BA plane in near-miss
Ohcirrej
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F3G, I'll admit emotion was involved in my posting and have apologised to Algy for my childish dig at him and ATI, however, I stand by what I have said.
Even in this short report, shall we highlight the inaccuracies?
Flight Controllers..............who are they? Oh yeah, they be the guys in the control tower.
Planes were at least a mile and a half apart............what was the vertical separation? And reading this, would people actually know what the required separation standards are? I have seen reports of "jets 1000 feet from disaster". Hmmmmmm.
And did the "flight controller" just sit there and watch this all happen. With the topic of avoiding action conflicting with against an RA at the front of many people's minds..............or did the controller (and others involved) play a blinder against other conflicting traffic?
No where near one of the worst reports that I have seen, however, still not the full story. And realistically, what does the report achieve for you? Are you going to move house? Are you going to write your MP? Are people going to stop flying? Do you even know what time it happend? I have seen that "the public have the right to know" neon sign lit-up so many times. Aside from envoking an emotional "gasp" factor, what does it achieve?
Even in this short report, shall we highlight the inaccuracies?
Flight Controllers..............who are they? Oh yeah, they be the guys in the control tower.
Planes were at least a mile and a half apart............what was the vertical separation? And reading this, would people actually know what the required separation standards are? I have seen reports of "jets 1000 feet from disaster". Hmmmmmm.
And did the "flight controller" just sit there and watch this all happen. With the topic of avoiding action conflicting with against an RA at the front of many people's minds..............or did the controller (and others involved) play a blinder against other conflicting traffic?
As a stakeholder in this matter, living in a part of Herts frequently overflown by airliners, I am pleased that the BBC reported this matter.
Last edited by Jerricho; 5th Dec 2003 at 22:14.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Jerricho
I understand your views and appreciate that you have apologised to Algy.
What does 'knowing' do for me? Not a lot directly, but it does keep the issue of crowded space in the public domain where MPs and others are influenced.
Sometimes the emotional gasp factor, as you put it, achieves more than any amount of rational and logical information.
I'm sure that you are right when you say that you have seen worse reports, but that s the point isn't it - most of us haven't and you have a NDA in your contact :-)
So, I say again, I don't think that this article was sensationalist and although I understand your frustration in 'knowing' that the report is not totally accurate, I'd rather live with that and have some public profile rather than have you know the full facts and stay quiet (as you must.)
BTW, how many 747 crash sites have you lived in close proximity to?
If you had seen the after effects of KAL Cargo, you might understand my view.
I understand your views and appreciate that you have apologised to Algy.
What does 'knowing' do for me? Not a lot directly, but it does keep the issue of crowded space in the public domain where MPs and others are influenced.
Sometimes the emotional gasp factor, as you put it, achieves more than any amount of rational and logical information.
I'm sure that you are right when you say that you have seen worse reports, but that s the point isn't it - most of us haven't and you have a NDA in your contact :-)
So, I say again, I don't think that this article was sensationalist and although I understand your frustration in 'knowing' that the report is not totally accurate, I'd rather live with that and have some public profile rather than have you know the full facts and stay quiet (as you must.)
BTW, how many 747 crash sites have you lived in close proximity to?
If you had seen the after effects of KAL Cargo, you might understand my view.
Ohcirrej
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd rather live with that and have some public profile rather than have you know the full facts and stay quiet (as you must.)
And as an aside, we have all seen the documentaries about "Crowded Skies" et al. I ask again, keeping it in the public domain achieves what? LCCs are expanding their customer bases, new runway plans for SE UK. Numbers are increasing. We know this. Yet, having the media sprout some of the filth you see posted/linked to this site isn't achieveing anything. You yourself have admitted "not a lot directly where MP's and others are influenced". The only reactions I see that come from this thing are knee jerk ones that aren't thought through, and often do not include those professionals directly involved on a daily basis.
BTW, I really don't see the relevance of mentioning the KAL/EGSS incident. Not detracting from the sadness of the incident and the effect it may have had, being close to where you live, but this is almost bordering on a "media-type" attempt to envoke a non-objective response. Sorry, just the way I see it
Guest
Posts: n/a
Jerricho
Your right, I don't want to hear one side, but the problem is that no one usually tells the other side.
As for KAL, I'm not being sensationalist - that's the outcome when you don't 'get away' with a serious incident ... thank god that the 747 landed in open countryside - but my reply was for 5 miles baby, not you - and in particular a comment that 'nothing' had happened which struck me as being complacement.
