asa and definitions
 

Sarcs,

Is this just another attempt by the system just to "invent" something, as when I searched ICAO there does not appear to be a match.

It gives some "boffin" the means to grandstand without any positive effect on safety.

The point of sep assurance is for the controller to make separation occur, not just let it happen. Requirements, pegging speeds, interim levels instead of letting it run and monitoring. You could call it controller technique.

If I avoid a BOS by sheer dumb luck, by responding to a STCA alarm or by catching it just in time it's only one hole in the Swiss cheese away from a potential collision. It's only 30 seconds or a mile or two away from an accident. I'd call that worthy of investigation.

How is that grandstanding by boffins?

Well said le Pingoin!:ok:

UITA you are kind of missing the point…it doesn’t really matter if ASA have a different name for a particular type of incident or how they categorise incidents in terms of safety risk.

le Pingoin spells it out best…

Like a ‘responsible pilot’ flying IFR octa in IMC who suddenly breaks clear of cloud only to be confronted by another aircraft flying at the same level which he/she narrowly avoids…what are you going to do when you get back to base ?:confused:

Your going to submit a IRM through whichever system is available to you…just like these ‘responsible controller’s’ are doing for what they consider to be significant safety issues that they are trained to believe that if not properly addressed could ultimately lead to a tragic accident!:sad:

Once the RP or RC has submitted an incident report, whether it is internally through the company SMS or directly to the ATSB, they have a certain expectation of response from the relevant authorities.:rolleyes:

When these expectations appear not to be appropriately addressed (and there seems to be a chain of non-responses) even though the procedures in place say there should be safety investigations/enquiries happening…I think that is very disturbing!!:ugh:

The bureau can categorise and re-categorise, filter and re-filter incidents, redefine ICAO Annex 13 etc:yuk::yuk:..etc all they like to escape having to investigate serious incidents for purely fiscal or resource reasons but that doesn’t excuse not relaying these incident notifications on down the food chain to ICAO (if that is what is happening here).:cool:

The whole idea of these systems and accident databases etc is to help plug up the holes and discover trends that could ultimately help avoid a future accident. If part of that accepted chain has been broken then we have effectively created rather than blocked up a hole.:{

My gripe is there is no black and white definition.

I agree, but the "just in time" example is problematic. Who decides what is just in time? One of our checkies has decreed that 6 nm miles with closing is LOSA. Fair enough, but what about 7, or 8 etc. Particularly given the somewhat elastic relationship between issued IAS and actual groundspeed.

If I need to change a level to resolve a conflict SA says, quite rightly, that a requirement shall be used to ensure separation., but what if the conflict is 90 minutes away? What if both aircraft are entering surveillance which will resolve the conflict?

If I have two aircraft on converging vectors with no vertical separation, and then hand them off to the next sector, that is a LOSA. However, two aircraft on converging SID's with no vertical separation handed off is standard practice (at PH anyway) and happens hundreds of times a week.

I guess what I'm trying to say is some LOSA are deadly serious and need to be investigated (and maybe someones bottom kicked), and some are "if things had been different that might have led to a breakdown", and entirely subjective. Remember also that by definition, a LOSA is the controllers fault so in one sense the investigation will always result in the same answer.

Speaking to controllers who have worked overseas, we have the most anal retentive, report/investigation obsessed system in the world. Whether we are at the cutting edge of a better safety culture or not is another debate.

PS le Pingouin if you can stop a STCA becoming a BOS you are faster than me :ok:

And it may well be because of that retentive reporting system that 2 RPT aircraft haven't been welded together in Australia...yet
At the moment it appears on occasion we don't even know when there is an RPT jet in the airspace.

Careful snowflake, there may have to be another PM sent your way if you continue to subtly abuse Australian ATC :=

Jack, if you want to continue sending abusive emails to my personal account fill your boots, last count was 3 now isn't it?
Im actually a great fan of ATC. I believe we have the best bunch of pros in the world here let down by bad management at the very top, which will hopefully change now.
Unlike you I don't paint a whole group of people in a bad light just because of the odd stuff up. There but for the grace...
So to help you out, the post meant its good to have a healthy reporting culture as no organisation is perfect.
Probably best for my email account and the peace of prune that we don't communicate.
PS And honestly, who calls anyone Snowflake?
PPS On second thoughts given you personal emails to me, that is the nicest reference so far.

NB, you probably could be a bit more definitive but it would be horribly complex - possibly a "time to BOS" coupled with "degree of intervention required" system. I don't disagree sep assurance can be rather subjective. What's acceptable in one situation may not be in another, e.g. depending on how busy you are. A lot of it is wrapped up in control technique, another less then well defined subject.

I'm not familiar with PH SIDs but maybe it's something that needs to be looked at - such things can become accepted in common practice despite being inherently unsafe.

Totally agree that some LOSAs are more serious than others. Barely missing a BOS and being totally unaware of the conflict for instance versus a reasonably implemented plan that got a bit tighter than expected for instance.

Maybe we are anal but it's hard to argue against the concept of sep assurance.

As to beating the STCA I'm not sure that's even possible!

The STCA is triggered at a time (CPA) not distance, so based on a/c speed it could go off at 10 miles or it could go off at 3. It certainly isn't smart enough to know what a 'separation standard' is...

Snowflake, you don't have a sense of humour do you? :cool:

All for one and one for all
 

le Pingouin,
I have to agree with the French Penguin on this one. There is that 'Swiss cheese' again.

Jack, I always enjoy your posts mate. You got balls and say it the way it is.
It's interesting as I have never been called 'Snowflake'. But I once had a male flight attendant look me up and down as I boarded the aircraft, and despite the badge of honor on my shirt indicating I was a 4 star Captain he called me 'Cupcake'! Go figure?

ozbiggles, careful old son, don't 'out' Jacks PM's or make reference to them as you will get your botty smacked by the MODS (It's in the Pprune rules, I know, did it myself recently (sort of) and nearly got a thread closed (again, sorry lads). I'm not trying to interfere, I just think this thread is of valued relevance and would hate to see it closed:ok:

Brothers, may I be so bold as to call you that? At the end of the day, Pilots (yep, I have been guilty), Controllers, Engineers, the entire gambit has been guilty of a mistake, no questions or arguments in that. Our focus should be on the systemic issues within the system on both sides of the fence. More often than not we receive varying levels of pisspoor training, we are victims of working frontline within a bureaucratic third world system at times, we are left under resourced and fatigued by blood sucking Executive parasites counting their bonuses while we count the amount of sleep we have had on one hand. We are not supported by the very agencies charged with keeping the system safe. We have to endure the ramifications of decisions made by Screaming Skulls, Beakers and Russellites. We need to rally together and support each other as nobody else will. We need to (metaphorically speaking) put in a vote of no confidence in that utter fool of a Minister presiding over this slop, and buy him and his plethora of minions, spin doctors and dross collectors some business class tickets aboard the S.S Styx and dispatch them down river.....

Well said Oleo!! And what he says makes a lot of sense.

I think what GF and co were saying earlier is very much a concern for all and sundry and perhaps where you ATC crew will get the most mileage is within these so called BOS/LOSA incidents that appear to be unresponded to by the ATSB and subsequently by ICAO.

If you can get together and work out which of the SA reported events have not been recorded by the bureau or recorded but not forwarded to ICAO then I think you start to mount a case that the good Senator X and Ben S would be ownly too happy to ask the questions about!

My two bobs worth...and if you want a hand we (the rest of the industry) are ownly to happy to help out!