"MOR" complaint by ATC?
 

In a recent conversation I had with an ATC officer, he referred to an "MOR" complaint being filed against a certain aircraft. What is an "MOR" (at least that is what it sounded like) and what are the consequences for the aircraft concerned?

A MOR is a Mandatory Occurrence Report, more details to be found here. CAP 382: Mandatory Occurrence Reporting Scheme | Publications | CAA

SH

Thank you.

Warning - rant
 

No offence,

Im just tired of it beeing a common way of saying to file a report against an aircraft/flightcrew/controller.:ugh:

I prefer that people file reports on situations and therefore for the safety/workenvironment of the majority. Observe that i am not speaking about the content of said report..

Or maybe I'm just to positive about it?
In my opinion an occurence/incident report in any aviation system should not be mixed up with a lawsuit. Even if a report for some reason would lead to one that's another story. Please leave the blaiming for the investigators.

Rant over & sorry for eventual thread hijacking:E

kme: - well said :D

kme how right you are.
A friend of mine recently had an MOR "filed against him" by an ATCO and tried to discuss the circumstances with the controller and all he got was invective.
Looking at the circumstances I considered the controller to be "in the wrong".
The pilot could, in my opinion, have also have filed an MOR allocating blame to the ATCO..
But this allocation of blame is not the point of an MOR. The circumstances of any incident worth reporting should be looked at dispassionately to see what can be learnt from the incident and to see if any changes to procedures are required.

Many years ago in an ATC sub-centre, far far away, the contracted cleaners would hoover the ops-room during the latter stages of the evening traffic peak. The old hoover was very noisy and would sometimes mask the RTF. One of the ATCOs MOR'd the hoover and, as a result, we got a brand-new, almost silent, hoover, (called Henry), and the cleaning was switched to the lunch-time 'slack period'.
The CAA allegedly, used this example in presentations about what the MOR scheme was about.

In fairness when investigating an incident it is often the case that "blame" is often spread throughout the reporter and reportee.

I had an aircraft taxi through a lit red stop bar and I was also cited for a lapse in phraseology. Perfectly acceptable. The occurrence merited an MOR .The investigators looked at the circumstances and decided what happened.Lessons learned all round (me raising my game)and the MOR system doing what it was designed to do. As for discussing it the ATCO should not be drawn into discussing anything. Leave it to the Watch Manager(or equivalent) and then let the investigation take its course.

Of course, back in the bad old days you'd meet the pilot for a beer and discuss things in a gentlemanly manner before trying to strangle each other!!

Does the "939" not exist nowadays? Pilots would throw themselves off their wallets to avoid being 939'd.

Howto communicate

What exactly are you on about ? And why do you need to post your message twice ?

Bren; 939's still exist , but they're for a Breach of Air Navigation Legislation (BANL) not for a safety related occurence although the BANL could involve safety anyway, so an MOR would be filed as well.
I've done one myself many moons ago, and Fairoaks did one about a year ago.

Ok T - many thanks. Brain is a bit rusty here!!

ABANL.

Andy

Picky picky picky AM