Court Martial over F15 crash

[Lucifer]

Just noticed this.. .. .<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/scotland/newsid_1871000/1871863.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/scotland/newsid_1871000/1871863.stm</a>. .. .(Corrected link). . . . <small>[ 14 March 2002, 07:44: Message edited by: Lucifer ]</small>

[ORAC]

Correct Link. Leuchars Air Traffic Controller being Court Marshalled&gt;. .. . <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/scotland/newsid_1871000/1871863.stm" target="_blank">BBC</a>

[Reheat On]

Presumably since CMs have been thrown into abeyance by the Eurocrats some wise Retribution Agency will now seek to make a civilian charge in the same way the foot sloggers across the water have had to endure.... And all for the love of Her Majesty. All very sad and not nice when it happens in the public eye. For a CM to have been trailed there must be some fairly unusally damning support.

[Capt Widebody]

I just saw this story on the TV.. .. .Irrespective of the current legality of the Courts Martial, this particular development has the potential to drive yet another nail into the coffin of open and honest reporting in flight safety incidents and accidents.. .. .I had been hoping that the old system of apportioning blame in military aviation accidents really was a thing of the past. The Chinook enquiry ruling was a particularly encouraging development which seemed to send out a message which supports the military's current stance: that is, in short, to find out the causes and learn as much about technical and human failings from incidents without directly apportioning blame, so as to avoid a recurrence of the incident.. .. .Some of the old-school will argue that there will always be cases where individuals do act maliciously or neglect their duty to a gross degree. But I firmly maintain that finding out the reasons behind the failings without going on witch-hunts is the only way forward. How many HFORs will be recieved from ATCOs following this, I wonder?. .. .This fatal accident, like any other fatal accident is most distressing. But I have no doubt there will be many other professional pilots out there who are wondering why someone is trying to hang the ATCO involved. He or she was not flying the aircraft, and I don't need to spell out what the various radar service "contracts" do and do not include.. .. .There are those of you who may think that we hug too many trees in this PC era we now work in. In many apsects of our modern working society, I agree. But the only way we can now improve flight safety further and reduce these terrible accident statistics is by learning and analysing where we are making human errors.. .. .Unless we stop trying to make scapegoats out of those who visibly make mistakes (and I speak in general terms here), then we will never foster an open and honest attitude to flight safety reporting within the military; the mistakes which aviators make which we actually get to hear about will remain the tip of the iceberg.

[Dan Winterland]

This is also the MOD admitting one of their employees acted negligently and will leave them liable to massive damages in favour of the deceased pilots families.

[BEagle]

Hmmm - odd how after this accident, everyone was reminded of the rules concerning responsibility for safe terrain avoidance in IMC whether under RAS or RIS....... .. .There are some pilots who seem to think that RAS will cocoon them from any responsibility for safe separation from other ac and/or the ground. A colleague of mine was once flying in IMC and asked for a cloudbreak; ATC advised that they could only see him down to the safe sector altitude, any further descent would be 'at his own discretion'. So he continued his descent and found himself facing Didcot power station at very close range. Afterwards he told me that he considered this to be ATC's fault....... .. .Perhaps the in-built caution many pilots in the UK have when deciding to descend below safety altitude in IMC without knowing precisely where they are, what Safety Altitude in the area actually is and what mandatory on-board aids must be serviceable would have prevented this accident? I have certainly descended to the minimum permitted altitude in IMC in the past - but that was in a Vulcan with a fully serviceable crew, radar, radio altimeter, TFR....and even then it was very hard work to continue the flight for any length of time in safety. To descend in IMC below SA in a single seat jet in unfamiliar territory whilst under RAS to me seems fraught with danger.....

[cyclic]

BEagle. .. .I think you have hit the nail on the head. Under RAS terrain clearance remains the responsibility of the pilot. If ATC descend you below sector safe altitude it's still your responsibility.

