2020: Dutch ATC legally threatens public media after EHAM runway blunder revealed.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2020: Dutch ATC legally threatens public media after EHAM runway blunder revealed.
...read it at
https://www.aviation24.be/airports/a...ilable-runway/
The issue is a bit too complex to fully describe in a "forum subject header"
Dutch ATC / Luchtverkeersleiding Nederland now wants the audio at
off the internet,
threatening legal action against public media in The Netherlands.
That amounts to censorship.
Barbra Streisand effect:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
https://www.aviation24.be/airports/a...ilable-runway/
https://www.aviation24.be/airports/a...ilable-runway/
The issue is a bit too complex to fully describe in a "forum subject header"
Dutch ATC / Luchtverkeersleiding Nederland now wants the audio at
threatening legal action against public media in The Netherlands.
That amounts to censorship.
Barbra Streisand effect:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
https://www.aviation24.be/airports/a...ilable-runway/
Making the runway available
Making the runway available
The procedure for starting to use a runway is that LVNL notifies the airport from the air traffic control tower
about the exact time at which they want to start using a runway.
After that, the airport performs an inspection of the runway.
After the inspection of the runway has taken place,
LVNL submits a formal request to the airport to start using the runway.
about the exact time at which they want to start using a runway.
After that, the airport performs an inspection of the runway.
After the inspection of the runway has taken place,
LVNL submits a formal request to the airport to start using the runway.
LVNL will now take legal action against the news organization
as the video clip was not removed before last night 23:59 (UTC +1),
LVNL states that incidents between air traffic control and an aircraft
may not be retransmitted and this according to a European Regulation.
as the video clip was not removed before last night 23:59 (UTC +1),
LVNL states that incidents between air traffic control and an aircraft
may not be retransmitted and this according to a European Regulation.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...for anyone able to read Dutch , or able to use "machine translate", please follow
the journalist's Twitter account at
https://twitter.com/dsajet
Also see
https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/26211...erkeersleiding
for lots more.
A wellknown Dutch "shock log" has now also picked this up:
https://www.geenstijl.nl/5151955/sch...raudio-rtv-nh/
Plus
https://www.villamedia.nl/artikel/lu...egen-nh-nieuws ,
the official "Dutch Journalism Association" website.
"Fake news"? Unfortunately, this is not.
LVNL/Luchtverkeersleiding Nederland/Dutch ATC is trying to "sweep things under the carpet/cover-up things" over the last few years.
the journalist's Twitter account at
https://twitter.com/dsajet
Also see
https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/26211...erkeersleiding
for lots more.
A wellknown Dutch "shock log" has now also picked this up:
https://www.geenstijl.nl/5151955/sch...raudio-rtv-nh/
Plus
https://www.villamedia.nl/artikel/lu...egen-nh-nieuws ,
the official "Dutch Journalism Association" website.
"Fake news"? Unfortunately, this is not.
LVNL/Luchtverkeersleiding Nederland/Dutch ATC is trying to "sweep things under the carpet/cover-up things" over the last few years.
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LVNL/Luchtverkeersleiding Nederland/Dutch ATC is trying to "sweep things under the carpet/cover-up things" over the last few years.
It is not limited to ATC by the way , he same goes for CVRs
Similar procedures and actions exists in many modern States (e.g Canad or New Zealand) where safety management is more important that journalist sensationalism...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...if you can read Dutch, then try
https://nos.nl/artikel/2322990-topma...-vluchten.html
Published last Friday.
Amsterdam Airport Schiphol and Dutch ATC want to raise flight-capacity/slots from 500,000 flights to 540,000 flights, putting pressure on Dutch national government.
Publicity like
https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/26210...over-landingen
they can ill-afford right now.
It is not that much about sensationalism anymore, it is about censorship.
And certainly not all Dutch institutions have the wellbeing of residents near Amsterdam Airport in mind.
https://nos.nl/artikel/2322990-topma...-vluchten.html
Published last Friday.
Amsterdam Airport Schiphol and Dutch ATC want to raise flight-capacity/slots from 500,000 flights to 540,000 flights, putting pressure on Dutch national government.
Publicity like
https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/26210...over-landingen
they can ill-afford right now.
It is not that much about sensationalism anymore, it is about censorship.
And certainly not all Dutch institutions have the wellbeing of residents near Amsterdam Airport in mind.
