ATCO murdered in Zurich (Merged)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: temporarily unsure :-)
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my sincerest condolences to the ATCO and his family.I have the highest regard for the Swiss ATCOs and i think,as so many others have said,that this sort of thing is so tragic because obviously they had already gone through so much.
I hope that the authorities catch whoever did this.even if it was done by a relative of a pax,it is utterly senseless.
I hope that the authorities catch whoever did this.even if it was done by a relative of a pax,it is utterly senseless.
Need automatic RA notification to ATC
Further to one of the controllers reiterating that pilots deviating from a clearance in conformance with a TCAS RA should notify ATC so that ATC doesn't issue conflicting instructions: there has been discussion of automatic RA notification to ATC from TCAS.
Certainly if the controller had known that TCAS had taken over, he would have shut up and started filling out the airprox forms.
My preference is for automatic notification of TCAS RAs to ATC since the aircrews are in a suddenly high workload situation and don't really have time to discuss their clearance.
Certainly if the controller had known that TCAS had taken over, he would have shut up and started filling out the airprox forms.
My preference is for automatic notification of TCAS RAs to ATC since the aircrews are in a suddenly high workload situation and don't really have time to discuss their clearance.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beringer.
Your view lacks compassion, both for the ATCO and his family.
From a technical view point: Complete safety means nobody flies. Error will always exist in human endevour and it is not possible to run an ATC system without some danger. That is why such systems must be designed and run in a manner which deliberately offsets the "hoops" to the greatest degree possible. On the night in question the system was exposed, mainly, by management decisions that lined up the hoops. Those decisions were not the responsibility of the ATCO and whilst he was involved in the system failure, it is not his fault.
I think your remarks might not assist here. Peace man.
Point 4
Your view lacks compassion, both for the ATCO and his family.
From a technical view point: Complete safety means nobody flies. Error will always exist in human endevour and it is not possible to run an ATC system without some danger. That is why such systems must be designed and run in a manner which deliberately offsets the "hoops" to the greatest degree possible. On the night in question the system was exposed, mainly, by management decisions that lined up the hoops. Those decisions were not the responsibility of the ATCO and whilst he was involved in the system failure, it is not his fault.
I think your remarks might not assist here. Peace man.
Point 4
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TCAS
It might be simplistic, but is there no way that TCAS could be engineered to broadcast these advisories so that the ATC people know what is happening, especially if the crew are not having time to make the radio broadcast and hope that the frequency is clear.
please wait
Join Date: May 2001
Location: miami and other nice places
Age: 63
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't think this is science fiction luoto, already back in 1996 NASA did testing with advanced ATC systems that may very well transmit such information to the screens of the controllers.
Would require some modifications though and as these will cost money they may never jump across the "cost-benefit-fence" unless we have two A380 colliding over a major city because a controller gave other advisories and a crew would not have complied with their TCAS alert...
Would require some modifications though and as these will cost money they may never jump across the "cost-benefit-fence" unless we have two A380 colliding over a major city because a controller gave other advisories and a crew would not have complied with their TCAS alert...
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,692
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Luoto :
it is technically rather easy to downlink RAs, as the RAs are already broadcasted on the Mode S to co-ordinate with the other TCAS(s). To receive this you only need a fixed antenna relatively cheap.
But this pose serious ( legal ) problems. Because what the controller will see on his scope is an RA being issued by a system, not the fact that the pilot is following the RA. There are also short false RAs that are being transmitted but not resulting in an audio resolution in the cockpit, and also not all aircraft are TCAS equiped.
Downlinking RAs will solve some problems but create new ones as well. anyway it is being seriously studied by Eurocontrol and already tested in Japan.
Gunship :
there were not really 2 sets of rules on TCAS adherence before July 2002. Just the fact that an RA stands for Resolution ADVISORY and it was always up to the pilot in command to follow it or not.
( Visual aquisition of the intruder was even mentionned as a possible reason not to follow an RA ) Also some other aviation rules said that a pilot should always follow an ATC clearance unless in emergency, and an RA was not described as an emercency.
In this confusion some airlines and /or some State authorities delivered different instructions to their pilots.
But it is all relatively straightened now.
Reference the Guardian article.
A good illustration of what a wrong sentence can do in some minds :.
_____________________________________________________
quote :
He had wrongly instructed the Bashkirian airlines plane to descend, even though its onboard warning equipment told it to climb. The pilot followed the controller's instructions and ploughed into a DHL cargo plane that was descending in accordance with its own collision-avoiding equipment.