[Chilli Monster]

Civil units thankfully decree a level below which RAS will simply not be given - and this normally equates to the highest of your SSA's (if the sectors are different) within 25 miles.. .. .Even though the pilot is responsible for terrain separation under a LARS service I would still take the attitude that if the pilot wanted a descent I would give him down to SSA and no further unless he was VMC and visual with the ground. From that point it's pilot's decision what height he flies, not mine. Duty of care means you do your best for him, but from then onwards it's his decision.. .. .Hopefully it will be the system that will be found wanting and not the ATCO involved - we don't need another Gradimir Tasic (BEA/JAT Midair Yugoslavia 1976 - another scapegoat when the system was at fault).. .. .CM. . . . <small>[ 15 March 2002, 13:47: Message edited by: Chilli Monster ]</small>

[phd]

Capt. Widebody. .Spot-on. This CM will do nobody any good whatsoever and will throw no light on how we can prevent mid-air collisions during low-level training sorties in the future. It will also take us back several years in trying to engender the open and honest human factor reporting processes that the CAA is promoting as the only way to improve aviation safety in the long term. Like the Chinook Pilots in the Mull of Kintyre debacle the ATCO in this case may become an easy scape-goat for an incident that nobody should be blamed for but everybody involved in the 'aviation system' is responsible for. It is the 'system' that should be examined for root causes and possible remedies. However once again those in positions of power would rather externalise the fault by pointng the finger rather than admitting the system fallibilities and perhaps their own roles in that system failure.. .-----------------------------------------------. .Pobody's nerfect - and that includes you and me.

[Scud-U-Like]

If a civilian ATCO were alleged to have performed his duty negligently, thereby contributing to the cause of a fatal accident, he would doubtless face some sort of internal disciplinary hearing. That is all that is happening to the RAF ATCO.. .. .He is being accused not of negligently causing the pilots' deaths (ie manslaughter), but of negligently performing his professional duty.

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

BEagle has an interesting point. What did the pilots think they were getting and what did the controller think he was giving? The bottom line is, if you don't know the terms of your 'contract' you may well find yourself in trouble. . .. .CM, the military also have rules about RAS and Safety Altitude/Radar Vector Chart. These were in force way before this incident.. .. .Scud U. Can you confirm which part of the AFA the controller is being charged under?. . . . <small>[ 15 March 2002, 17:47: Message edited by: Whipping Boy's SATCO ]</small>

[Proletarian]

Any military ATCO who reads this might be interested to know that I understand the ATCO involved was a member of the Guild of Air Traffic Controllers. However, when he approached them for legal help in this case, they told him they were not interested - not much of a return on the £60 per year subscription. Apparently, the same thing also happened to the ATCO involved in the Pristina incident. I wonder if they would have acted the same way if the ATCO's involved were civil rather than military?

[Radar Muppet]

We are all being very judgemental about the system's handling of this unfortunate ATCO. Before anyone else blathers-on about the requirement for openness and (by logical progression) no punishments in air operations, let us remember that two fighter pilots f*cking DIED because aforementoned ATCO presumeably made a mistake(s). Sorry to be un-PC, but we don't know the real details of who did what, where and when except that without doubt, 2 families are mourning because somebody or bodies screwed it. So less of the self-righteous hugging please and let the system, albeit flawed, take its course, then publish the actual story before we pass judgement. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="frown.gif" />

[higthepig]

If you look at all the paperwork and changes sent out post this accident it implies that the system was not watertight. If the defence has any sense they will produce all the paperwork to prove that there were loopholes. We could have all been in this situation and I would not wish this on my worst enemy. It is awful that others have died but it takes ages to learn from mistakes unfortunatley.

