“Oh, I am fortune's fool!”
Did you ever explain to friends, relatives or passengers ‘closing speed’? On occasion (thankfully rare) I have done so and the response is always the same; surprise. When you expand the math involved and do some basic ‘Newton’ (F=Ma) and explain (in lay terms) the very small amount of time involved for two aircraft to cover 3 Nms and the forces involved in a collision, the little light comes on and they understand why we are always concerned about ‘Traffic’. It is possible to up the scare factor when they realise how it can be very difficult to ‘see’ another aircraft; haze, cloud, glare, cockpit visibility, glare shield height, flight attitude and the blind area created ahead and below, etc.
Aviation traffic control and the legislation acknowledge this risk and more besides. Millions, probably billions are expend to ensure that, in primus, aircraft do not get into a ‘close proximity’ situation without prior knowledge of traffic and positive separation. More money again is spent to make the system ‘efficient’ and delays are minimised, while retaining a safe zone around individual aircraft. The reason for expenditure is simple enough; the speed at which ‘things’ happen when it all goes pear shaped is truly frightening.
When a ‘good’ system fails – once – the reason why is examined and, where required, a patch or a ‘fix’ is initiated at high speed; for a repeat of a systematic breakdown which led to a ‘mid-air’ collision or even a close call is unpardonable. When any systematic error is repeated and there are consequences, it’s time to stop pretending ‘all is well’: clearly it’s not.
Australia relies too heavily on luck, the skill of the ATCO, has a propensity to treat the ATCO as cannon fodder and the legal system is far too easily manipulated to allow the offering of an individual to the sacrifice, rather than own up to systematic flaws.
Halfwit has been involved in the development of these systems and a ‘match-fit’ product of it. There are some serious systematic problems which need be addressed. We have indeed been a lucky country, thus far. Lady Luck is, if nothing else fickle.
Aye, as M. Henry has it, “None so deaf as those that will not hear. Non so blind as those who will not see”. Tick tock indeed; I fear it’s not a matter of if, only when.
Toot toot.
Did you ever explain to friends, relatives or passengers ‘closing speed’? On occasion (thankfully rare) I have done so and the response is always the same; surprise. When you expand the math involved and do some basic ‘Newton’ (F=Ma) and explain (in lay terms) the very small amount of time involved for two aircraft to cover 3 Nms and the forces involved in a collision, the little light comes on and they understand why we are always concerned about ‘Traffic’. It is possible to up the scare factor when they realise how it can be very difficult to ‘see’ another aircraft; haze, cloud, glare, cockpit visibility, glare shield height, flight attitude and the blind area created ahead and below, etc.
Aviation traffic control and the legislation acknowledge this risk and more besides. Millions, probably billions are expend to ensure that, in primus, aircraft do not get into a ‘close proximity’ situation without prior knowledge of traffic and positive separation. More money again is spent to make the system ‘efficient’ and delays are minimised, while retaining a safe zone around individual aircraft. The reason for expenditure is simple enough; the speed at which ‘things’ happen when it all goes pear shaped is truly frightening.
When a ‘good’ system fails – once – the reason why is examined and, where required, a patch or a ‘fix’ is initiated at high speed; for a repeat of a systematic breakdown which led to a ‘mid-air’ collision or even a close call is unpardonable. When any systematic error is repeated and there are consequences, it’s time to stop pretending ‘all is well’: clearly it’s not.
Australia relies too heavily on luck, the skill of the ATCO, has a propensity to treat the ATCO as cannon fodder and the legal system is far too easily manipulated to allow the offering of an individual to the sacrifice, rather than own up to systematic flaws.
Halfwit has been involved in the development of these systems and a ‘match-fit’ product of it. There are some serious systematic problems which need be addressed. We have indeed been a lucky country, thus far. Lady Luck is, if nothing else fickle.
Aye, as M. Henry has it, “None so deaf as those that will not hear. Non so blind as those who will not see”. Tick tock indeed; I fear it’s not a matter of if, only when.
Toot toot.