Instead of playing the "blame game", why not hold the air traffic controller responsible for his action? Human error is invevitable but this is not human error. This is negligence. A person in this position needs to be held accountable for putting the publics safety at risk. If it is found out that he was not given enough time between shifts, then that is Ray LaHoods fault. Can you guarantee that two air traffic controllers won't behave in a negligent manner? The answer is no, you can't.
0
Instead of playing the "blame game", why not hold the air traffic controller responsible for his action? Human error is invevitable but this is not human error. This is negligence. A person in this position needs to be held accountable for putting the publics safety at risk. If it is found out that he was not given enough time between shifts, then that is Ray LaHoods fault. Can you guarantee that two air traffic controllers won't behave in a negligent manner? The answer is no, you can't.
steve: WHENEVER security is involved, there are ALWAYS at least TWO INDIVIDUALS included in the plan. That is simply a basic concept of the security principle. Do you EVER see ONE individual in an armored truck? C'mon dude, this is security 101.
~~~~~ZOSO~~~~~
0
steve: WHENEVER security is involved, there are ALWAYS at least TWO INDIVIDUALS included in the plan. That is simply a basic concept of the security principle. Do you EVER see ONE individual in an armored truck? C'mon dude, this is security 101.
steve: WHENEVER security is involved, there are ALWAYS at least TWO INDIVIDUALS included in the plan. That is simply a basic concept of the security principle. Do you EVER see ONE individual in an armored truck? C'mon dude, this is security 101.
thats a funny argument, i thought coordinating departing and arriving flights was the job function of a controller.
why do condos routinely have only 1 security officer working the desk? or office buildings, or many bars, or many parking garages, or many police cars?
and what does this have to do with someone falling asleep?
0
Quote Originally Posted by TheGoldenGoose:
steve: WHENEVER security is involved, there are ALWAYS at least TWO INDIVIDUALS included in the plan. That is simply a basic concept of the security principle. Do you EVER see ONE individual in an armored truck? C'mon dude, this is security 101.
thats a funny argument, i thought coordinating departing and arriving flights was the job function of a controller.
why do condos routinely have only 1 security officer working the desk? or office buildings, or many bars, or many parking garages, or many police cars?
and what does this have to do with someone falling asleep?
"why do condos routinely have only 1 security officer working the desk?
or office buildings, or many bars, or many parking garages, or many
police cars?"
You compare these to restricted air space over our Nation's Capital???
Seriously, you are a deranged individual.
~~~~~ZOSO~~~~~
0
"why do condos routinely have only 1 security officer working the desk?
or office buildings, or many bars, or many parking garages, or many
police cars?"
You compare these to restricted air space over our Nation's Capital???
The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) is a United States and Canada bi-national organization charged with the missions of aerospace warning and aerospace control for North America. Aerospace warning includes the monitoring of man-made objects in space, and the detection, validation, and warning of attack against North America whether by aircraft, missiles, or space vehicles, through mutual support arrangements with other commands.
Aerospace control includes ensuring air sovereignty and air defense of the airspace of Canada and the United States. The renewal of the NORAD Agreement in May 2006 added a maritime warning mission, which entails a shared awareness and understanding of the activities conducted in U.S. and Canadian maritime approaches, maritime areas and internal waterways.
0
North American Aerospace Defense Command
The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) is a United States and Canada bi-national organization charged with the missions of aerospace warning and aerospace control for North America. Aerospace warning includes the monitoring of man-made objects in space, and the detection, validation, and warning of attack against North America whether by aircraft, missiles, or space vehicles, through mutual support arrangements with other commands.
Aerospace control includes ensuring air sovereignty and air defense of the airspace of Canada and the United States. The renewal of the NORAD Agreement in May 2006 added a maritime warning mission, which entails a shared awareness and understanding of the activities conducted in U.S. and Canadian maritime approaches, maritime areas and internal waterways.
Instead of playing the "blame game", why not hold the air traffic controller responsible for his action? Human error is invevitable but this is not human error. This is negligence. A person in this position needs to be held accountable for putting the publics safety at risk. If it is found out that he was not given enough time between shifts, then that is Ray LaHoods fault. Can you guarantee that two air traffic controllers won't behave in a negligent manner? The answer is no, you can't.