Air proxes are not 'nothing', although I wouldn't wish to sensationalise them either ... but they do need investigating and dealing with.
It's a shame that the BBC got it wrong (for I have no reason to doubt your opinion), but who can give them the right information? I still think that the article was respnsibly written ... as you probably know, I will challenge sensationalist journalism strongly.
Even if we disagree, I do see your point of view.
Your right, I don't want to hear one side, but the problem is that no one usually tells the other side.
As for KAL, I'm not being sensationalist - that's the outcome when you don't 'get away' with a serious incident ... thank god that the 747 landed in open countryside - but my reply was for 5 miles baby, not you - and in particular a comment that 'nothing' had happened which struck me as being complacement.
Air proxes are not 'nothing', although I wouldn't wish to sensationalise them either ... but they do need investigating and dealing with.
It's a shame that the BBC got it wrong (for I have no reason to doubt your opinion), but who can give them the right information? I still think that the article was respnsibly written ... as you probably know, I will challenge sensationalist journalism strongly.
Even if we disagree, I do see your point of view.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this is yet another incident that has happened that then gets VERY misreported as usual by knowledgeless Media types, blown therefore out of all preportion by the public, and once again ATC/Aviation is a terrible industry.
I agree that this is a 'better' report, but still it mis-reports events and is factless. TCAS can activate an RA even if the a/c are safely separated. The a/c can be less that a mile apart but they can still be over 1500ft away. I know that this isn't the case in this event, but the real happennings and the reported happennings do not closely tie.
I say nothing happenned because all the safety related equipment together with skilled pilots and competent controlling in such circumstances prevented the a/c colliding - so basically worked. A/c all around the world get close to each other EVERY day, but these systems be it TCAS, radar conflict alert, or just plain human intervention stop nearly all becoming even closely considered to being an incident - why report with not much backup? Let the investigations bureaus find out the facts, not the media speculate on something they don't understand.
Guest
Posts: n/a
5 Miles
The media pressurising people is another matter - I'm not dismissing this and take a very different view about it - even if justified by a utilitarian approach, there is the matter of individuals circumstances to consider. I also understand some of the challenges faced by an ATCO, especially after the court martial of the RAF officer recently.
The only unease I feel about your post is, without intending to, you are establishing a kind of censorship of the press by seeking to prevent them publishing ... and yes, I do accept that sometimes they go way over the top. It is a shame that there seems to be no official counterbalance - although the BBC did, in fairness, quote BA in a non sensational context.
I do understand TCAS (at least to the level to avoid triggering spurious alarms by sloppy use of the xponder in a light aircraft) and am sure that the incident was handled well - but it was still an incident and thus a legitimate subject to report IMHO.
Maybe we need to agree to disagree on this point - but you do have my sympathies for seeing the aftermath of a crash and in my case, the a/c missed my daughters house by only a few hundred metres, so that shook me somewhat.
The media pressurising people is another matter - I'm not dismissing this and take a very different view about it - even if justified by a utilitarian approach, there is the matter of individuals circumstances to consider. I also understand some of the challenges faced by an ATCO, especially after the court martial of the RAF officer recently.
The only unease I feel about your post is, without intending to, you are establishing a kind of censorship of the press by seeking to prevent them publishing ... and yes, I do accept that sometimes they go way over the top. It is a shame that there seems to be no official counterbalance - although the BBC did, in fairness, quote BA in a non sensational context.
I do understand TCAS (at least to the level to avoid triggering spurious alarms by sloppy use of the xponder in a light aircraft) and am sure that the incident was handled well - but it was still an incident and thus a legitimate subject to report IMHO.
Maybe we need to agree to disagree on this point - but you do have my sympathies for seeing the aftermath of a crash and in my case, the a/c missed my daughters house by only a few hundred metres, so that shook me somewhat.
Ohcirrej
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F3G, I respect what you are saying and we probably going to have to agree to disagree.
The media does seem of trip over each other to get that all important scoop over their rivals, and especially early on in a "breaking story" speculation and assumptions do occur. I'm not implying the press be "sensored" over what they report, yet more concerned over the fact that many of these media sources seem to bestow on themselves a licence to "fill the gaps". And IMHO, the aviation industry seems to be more susceptible to this than other areas of public interest.