UK does not allow Live ATC audio streaming so if the Dutch want to stop it then its up to them surely -
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We even used to have a website , which is/was
https://www.atcbox.com
/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/atcbox-foundation
It's similar in UK
Whilst there is no law specifically prohibiting listening to ATC broadcasts it is illegal to act on the information in any way, share it or re-transmit it.
I personally find it reassuring that I can do my job day to day without the threat of a recording of my voice being put on youtube to be judged out of context by people who usually know little about aviation.
The only people who think this is a cover up don't know what they're on about. It's been fully reported through the correct channels and will be investigated.
However - "Cover up" makes much better headlines than " incident being investigated through normal processes" or "Media company being prosecuted for breaking the law"
Whilst there is no law specifically prohibiting listening to ATC broadcasts it is illegal to act on the information in any way, share it or re-transmit it.
I personally find it reassuring that I can do my job day to day without the threat of a recording of my voice being put on youtube to be judged out of context by people who usually know little about aviation.
The only people who think this is a cover up don't know what they're on about. It's been fully reported through the correct channels and will be investigated.
However - "Cover up" makes much better headlines than " incident being investigated through normal processes" or "Media company being prosecuted for breaking the law"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...you really LOVE the Youtube-account
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCue...rOppky5gl3U6QQ
/
https://twitter.com/VASAviation
then, I suppose...
Which is one of the gripes of this Dutch public news media company:
twitter.com/dsajet/status/1229089717960036352
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCue...rOppky5gl3U6QQ
/
https://twitter.com/VASAviation
then, I suppose...
Which is one of the gripes of this Dutch public news media company:
twitter.com/dsajet/status/1229089717960036352
Last edited by Stratofreighter; 17th Feb 2020 at 12:55.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...and another link:
https://nltimes.nl/2020/02/17/16-pla...ers-reportedly
https://nltimes.nl/2020/02/17/16-pla...ers-reportedly
LVNL is now demanding that NH Nieuws remove a published fragment
n which air traffic controllers can be heard instructing planes to land on a closed runway,
and is threatening to take the broadcaster to court if it doesn't, NH Nieuws wrote.
According to the broadcaster,
LVNL is relying on a European regulation, which states that recordings of air traffic control may be listened to, but not published again.
NH Nieuws said that the social and journalistic importance of this fragment is of such concern that it will not be deleted.
The safety situation at Schiphol is an important and relevant topic, the broadcaster said.
NH Nieuws also said that air traffic control makes selective use of this European regulation.
The broadcaster referred to a recording of King Willem-Alexander communicating with air traffic control as a pilot that was published on social media.
A communications adviser for LVNL called this a "nice fragment".
Last month, LVNL also allowed a vlogger into the control tower, and sound clips were published on their video blog, NH Nieuws said.
...which is Sam Chui at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKp_0268BVQ ...
The Netherlands association for journalism NVJ is impressed
with NH Nieuws for standing its ground, general secretary Thomas Bruning said on Twitter.
n which air traffic controllers can be heard instructing planes to land on a closed runway,
and is threatening to take the broadcaster to court if it doesn't, NH Nieuws wrote.
According to the broadcaster,
LVNL is relying on a European regulation, which states that recordings of air traffic control may be listened to, but not published again.
NH Nieuws said that the social and journalistic importance of this fragment is of such concern that it will not be deleted.
The safety situation at Schiphol is an important and relevant topic, the broadcaster said.
NH Nieuws also said that air traffic control makes selective use of this European regulation.
The broadcaster referred to a recording of King Willem-Alexander communicating with air traffic control as a pilot that was published on social media.
A communications adviser for LVNL called this a "nice fragment".
Last month, LVNL also allowed a vlogger into the control tower, and sound clips were published on their video blog, NH Nieuws said.
...which is Sam Chui at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKp_0268BVQ ...
The Netherlands association for journalism NVJ is impressed
with NH Nieuws for standing its ground, general secretary Thomas Bruning said on Twitter.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...if you can read Dutch, then try
https://nos.nl/artikel/2322990-topma...-vluchten.html
Published last Friday.
Amsterdam Airport Schiphol and Dutch ATC want to raise flight-capacity/slots from 500,000 flights to 540,000 flights, putting pressure on Dutch national government.
Publicity like
https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/26210...over-landingen
they can ill-afford right now.
It is not that much about sensationalism anymore, it is about censorship.
And certainly not all Dutch institutions have the wellbeing of residents near Amsterdam Airport in mind.
https://nos.nl/artikel/2322990-topma...-vluchten.html
Published last Friday.