__________________________________________________
Everything is correct except the word " wrongly ". P.N. issued the clearance BEFORE anyone had announced an RA, as the RAs came AFTER the clerance... A world of a difference for us , ( as PN was issuing a correct clearance at that time ) but not to the general public who beleive what is in the news and condemmend him.
I again deplore that the names are mentionned. What does this bring ? More problems for the relatives staying behind , that`s all...
I start to dislike journalists .
it is technically rather easy to downlink RAs, as the RAs are already broadcasted on the Mode S to co-ordinate with the other TCAS(s). To receive this you only need a fixed antenna relatively cheap.
But this pose serious ( legal ) problems. Because what the controller will see on his scope is an RA being issued by a system, not the fact that the pilot is following the RA. There are also short false RAs that are being transmitted but not resulting in an audio resolution in the cockpit, and also not all aircraft are TCAS equiped.
Downlinking RAs will solve some problems but create new ones as well. anyway it is being seriously studied by Eurocontrol and already tested in Japan.
Gunship :
there were not really 2 sets of rules on TCAS adherence before July 2002. Just the fact that an RA stands for Resolution ADVISORY and it was always up to the pilot in command to follow it or not.
( Visual aquisition of the intruder was even mentionned as a possible reason not to follow an RA ) Also some other aviation rules said that a pilot should always follow an ATC clearance unless in emergency, and an RA was not described as an emercency.
In this confusion some airlines and /or some State authorities delivered different instructions to their pilots.
But it is all relatively straightened now.
Reference the Guardian article.
A good illustration of what a wrong sentence can do in some minds :.
_____________________________________________________
quote :
He had wrongly instructed the Bashkirian airlines plane to descend, even though its onboard warning equipment told it to climb. The pilot followed the controller's instructions and ploughed into a DHL cargo plane that was descending in accordance with its own collision-avoiding equipment.
__________________________________________________
Everything is correct except the word " wrongly ". P.N. issued the clearance BEFORE anyone had announced an RA, as the RAs came AFTER the clerance... A world of a difference for us , ( as PN was issuing a correct clearance at that time ) but not to the general public who beleive what is in the news and condemmend him.
I again deplore that the names are mentionned. What does this bring ? More problems for the relatives staying behind , that`s all...
I start to dislike journalists .
The Original Party Animal
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Around the corner
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATC Watcher,
Very informative post.
Re TCAS, the Japan DC10/B747 incident from January 2001 springs to mind, where the crew of the B747 (I think) decided to ignore the RA and do it visually instead. Turned out it wasn't really the right decision, since it resulted in a very close encounter (10m, I repeat: 10m seperation!).
One of the recommendations of the japanese investigators was for ICAO to clarify the use of TCAS.
As we know, nothing happened in that respect until July 1st 2002...
Very informative post.
Re TCAS, the Japan DC10/B747 incident from January 2001 springs to mind, where the crew of the B747 (I think) decided to ignore the RA and do it visually instead. Turned out it wasn't really the right decision, since it resulted in a very close encounter (10m, I repeat: 10m seperation!).
One of the recommendations of the japanese investigators was for ICAO to clarify the use of TCAS.
As we know, nothing happened in that respect until July 1st 2002...
please wait
Join Date: May 2001
Location: miami and other nice places
Age: 63
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Though aviation marked its 100th aniversary it seems we still only learn painfully from event to event and continue to follow on Murphy's track.
This sucks. - Big Time!
Now, after this obsulete midair we finally get more precise ICAO standarts dealing with TCAS. So when will all aircraft be equipped with such a life saving device, which clearly proved it is worth its pricetag on numerous occasions in daily operation?
Probably we will sooner see all automobiles equipped with similar distance alert systems, as we have seen airbags becoming standart there, then it would become mandatory for anything flying to have TCAS on board and functioning at all times.
The really sad part here is the murder of the controller. But maybe it will mark another 'wake up call' for those, specifically in charge of decisionmaking and implementation in safety relevant areas, so that one desperate husband or wife won't wait in front of their door, after a fatal accident entirely wiped out another family.
Times are getting more violent these days, and this may happen everywhere, anytime.
This sucks. - Big Time!
Now, after this obsulete midair we finally get more precise ICAO standarts dealing with TCAS. So when will all aircraft be equipped with such a life saving device, which clearly proved it is worth its pricetag on numerous occasions in daily operation?
Probably we will sooner see all automobiles equipped with similar distance alert systems, as we have seen airbags becoming standart there, then it would become mandatory for anything flying to have TCAS on board and functioning at all times.