Further to what 5miles has mentioned, I have seen and experienced the frustration of seeing something being reported, compounded sometimes by the astronomical speed it makes the media. Often those directly involved are not aware of the full details, yet to see something on the TV or in print so quickly can be quite insulting. And the media's point of view......."who cares, we got the story first. If we have to, we can always retract it later."
It is human nature to focus on things that go wrong, and perhaps feel a complusion to wish to rectify the situation. But these emotions should be envoked for the correct reasons, not with half (if that) the story.
The media does seem of trip over each other to get that all important scoop over their rivals, and especially early on in a "breaking story" speculation and assumptions do occur. I'm not implying the press be "sensored" over what they report, yet more concerned over the fact that many of these media sources seem to bestow on themselves a licence to "fill the gaps". And IMHO, the aviation industry seems to be more susceptible to this than other areas of public interest.
Further to what 5miles has mentioned, I have seen and experienced the frustration of seeing something being reported, compounded sometimes by the astronomical speed it makes the media. Often those directly involved are not aware of the full details, yet to see something on the TV or in print so quickly can be quite insulting. And the media's point of view......."who cares, we got the story first. If we have to, we can always retract it later."
It is human nature to focus on things that go wrong, and perhaps feel a complusion to wish to rectify the situation. But these emotions should be envoked for the correct reasons, not with half (if that) the story.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey guys, you're not alone. I work for the Beardy one's train company. The press are at best, ill informed and at worst, ignorant. The story is ALL they care about and I have first hand experience of the LIES they print to spice up a story.
Still behind the curtain
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends who's reporting it
I'm trying to start this calmly after reading your postings, some lambasting the press -- others defending it.
What do you read when you get up in the morning with your cup of coffee? I assume it's the paper. Now, whether you subscribe to the yellow rag tabloid, or the more unsensational fold-over newspaper, that's your choice. But you read it and you spend money to buy it, and in all honesty, you probably believe what you're reading, because if you didn't, you wouldn't spend money on that printed paper.
I agree with many of you that TV news has dropped to a very low point, especially in the United States, where ratings are everything and contents are hyped to keep the watcher from pressing the button.
No matter what, however, at the first sound bite of an air tragedy, who's the first to post it on PPrune but you -- yes even those who complain about journalists from morning to night.
If it were not for reporters who would know about Indonesia's suicide pilot, the co-pilot on Egypt Air, taking off from closed runways, etc. If no one reported it, do you really think that the airport or the airline would be kind and willing enough to come out with a confession that we really f*cked up. NO!
I also make no bones about it that I was a United Press International (UPI) reporter for 18 years, stationed all over the world. I was also a private pilot. I wanted to be a commercial pilot, but the money ran short.
My conclusion on this whole subject is that there is a decent press that will and has to write or broadcast the story straight. What most of you are probably referring to is the tabloids where anything goes.
What do you read when you get up in the morning with your cup of coffee? I assume it's the paper. Now, whether you subscribe to the yellow rag tabloid, or the more unsensational fold-over newspaper, that's your choice. But you read it and you spend money to buy it, and in all honesty, you probably believe what you're reading, because if you didn't, you wouldn't spend money on that printed paper.
I agree with many of you that TV news has dropped to a very low point, especially in the United States, where ratings are everything and contents are hyped to keep the watcher from pressing the button.
No matter what, however, at the first sound bite of an air tragedy, who's the first to post it on PPrune but you -- yes even those who complain about journalists from morning to night.
If it were not for reporters who would know about Indonesia's suicide pilot, the co-pilot on Egypt Air, taking off from closed runways, etc. If no one reported it, do you really think that the airport or the airline would be kind and willing enough to come out with a confession that we really f*cked up. NO!
I also make no bones about it that I was a United Press International (UPI) reporter for 18 years, stationed all over the world. I was also a private pilot. I wanted to be a commercial pilot, but the money ran short.
My conclusion on this whole subject is that there is a decent press that will and has to write or broadcast the story straight. What most of you are probably referring to is the tabloids where anything goes.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Devon UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Final 3 Greens I would just like to point out that I used to live close enough to experience a 747 go down, in fact when KAL crashed my house shook so much I thought the whole airport had been bombed.
It took a long time for the story to hit the press as I was looking to find out what had happened.
However this does not excuse the press and the absolute ineptness of some of their people who open their mouths before engaging brain.