Amsterdam Airport Schiphol and Dutch ATC want to raise flight-capacity/slots from 500,000 flights to 540,000 flights, putting pressure on Dutch national government.
Publicity like
https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/26210...over-landingen
they can ill-afford right now.
It is not that much about sensationalism anymore, it is about censorship.
And certainly not all Dutch institutions have the wellbeing of residents near Amsterdam Airport in mind.
https://www.parool.nl/amsterdam/weer...baan~bbf27729/
De affaire komt op een pikant moment.
Vorige week bepleitten twee van de vier regeringspartijen, D66 en ChristenUnie,
nieuw veiligheids*onderzoek voordat er een besluit valt of Schiphol verder mag groeien.
Vorige week bepleitten twee van de vier regeringspartijen, D66 en ChristenUnie,
nieuw veiligheids*onderzoek voordat er een besluit valt of Schiphol verder mag groeien.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: MC80 Home One type Star Cruiser
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to the media, this was a blunder and a serious safety risk. According to LVNL, it was just a formality. I’m sure that it will be dealt with an internal safety investigation and that a trial by media is absolutely unnecessary.
“The runway had been inspected, and the runway lighting with the corresponding stopbars that protect against unauthorized entry onto the runway had been switched on.”
To me, that seems like a formality as the runway was not officially cleared for operation. Apart from that, the runway was safe to be used.
This media sensationalism only works in favour of anyone who is against the airport and the aircraft noise in their backyard. This gives them more reasons to complain.
Unfortunately, the LVNL drew more attention and fuelled the sensationalism by wanting this video, which basically shows a non-event, to be removed.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, this is about censorship. This NH-Nieuws item of yesterday is only one of several recent incidents whereby LVNL puts pressure on Dutch public media.
Again read
https://www.parool.nl/amsterdam/weer...baan~bbf27729/
in a translation.
The English-language
https://nltimes.nl/2020/02/11/ruling...-safety-growth
was published earlier last week.
Again read
https://www.parool.nl/amsterdam/weer...baan~bbf27729/
in a translation.
The English-language
https://nltimes.nl/2020/02/11/ruling...-safety-growth
was published earlier last week.
Before Schiphol can be given permission to further expand its number of flight movements, there must first be a new investigation into safety at the airport, according to coalition parties D66 and ChristenUnie. They want to be absolutely certain that growth will not affect the safety of passengers and employees at Schiphol, NOS reports.
D66 parliamentarian Jan Paternotte and ChristenUnie MP Eppo Bruins want the Dutch Safety Bard to conduct a new investigation into safety at the airport and publish a report. Until then, Schiphol must remain limited to its current 500 thousand flight movements per year.
"It is already very busy in the air around Schiphol," Bruins said to the broadcaster. "If you are going to squeeze more traffic into that airspace, you will hit the limits of what is possible." Paternotte added that the Dutch Safety Board already published a critical report about safety at Schiphol a few years ago. He gets the impression that not much was done with it. "There are collisions on the ground and all sorts of other incidents; 140 times per year. Before there is any growth, there must first be new advice from the Dutch Safety Board."
D66 parliamentarian Jan Paternotte and ChristenUnie MP Eppo Bruins want the Dutch Safety Bard to conduct a new investigation into safety at the airport and publish a report. Until then, Schiphol must remain limited to its current 500 thousand flight movements per year.
"It is already very busy in the air around Schiphol," Bruins said to the broadcaster. "If you are going to squeeze more traffic into that airspace, you will hit the limits of what is possible." Paternotte added that the Dutch Safety Board already published a critical report about safety at Schiphol a few years ago. He gets the impression that not much was done with it. "There are collisions on the ground and all sorts of other incidents; 140 times per year. Before there is any growth, there must first be new advice from the Dutch Safety Board."
Last edited by Stratofreighter; 17th Feb 2020 at 13:28.
No , they are just ensuring that they will not be put on trial by social media. There are very well functioning institutions to deal with such incidents inside the Dutch system without adding twitter and Facebook ..
It is not limited to ATC by the way , he same goes for CVRs
Similar procedures and actions exists in many modern States (e.g Canad or New Zealand) where safety management is more important that journalist sensationalism...
It is not limited to ATC by the way , he same goes for CVRs
Similar procedures and actions exists in many modern States (e.g Canad or New Zealand) where safety management is more important that journalist sensationalism...