The really sad part here is the murder of the controller. But maybe it will mark another 'wake up call' for those, specifically in charge of decisionmaking and implementation in safety relevant areas, so that one desperate husband or wife won't wait in front of their door, after a fatal accident entirely wiped out another family.
Times are getting more violent these days, and this may happen everywhere, anytime.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: hamble
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skyguide now have a massive image problem, and it's going to get worse with the forthcoming publication of the report into the collision over the Lake of Constance. I wonder how long it will be before the MBA consultants that so many Swiss companies seem to depend on, with their talk of 'downsides, benchmarking, core values and corporate identity' will advise them to change their name. After all they've done it with monotonous regularity in the recent past - from Radio Schweiz to Swisscontrol to Skyguide - with all the associated costs of 'rebranding'. No wonder Zurich airport has the highest landing fees and passenger taxes in the world. It also now has the worst delay statistics in Europe. My suggestion for a new name would be 'Extraordinary'. It matches 'Unique' and reflects the extraordinary fact that ATC controllers in Zurich have watched no less than five airliners disappear from their radar screens to impact the ground with fatal results over the last 14 years. One of their principal spokespersons on this thread goes by the name of 'Spuds McKenzie'. If I remember correctly this was a one-eyed dog that was ditched as a slogan by the Budweiser brewery some time ago for being commercially irrelevant - rather a suitable name for a Skyguide controller don't you think?
Pardoned PPRuNer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: GlassGumtree
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Dear Me
Condolences to the family and friends.
But - come on you guys, you keep on saying it yourselves
- WAIT UNTIL THE OFFICIAL REPORT COMES OUT.
These discussions and arguments are no good for anybody - no matter how much you pretend to know, or how close to the event you were.
Even I am embarassed about some of the things you professionals have been saying - without basis of fact.
But - come on you guys, you keep on saying it yourselves
- WAIT UNTIL THE OFFICIAL REPORT COMES OUT.
These discussions and arguments are no good for anybody - no matter how much you pretend to know, or how close to the event you were.
Even I am embarassed about some of the things you professionals have been saying - without basis of fact.
694c,
you seem to be running out of valid arguments. Usually that is when people start direct personal attacks.
Whatever grudge you may have against skyguide or ZRH or Switzerland or all of the above, kindly refrain from just blasting all over the place.
you seem to be running out of valid arguments. Usually that is when people start direct personal attacks.
Whatever grudge you may have against skyguide or ZRH or Switzerland or all of the above, kindly refrain from just blasting all over the place.
ex-Tanker
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Luton Beds UK
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why follow TCAS?
Just to clear up one point here - the TCAS issues instructions to both aircraft involved in a confliction. The ATC may do if they have time - or only to one of the aircraft.
Disobeying TCAS can well lead to an escalation of the situation.
If nothing else comes from this tragic mess, let us at least learn that TCAS is the master. That is how it was conceived - and if it goes off with an RA, there is precious little time to question its motives.
Disobeying TCAS can well lead to an escalation of the situation.
If nothing else comes from this tragic mess, let us at least learn that TCAS is the master. That is how it was conceived - and if it goes off with an RA, there is precious little time to question its motives.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
694c and Berenger Saunier:
This forum is often useful and interesting for exchanging ideas and learning from one another. You two, however, come across as offensive bigots.
For the rest of you:
Let me state a few things. The controllers at Zuerich (Swiss, Danish and the other nationalities) are very, very good at what they do. The airspace is busy and complex and there are many problems for which, though not of their making, the controllers have to compensate.
There have been several accidents over the years and the reasons for these are many and varied. It is accepted best practice in modern aviation to try to understand all the parts of a chain that allowed an incident to occur. Only then, through knowledge, education and reviewing working practices can we move on towards the goal of improving safety. Apportioning blame, whether fairly or not, is not helpful in this regard. I think that there are some issues that maybe Skyguide management needs to review (introduction of reporting schemes?, establishing an independent safety regulator?) and the ridiculous situation that has been allowed to develop over noise regulations needs to be sensibly addressed (both the Swiss and German authorities are at fault here and it is a subject worthy of it’s own forum). But please do not attack or criticise any of the controllers. Believe me when I say that they would more than stand up with the very best in the world.
One issue that really angers me here is the way identifying information was released about PN. The initial press releases by Skyguide were in my opinion clumsy (citicising the Russian pilot’s english et cetera). Skyguide had a responsibility to PN as an employee that it failed in. The day after the controller who was on duty at the time of the Crossair crash in 2001 was interviewed by the Air Accident Investigators, details that should have been confidential were in the Swiss newspapers. Why did this happen? The controller concerned didn’t talk to the press, so who did? Skyguide management? The Air Accident Investigators?