At that time Stansted was swarming with press for months, what with the crash and the hijack, it was near impossible to get to work through all the press vehicles that had taken over the roads to the airport.
I was astounded by some of the most incredible mistakes that these so called knowledgable reporters came out with, my favourite was a BBC reporter discussing how the crew on board the hijacked aircraft would be microwaving the meals for the passengers, I wonder how many times she'd been told to turn her mobile phone off too!?!?!?!?
Basically the reporters are (allegedly) only human, it's up to the controllers and researchers to confirm the facts BEFORE the pieces go to air (or press)
All airlines have press offices, if you know of an incedent that involves your company, the best thing to do is advise your press office, they will send out the information that is relevant and factual that can be used sensibly by the press.
This helps us all!!!
It took a long time for the story to hit the press as I was looking to find out what had happened.
However this does not excuse the press and the absolute ineptness of some of their people who open their mouths before engaging brain.
At that time Stansted was swarming with press for months, what with the crash and the hijack, it was near impossible to get to work through all the press vehicles that had taken over the roads to the airport.
I was astounded by some of the most incredible mistakes that these so called knowledgable reporters came out with, my favourite was a BBC reporter discussing how the crew on board the hijacked aircraft would be microwaving the meals for the passengers, I wonder how many times she'd been told to turn her mobile phone off too!?!?!?!?
Basically the reporters are (allegedly) only human, it's up to the controllers and researchers to confirm the facts BEFORE the pieces go to air (or press)
All airlines have press offices, if you know of an incedent that involves your company, the best thing to do is advise your press office, they will send out the information that is relevant and factual that can be used sensibly by the press.
This helps us all!!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hostie
I agree that some of the Stansted coverage was not appropriate -in fact if you search for the thread, you will find that I didn't much like the way that the results of the board of enquiry were reported either.
The reason why I didn't like the adverse comments that the BBC report about the airprox received on this thread was because it seemed to me to be trying to achieve a reasonable approach and tone.
But that doesn't make me FOP (friend of the press)
Jerricho/5 Miles
Okay maybe we need to disagree in this instance, but I do appreciate the terrific job that you guys do and it's sad that the public are not overly aware of the professionalism that keeps them safe when were up there.
I agree that some of the Stansted coverage was not appropriate -in fact if you search for the thread, you will find that I didn't much like the way that the results of the board of enquiry were reported either.
The reason why I didn't like the adverse comments that the BBC report about the airprox received on this thread was because it seemed to me to be trying to achieve a reasonable approach and tone.
But that doesn't make me FOP (friend of the press)
Jerricho/5 Miles
Okay maybe we need to disagree in this instance, but I do appreciate the terrific job that you guys do and it's sad that the public are not overly aware of the professionalism that keeps them safe when were up there.
Ohcirrej
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What do you read when you get up in the morning with your cup of coffee? I assume it's the paper
You mention our referral to the Tabloid press. The report that has started this thread is the BBC, which is supposedly the foremost of UK journalism. They were the same media group that initially reported the DHL that was recently hit by a missile as having had one of it's engines hit. They were also responsible for the production of a "mock-umentary" the titled 'The day Britain stood still' which theoretically showed the timeline of events that lead to a mid-air at Heathrow. The show caused quite a heated response from NATS, with requests that it not be shown, as the producers didn't even consult with them. And as you may have seen, caused quite a lively debate on these forums.
No matter what, however, at the first sound bite of an air tragedy, who's the first to post it on PPrune but you -- yes even those who complain about journalists from morning to night.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you're getting your knickers in a twist that crap reporting is influencing people, just email a link to this site to your MP. Aviation safety is addressed by the Transport Select Committee, and I think it's fair to say Gwyneth Dunwoody (love her or loathe her) is far from being a pushover as recent events would suggest, or influenced by the tabloids. Besides, plenty of people from the industry are called as witnesses and give good testimony that is listened to. I doubt that will include the editor of a tabloid any time soon.
I don't have any experience of an MP being bombarded with letters about safety, a few I know get local groups who live on the perimiters of airports lobbying about noise and runways but that seems to be it. With sensationalist reporting, imho, I think it's still the old saying of today's news is tomorrow's fish and chip paper.
I don't have any experience of an MP being bombarded with letters about safety, a few I know get local groups who live on the perimiters of airports lobbying about noise and runways but that seems to be it. With sensationalist reporting, imho, I think it's still the old saying of today's news is tomorrow's fish and chip paper.