You can't get away with that over here. We have leakers and the news is free to post hearsay as fact
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EDSP
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From ITU Radio Regulations Vol. 1 from 2016
Administrative Provisions:
17.1 In the application of the appropriate provisions of the Constitution and the Convention, administrations bind themselves to take the necessary measures to prohibit and prevent:
17.2 a) the unauthorized interception of radiocommunications not intended for the general use of the public;
17.3 b) the divulgence of the contents, simple disclosure of the existence, publication or any use whatever, without authorization of information of any nature whatever obtained by the interception of the radiocommunications mentioned in No. 17.2
18.4 § 2 The holder of a licence is required to preserve the secrecy of telecommunications, as provided in the relevant provisions of the Constitution and the Convention. Moreover, the licence shall mention, specifically or by reference, that if the station includes a receiver, the interception of radiocommunication correspondence, other than that which the station is authorized to receive, is forbidden, and that in cases where such correspondence is involuntarily received, it shall not be reproduced, nor communicated to third parties, nor used for any purpose, and even its existence shall not be disclosed
Aeronautical Services:
36.3 § 3 Except as otherwise provided for in these Regulations, the person responsible, as well as all the persons who may have knowledge of any information whatever obtained by means of the radiocommunication service, are placed under the obligation of observing and ensuring the secrecy of correspondence.
37.11 § 4 Each administration shall take the necessary steps to place operators under the obligation to preserve the secrecy of correspondence as provided for in No. 18.4.
Administrative Provisions:
17.1 In the application of the appropriate provisions of the Constitution and the Convention, administrations bind themselves to take the necessary measures to prohibit and prevent:
17.2 a) the unauthorized interception of radiocommunications not intended for the general use of the public;
17.3 b) the divulgence of the contents, simple disclosure of the existence, publication or any use whatever, without authorization of information of any nature whatever obtained by the interception of the radiocommunications mentioned in No. 17.2
18.4 § 2 The holder of a licence is required to preserve the secrecy of telecommunications, as provided in the relevant provisions of the Constitution and the Convention. Moreover, the licence shall mention, specifically or by reference, that if the station includes a receiver, the interception of radiocommunication correspondence, other than that which the station is authorized to receive, is forbidden, and that in cases where such correspondence is involuntarily received, it shall not be reproduced, nor communicated to third parties, nor used for any purpose, and even its existence shall not be disclosed
Aeronautical Services:
36.3 § 3 Except as otherwise provided for in these Regulations, the person responsible, as well as all the persons who may have knowledge of any information whatever obtained by means of the radiocommunication service, are placed under the obligation of observing and ensuring the secrecy of correspondence.
37.11 § 4 Each administration shall take the necessary steps to place operators under the obligation to preserve the secrecy of correspondence as provided for in No. 18.4.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...guess so.
See
https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/26210...over-landingen
...it may very well be
hat in future Luchtverkeersleiding Nederland LVNL
itself
will have to refrain from using radio-communications.
Dutch media is now particularly riled that that LVNL is using these rules randomly as it seems fit to themselves...
/
See
https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/26210...over-landingen
Selectief beleid
Opvallend is dat de LVNL zeer selectief is in het eisen van verwijdering van fragmenten tussen de verkeerstoren en piloten.
Een fragment waarin Koning Willem Alexander (die ook KLM-piloot is) te horen is,
werd zelfs door het Instagram-account van LVNL geliket.
Het fragment werd uitgezonden bij meerdere televisieprogramma's.
Ook plaatste nota bene de CEO van de luchtverkeersleiding, Michiel van Dorst,
een fragment op YouTube waarin allerlei opnames te horen zijn tussen de verkeersleiding en het toestel.
Vorige maand nog liet de LVNL een vlogger toe tot de verkeerstoren,
die daarin ook geluidsfragmenten maakte van de communicatie tussen piloten en verkeersleiders.
Opvallend is dat de LVNL zeer selectief is in het eisen van verwijdering van fragmenten tussen de verkeerstoren en piloten.
Een fragment waarin Koning Willem Alexander (die ook KLM-piloot is) te horen is,
werd zelfs door het Instagram-account van LVNL geliket.
Het fragment werd uitgezonden bij meerdere televisieprogramma's.
Ook plaatste nota bene de CEO van de luchtverkeersleiding, Michiel van Dorst,
een fragment op YouTube waarin allerlei opnames te horen zijn tussen de verkeersleiding en het toestel.
