Originally Posted by
Kerosene Kraut
It was not standard to have to follow TCAS in any case like it is today at that time. So don't blame the pilot.
ATC was understaffed, had phone-line troubles and gave conflicting instructions. So I'm not blaming that poor ATC guy neither. The ATC organization above did a poor job that day.
I get such a sense of deja vue every time there is a collision.
It might not have been standard to have to follow the RA, but it was well understood by the manufacturers and those of us in receipt of proper training that manoeuvring in the opposite sense of the RA was very dangerous.
I still don't blame the crew; they had bad training and in spite of the fact that good training guidance was available it was not successfully promulgated around the industry....... AND STILL ISN'T.
For those advocating TCAS: Bear in mind it is designed for transport category controlled airspace separations, traffic density and performance. I suspect (but don't know never having looked at it for the GA role) that it would be a lot less use than many might think. If nothing else I can imagine the datalink freqs getting utterly saturated.
Don't get me wrong, much as 'see and avoid' should be an essential part of the arsenal it is not a total solution, even when practised rigorously. But TCAS is NOT and never will be, a panacea. Especially for GA.
And I say this as a TCAS training expert and advocate of TCAS.