Controllers are sometimes under a lot of pressure. Berenger’s comments about air conditioned comfort are outrageous! All controllers are professionals. Every day at work is a matter of pride and conscience. Expedition and safety are not easily compatible but we do try our best ALWAYS, although sometimes under not the best of circumstances eg equipment failings, poor management practices.
The standard of journalism here in the UK (I can only assume it is the same in the rest of the world) relating to this murder has been very sloppy indeed. I refer to statements already made on PPRUNE in this regard. Every article that I have read or listened to has been full of factual errors and incorrect statements. If we as controllers and pilots did our job so badly there would be a great number of accidents. Air travel is as safe as it is through our professionalism.
Now, I am off to work.
This forum is often useful and interesting for exchanging ideas and learning from one another. You two, however, come across as offensive bigots.
For the rest of you:
Let me state a few things. The controllers at Zuerich (Swiss, Danish and the other nationalities) are very, very good at what they do. The airspace is busy and complex and there are many problems for which, though not of their making, the controllers have to compensate.
There have been several accidents over the years and the reasons for these are many and varied. It is accepted best practice in modern aviation to try to understand all the parts of a chain that allowed an incident to occur. Only then, through knowledge, education and reviewing working practices can we move on towards the goal of improving safety. Apportioning blame, whether fairly or not, is not helpful in this regard. I think that there are some issues that maybe Skyguide management needs to review (introduction of reporting schemes?, establishing an independent safety regulator?) and the ridiculous situation that has been allowed to develop over noise regulations needs to be sensibly addressed (both the Swiss and German authorities are at fault here and it is a subject worthy of it’s own forum). But please do not attack or criticise any of the controllers. Believe me when I say that they would more than stand up with the very best in the world.
One issue that really angers me here is the way identifying information was released about PN. The initial press releases by Skyguide were in my opinion clumsy (citicising the Russian pilot’s english et cetera). Skyguide had a responsibility to PN as an employee that it failed in. The day after the controller who was on duty at the time of the Crossair crash in 2001 was interviewed by the Air Accident Investigators, details that should have been confidential were in the Swiss newspapers. Why did this happen? The controller concerned didn’t talk to the press, so who did? Skyguide management? The Air Accident Investigators?
Controllers are sometimes under a lot of pressure. Berenger’s comments about air conditioned comfort are outrageous! All controllers are professionals. Every day at work is a matter of pride and conscience. Expedition and safety are not easily compatible but we do try our best ALWAYS, although sometimes under not the best of circumstances eg equipment failings, poor management practices.
The standard of journalism here in the UK (I can only assume it is the same in the rest of the world) relating to this murder has been very sloppy indeed. I refer to statements already made on PPRUNE in this regard. Every article that I have read or listened to has been full of factual errors and incorrect statements. If we as controllers and pilots did our job so badly there would be a great number of accidents. Air travel is as safe as it is through our professionalism.
Now, I am off to work.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Europe
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First I would like to express my deep sympathy for the familiy of our murdered colleague.
The discussion until now covered a lot of aspects. However, there is one generic question I would like to bring up - not expecting an answer!
As already mentioned it's the system which has to blamed not the individual (swiss cheese model!)
But wherever human beings are involved, they make mistakes. Whether they create the system or form part of it. A human not making mistakes is not a human.
Can it be that an idividual not acting negligent or on purpose making a mistake can be sentenced for that - I mean sentenced for being human? I know this is not only possible but happens in reality.
The reason for that is, from my point of view, that puplic needs one (a face, a name,..) found guilty. Its somehow political. Concerning this issue society hasen't changed very much since 2000 years (or even longer). It's a matter of fact and therefor I do not hope that any major changes will occur in the near and middle future.
And it will always be the individual from the front-line who will be victimised.
Every ATCO and pilot has to live with the knowledge of his own human deficiency. Coping with that requires a strong nature.
The only thing remaining is to wish all of us good luck for the future!
dg
The discussion until now covered a lot of aspects. However, there is one generic question I would like to bring up - not expecting an answer!
As already mentioned it's the system which has to blamed not the individual (swiss cheese model!)
But wherever human beings are involved, they make mistakes. Whether they create the system or form part of it. A human not making mistakes is not a human.
Can it be that an idividual not acting negligent or on purpose making a mistake can be sentenced for that - I mean sentenced for being human? I know this is not only possible but happens in reality.