Vorige maand nog liet de LVNL een vlogger toe tot de verkeerstoren,
die daarin ook geluidsfragmenten maakte van de communicatie tussen piloten en verkeersleiders.
hat in future Luchtverkeersleiding Nederland LVNL
itself
will have to refrain from using radio-communications.
Dutch media is now particularly riled that that LVNL is using these rules randomly as it seems fit to themselves...
Klopt. En LVNL cherrypickt in die wet.
Verbieden wat ze niet uitkomt,
toejuichen dat wat ze in het zonnetje zet.
Verbieden wat ze niet uitkomt,
toejuichen dat wat ze in het zonnetje zet.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...so, LVNL applies the rules randomly, as seems to fit to its' own goals.
If they succeed in forcing that Youtube-clip of the internet
(there are MULTIPLE copies floating over social media now, by the way),
then it is very likely that in future
some parties may take Dutch ATC / LVNL to court for arbitrarily enforcing these rules.
Cherry-picking legislation is VERY much frowned upon in The Netherlands.
LVNL/Dutch ATC has taken the lid of Pandora's Box.
If they press on with this lawsuit, then it will come back to harm them in future.
Dutch media has got a long memory.
If they succeed in forcing that Youtube-clip of the internet
(there are MULTIPLE copies floating over social media now, by the way),
then it is very likely that in future
some parties may take Dutch ATC / LVNL to court for arbitrarily enforcing these rules.
Cherry-picking legislation is VERY much frowned upon in The Netherlands.
LVNL/Dutch ATC has taken the lid of Pandora's Box.
If they press on with this lawsuit, then it will come back to harm them in future.
Dutch media has got a long memory.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What you would expect from LVNL is a preliminary public summary of the incidents, indicating which party investigates the event, and when the results of the investigation will be publicly reported.
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...so, LVNL applies the rules randomly, as seems to fit to its' own goals.
If they succeed in forcing that Youtube-clip of the internet
(there are MULTIPLE copies floating over social media now, by the way),
then it is very likely that in future
some parties may take Dutch ATC / LVNL to court for arbitrarily enforcing these rules.
Cherry-picking legislation is VERY much frowned upon in The Netherlands.
LVNL/Dutch ATC has taken the lid of Pandora's Box.
If they press on with this lawsuit, then it will come back to harm them in future.
Dutch media has got a long memory.
If they succeed in forcing that Youtube-clip of the internet
(there are MULTIPLE copies floating over social media now, by the way),
then it is very likely that in future
some parties may take Dutch ATC / LVNL to court for arbitrarily enforcing these rules.
Cherry-picking legislation is VERY much frowned upon in The Netherlands.
LVNL/Dutch ATC has taken the lid of Pandora's Box.
If they press on with this lawsuit, then it will come back to harm them in future.
Dutch media has got a long memory.
I find it interesting that a european country belonging to the EU which enacted Freedom of Information Acts to give its citizens access to information should allow not only restricting information but the use of threats of legal action to suppress the information once it is in the public domain. There is no issue of national security and this is clearly censorship. Whether the relevant authorities undertake an investigation or a proper investigation is a separate issue.
Ironically if this threat had not been made only a handful of people would have been aware of the probably trivial event. But now millions are aware and reputations are being trashed. Conspiracies will seen where in fact there is just bureaucratic stupidity.
Ironically if this threat had not been made only a handful of people would have been aware of the probably trivial event. But now millions are aware and reputations are being trashed. Conspiracies will seen where in fact there is just bureaucratic stupidity.
I am a pilot. I don't mind a single bit that my ATC communication might be recorded and re-transmitted. You are talking on non-encrypted hardware, face reality. I also don't mind people like NH News here kind of accidentally uncovering a mistake by ATC. Mistakes happen. Own up to them.
This could have been so easily dealt with by LVNL/Dutch ATC by simply issuing a statement themselves. Be transparent. Be ahead of the story. If it was purely a formality, no harm issuing a press release disclosing the facts, actions taken, done. Instead of this surfacing in the news through an innocent video weeks later and now running around trying to do damage control by means of hypocritical law suits.
This could have been so easily dealt with by LVNL/Dutch ATC by simply issuing a statement themselves. Be transparent. Be ahead of the story. If it was purely a formality, no harm issuing a press release disclosing the facts, actions taken, done. Instead of this surfacing in the news through an innocent video weeks later and now running around trying to do damage control by means of hypocritical law suits.
