"The world's safest ATC system"

[atcea.com]

Does anyone dispute the FAA claim the the United States has the safest ATC system in the world?

Does anyone know by what safety standards ATC systems are rated? For example, is it ATC-caused accidents/seat mile, or what?
---
ATC 24/7 (http://atcea.com)

[GT3]

Some of their methods that i recently witnessed are not what the UK regard as safe!

[Jerricho]

Not having a go at you Rich, but statements like that are just non-operational management types massaging their prostates with their heads.

The three ATS providers I have worked for all have used words to the effect of "world leaders in ATC" somewhere in their mission statement (another great buzz word :rolleyes: ). Each system has certain procedures/systems that raise eyebrows of those from elsewhere (for example, the use of "Contact departure on 119.9 when airborne, clear for take off........" and the different wake turbulence categories used in the UK).

To actually state "the safest system" is a very bold statement. Personally, I see it as willy waving.

[Spitoon]

and a hostage to misfortune!

[Gonzo]

and the different wake turbulence categories used in the UK

Not only that, but the different wake vortex spacing used at different airports around the UK. Because we all know the air behaves so much differently in the south east!

[tori chelli]

now now Gonzo

London's reduced vortex between all heavier groups & lights and between mediums & smalls is just a 'trial'...(O.K a veeeerrrrry loooong trial)...not a question of different standards for different parts of the country in which what's required in one (large) place would get you 1261'd elsewhere...no, no, not at all!!!! :confused: :{

Tori

[Dan Winterland]

Having experience of flying into the New York airfirlds from the north, one cannot read this statement without showing signd of incredulity! Leaving the class A airspace at 180 to then mix it with GA in class G airpace in a 747 keeps you on edge. I've had several TCAS RAs doing this including one with four skywriting Harvards legally flying intermediate 500' levels through the Victor routes! Not to mention the Carnarsie approaches on the 13s at JFK while perfectly good ILSs are available.

Safe, my @rse!

[Scott Voigt]

Dan;

It's quite safe and works quite well, we just don't have as much ellitest airspace here and let everyone use it <BG>...

regards

Scott

[Jerricho]

As are many systems around the world, yet the need to shout about it seems a little louder in certain corners :hmm:

[ebenezer]

It's quite safe and works quite well, we just don't have as much ellitist airspace here and let everyone use it

Er, sorry Scott V, but isn't the fact that it didn't work awefully well (August 31, 1986 midair collision involving an Aeromexico DC-9 and a private aircraft in US airspace over Cerritos, Ca) the reason why the US pushed ahead so fast with TCAS???

And I doubt that many 'heavy metal' drivers in the US are that keen on the 'see and avoid' priniciple....

:hmm:

[Spuds McKenzie]

Scott, you can't be serious.
Mixed TFC VFR/IFR in Class G airspace?!

The most unsafe use of airspace IMHO!

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

I'm reluctant to compare ATC systems - I've worked with the worst and (IMHO) the best... but I am a serious believer in Class A airspace where everything is controlled for commercial traffic.. Descending into US airports I find myself looking nervously out of the window, whereas descending into the UK I find myself very relaxed watching the scenery. (NO criticism implied of US controllers - they have to work with their systems like we work with ours and they do a fine job).

[Jerricho]

Bren makes an excellent point. Comparing systems in different countries is like comparing chocky eggs and apples. Every country has it's own little tweaks on ICAO SARPs that works for them. I do take some exception with the "Our system is better than yours because........", especially when the offending party has never actually worked the airspace they are slagging.

[Spuds McKenzie]

Jerricho,

Agreed, systems are different and it's futile to discuss those differences.

But airspace classifications and its definitions are the same everywhere and therefore the implications are at least very similar as well (although there are factors like size of airspace, complexity and amount of movements to be considered).

So it is comparable to a certain extent.
We've had numerous so called "legal encounters" between VFR and IFR TFC in airspace E in the vicinity of a regional aerodrome.
There's a TMZ inside the TMA, so as an ATCO you would often get multiple STCA alerts (one IFR against several VFR) and the IFR flights would receive TCAS alerts (TAs and RAs).
I've had 1NM/0ft "legal encounters" there. Pretty heart stopping stuff!
And as I've mentioned this is in class E airspace, not G!
So the conclusion is:
"Legal" doesn't necessarily mean "safe".

[spekesoftly]

I am a serious believer in Class A airspace where everything is controlled for commercial traffic.. Descending into US airports I find myself looking nervously out of the window, whereas descending into the UK I find myself very relaxed watching the scenery

Let's not overlook the fact that other than at LL, the later part of an approach into many other UK Airports will be within a Class D CTZ, often with plenty of VFR traffic in the vicinity.

[chrisbl]

Mybe the point is that US airspace is the safest for the variety of airspace users using it.

No argument that if you keep aircraft out the airspace is really safe but the Class A is only so safe.

Someone quoted an accident in the US as a reason for the introduction of TCAS.

One could always quote the Swiss collision which proves that Class A and TCAS does not always work.


Having flown in the US and the UK, if you are not a Class A user the UK is far more unsafe.

At least in the states, when the weather is IMC you need an IR to fly in the Class E.

Airspace management depends on the airspace usage policy. The US has to meet a wide requirement of users, the UK is loaded towards the airlines.

[Jerricho]

airspace classifications and its definitions are the same everywhere and therefore the implications are at least very similar as well

True Spuds, however going back to my comment about differences and tweaks, in the UK an aircraft calling a ATC unit requires a clearance to enter Class D airspace. Here in Canada it is different that once establishing contact with ATC, unless specifically told to remain clear, the a/c can merrily chug on in (ie, even being told to "stand by") and believe me, they do.

[Scott Voigt]

Ebenezer;

The accident that you spoke of happened when a VFR aircraft not talking to anyone entered class B airspace and was not seen by the radar controller who was working the DC9. Same thing could have happened anywhere with restrictive airspace. The biggest difference is that here we have a HUGE amount of GA aircraft who are used to flying close to busy airspace. Most of them remain clear of the class B airspace as they are supposed to. You don't have any class A violaters around London do you??? Thought so <G>...

regards

Scott

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<You don't have any class A violaters around London do you??? >>

I presume you're joking, Scott? If I had a dollar bill for every one I've seen - and taken avoiding action on - I'd be living in luxury on a south seas island! Serious infringements don't happen too often - we don't have as many clockwork mice here in the UK as you do - but when they happen it often causes chaos.