The reason for that is, from my point of view, that puplic needs one (a face, a name,..) found guilty. Its somehow political. Concerning this issue society hasen't changed very much since 2000 years (or even longer). It's a matter of fact and therefor I do not hope that any major changes will occur in the near and middle future.
And it will always be the individual from the front-line who will be victimised.
Every ATCO and pilot has to live with the knowledge of his own human deficiency. Coping with that requires a strong nature.
The only thing remaining is to wish all of us good luck for the future!
dg
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doubtful guest
You make a valid point.
If we choose to operate our ATC system in a way that fails dangerous in the event of human error then our ethos is flawed. If the individuals who work such a system are then going to be held accountable for their human fallibility then an unreasonable burden is placed upon us.
Every time I put a headset on I control in a way that offsets the hoops. I have upset some people along the way who see me as overly prudent but it is not my job to make up for the lack of ATCOs, runways, terminals, stands and airspace or be driven by airlines' commercial pressure. I refuse to allow myself to be exposed by the "push, push" culture.
I once heard a saying that went something like... "Profit is sanity, excess is vanity"
Rings true I think.
Point 4
You make a valid point.
If we choose to operate our ATC system in a way that fails dangerous in the event of human error then our ethos is flawed. If the individuals who work such a system are then going to be held accountable for their human fallibility then an unreasonable burden is placed upon us.
Every time I put a headset on I control in a way that offsets the hoops. I have upset some people along the way who see me as overly prudent but it is not my job to make up for the lack of ATCOs, runways, terminals, stands and airspace or be driven by airlines' commercial pressure. I refuse to allow myself to be exposed by the "push, push" culture.
I once heard a saying that went something like... "Profit is sanity, excess is vanity"
Rings true I think.
Point 4
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many here seem to have a private axe to grind, especially 649c - a failed controller possibly? BTW the Bud dog was a pitbull with both eyes.
As ATC Watcher has pointed out, PN;s instruction was given before the TCAS avoidance alert occurred. Accepting this as being correct, from that point on he was also just a "passenger"
By their sensationalist, irresponsible reporting of the controller's identity and address, the media is an accessory to his murder and I hope that those involved are prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
As ATC Watcher has pointed out, PN;s instruction was given before the TCAS avoidance alert occurred. Accepting this as being correct, from that point on he was also just a "passenger"
By their sensationalist, irresponsible reporting of the controller's identity and address, the media is an accessory to his murder and I hope that those involved are prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lonmore makes "sensationalist.." reporting of the media's reporting... I thought the reporting had been, prior to the incident, the person's initials, nationality and town. That is still quite restrained standards by other norms. It goes a bit too far to blame the media for being partly responsible.
Anyway the point I was wondering was about the liability for controllers of their actions, whether negligent or not at a given time (i.e. accident due to well accidents happen vs crash due to controller reading the newspaper to pick an extreme!).
AND NO, FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE FEW PPRUNERS UNABLE TO SEE THINGS CLEARLY THIS IS NOT A SUGGESTION OF WHAT HAPPENED AT ZRH but it highlights that software companies seemingly can exclude liability if their software eats your accounts and kills your business so what is the real difference here.
Anyway the point I was wondering was about the liability for controllers of their actions, whether negligent or not at a given time (i.e. accident due to well accidents happen vs crash due to controller reading the newspaper to pick an extreme!).
AND NO, FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE FEW PPRUNERS UNABLE TO SEE THINGS CLEARLY THIS IS NOT A SUGGESTION OF WHAT HAPPENED AT ZRH but it highlights that software companies seemingly can exclude liability if their software eats your accounts and kills your business so what is the real difference here.
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lon more
You have to be careful about babies and bathwater. While, of course, it was more than regretable that this murderer was helped to find his victim by what was published in the media, if you make the media criminally responsible for the actions of every nutter who reads them they would end up reporting nothing but grain harvests and five-year plans.
There has been talk of local newspapers not publishing pictures of children (following sporting success, 1st communion or whatever) for fear of stirring up the paedophiles.
Is that the world we want to build for ourselves? Or would we rather tackle the real criminals rather than taking out the soft targets?
Timothy
You have to be careful about babies and bathwater. While, of course, it was more than regretable that this murderer was helped to find his victim by what was published in the media, if you make the media criminally responsible for the actions of every nutter who reads them they would end up reporting nothing but grain harvests and five-year plans.
There has been talk of local newspapers not publishing pictures of children (following sporting success, 1st communion or whatever) for fear of stirring up the paedophiles.
Is that the world we want to build for ourselves? Or would we rather tackle the real criminals rather than taking out the soft targets?
Timothy