[Sven Sixtoo]

I feel that, regardless of whether a piece of tape with the words "cleared to (any altitude below safety altitude)", or similar evidence is available, this prosecution is a bad idea. (It also may have considerable problems on a number of legal grounds, but that's a different issue). .. .It took BA years to recover from sacking the pilots who admitted to lining up on the road next to Heathrow.. .. .The aircrew attitude to Flight Safety is only just starting to embrace open and honest reporting as a reasonable concept. Trust is there, but fragile. . .. .The engineers have some way to go. Fear of the career-wrecking effects of even minor retribution that may be visited on one admitting to error is still both widespread and sufficient to modify behaviour.. .. .If ATCOs, normally amongst the most upfront in FS discussion, are to be placed in fear of their careers, or even their liberty, it will be necessary to interpret all of their instructions as having a defensive stance. I can't quite envisage the consequences of that straight off, but I am sure they won't be good.. .. .Picture a possibility. Met got it wrong, latest actual 8/150, screwed up fuel calcs, 100 lbs below minimums, 1 mile final, still well IMC. When, having porked the other options, my response to "Passing decision height, terminating service" is "KEEP TALKING!" will I get a reply?. .. .Sven

[phd]

Here here, Sven Sixtoo!

[MOA]

Just to add my two pence worth. Being rather new to this game, I understand that the only time an ATCO is responsible for terrain clearance is RCS. I personally carry a radar SSA with me and get my Nav to back me up on all height clearances. . .. .Being that we all don't know the service being provided at the time it's a bit quick to judge/defend at this time (if we do, I am unaware).. .. .Dont get me wrong, it's a tragedy which ever way you look at it. However, I hope the RAF isn't looking for an easy way out (again) and that the truth will be forthcoming.. .. .Here's to safe flying and a constructive outcome.

[Legalapproach]

I read the article in the newspapers with some interest but find it very hard to understand why an atco can be responsible for a low level accident unless things have changed markedly from my day.. .. .Although it was a long time ago my recollection was once descended into the low level area I was responsible for what went on and I don't really recall even bothering ATC.. .. .If nothing else, radio coverage must have increased astonishingly.

[Capt Widebody]

Gentlemen. I was attempting to avoid stating my opinion of whose fault this was likely to be, for hopefully obvious reasons. That said, I think CM and BEagle have elaborated enough on this. Neither do I think we have lost sight of the fact that two pilots died in this tragic accident. My point was not meant to evoke discussion on the wrongs and rights of the accident itself. I may be proved wrong, but I do not think that rocket science will be required to establish the cause group.. .. .What I am saying is whilst I can see how ATC can always have a contribution towards or against the safety of flight, especially in IMC regimes, IMHO the part played by ATC will only ever be a contribution for good or for bad. Like I said before, the ATCO was not in the aircraft. Radar Muppet, yes, I'm sure the guy did make a mistake. . - I understand your concern, but check the relevant wording(s) in your 318 and A, and have another think.. .. .Fishbed - you talk about the current ATC system needing to be looked at. I have to say that do not see any problem in it as it stands. Maybe some extra publicity of the "contracts" could have helped prevent this, maybe not.. .. .We are all in a business with inherent dangers; small mistakes can either go unnoticed, or can cause tragedy. The bottom line in this case was tragic. But also tragic, IMHO are the implications here for future open reporting.. .. .The message sent out to ATCOs (and all others in the FS chain) by this action has two sides: first, "don't screw up, or you'll pay for it". That's all well and good and may "encourage" extra vigilance and attention to detail, but underlying this is the other side of the message "if you do screw up, don't own up". We are all human, we all make mistakes. It's when we start trying to cover them up that we stop learning.. .. .PS: MOA, how's the camping holiday? You fly safe and be careful out there... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="cool.gif" />

[KDL]

Irrespective of our differing views on this issue, surly as professional individuals both privacy and speed are now required. I fully understand how the compexities of both RAF ATC incidents have cause difficulties in terms of resolution... but on my part, the resulting soap opera, part of which is displayed here, can surely only be damaging to both the pilot and ATC disciplines. . .. .My thoughts are with those who have died, but are also with those who are awaiting outcomes of investigations, whilst having the world talk around them. These people went to work with the clear intention of doing a professional job... lets give them the support the need that will allow a more open learning forum, rather than the defensive environment that is presently seeping through ATC.. .. .BTW is GATCO more than a front for Touchdown Holidays?