Bingo. 100% agree. If human error is inevitable, then we should have a third person to supervise the other two. You know, like you see on every AFSCME work site. Two union hacks supervising one person working slowly. It seems the reponsible thing to do is to just stay awake. It is unacceptable to fall asleep on the night shift at Walmart and someone entrusted with thousands of lives can surely fulfill his obligation to stay awake.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Balph:
Instead of playing the "blame game", why not hold the air traffic controller responsible for his action? Human error is invevitable but this is not human error. This is negligence. A person in this position needs to be held accountable for putting the publics safety at risk. If it is found out that he was not given enough time between shifts, then that is Ray LaHoods fault. Can you guarantee that two air traffic controllers won't behave in a negligent manner? The answer is no, you can't.
Bingo. 100% agree. If human error is inevitable, then we should have a third person to supervise the other two. You know, like you see on every AFSCME work site. Two union hacks supervising one person working slowly. It seems the reponsible thing to do is to just stay awake. It is unacceptable to fall asleep on the night shift at Walmart and someone entrusted with thousands of lives can surely fulfill his obligation to stay awake.
"why do condos routinely have only 1 security officer working the desk?
or office buildings, or many bars, or many parking garages, or many
police cars?"
You compare these to restricted air space over our Nation's Capital???
Seriously, you are a deranged individual.
first off, i dont think you know what the job function of an air traffic controller is.
secondly, for the umpteenth time. can you please explain why having a 2nd person working would have prevented the incident at reagan airport.
0
Quote Originally Posted by TheGoldenGoose:
"why do condos routinely have only 1 security officer working the desk?
or office buildings, or many bars, or many parking garages, or many
police cars?"
You compare these to restricted air space over our Nation's Capital???
Seriously, you are a deranged individual.
first off, i dont think you know what the job function of an air traffic controller is.
secondly, for the umpteenth time. can you please explain why having a 2nd person working would have prevented the incident at reagan airport.
With a few exceptions, flights into and out of DCA are restricted to destinations within 1,250 statute miles (2,010 km), in an effort to control aviation noise and send the major air traffic volume to the larger but more distant Dulles International Airport.
Taken from Wikipedia.
By definition it is actually a local airport, but I get your point.
I am just educating.
0
With a few exceptions, flights into and out of DCA are restricted to destinations within 1,250 statute miles (2,010 km), in an effort to control aviation noise and send the major air traffic volume to the larger but more distant Dulles International Airport.
Taken from Wikipedia.
By definition it is actually a local airport, but I get your point.
first off, i dont think you know what the job function of an air traffic controller is.
secondly, for the umpteenth time. can you please explain why having a 2nd person working would have prevented the incident at reagan airport.
I don't know what the job function of an air traffic controller is???
For one, to make certain that the runway is clear for the pilot to safely land his passengers. How the hell do you know there are not any maintenance people out there on the runway? Larger airports perform most runway maintenance during off hours, do they not?
You are basically sluffing this incident off as being inconsequential when, in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Maybe you would have enjoyed being in that pilots shoes, not being able to contact the tower, and landing blindly? Or maybe you would have enjoyed being one of the passengers in the third plane, the one that finally landed thirty minutes late?
For the umpteenth time, not having a second air controller in the tower is a security issue. Do you see only one pilot inside a commercial airplane when only one is needed to operate the aircraft? Why not??? If you really can't see how a second person in the tower could have prevented this incident, I'm sorry, you are way beyond any sense of hope. Did your parents have any kids that lived???
~~~~~ZOSO~~~~~
0
Quote Originally Posted by steveshane67:
first off, i dont think you know what the job function of an air traffic controller is.
secondly, for the umpteenth time. can you please explain why having a 2nd person working would have prevented the incident at reagan airport.
I don't know what the job function of an air traffic controller is???
For one, to make certain that the runway is clear for the pilot to safely land his passengers. How the hell do you know there are not any maintenance people out there on the runway? Larger airports perform most runway maintenance during off hours, do they not?
You are basically sluffing this incident off as being inconsequential when, in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Maybe you would have enjoyed being in that pilots shoes, not being able to contact the tower, and landing blindly? Or maybe you would have enjoyed being one of the passengers in the third plane, the one that finally landed thirty minutes late?
For the umpteenth time, not having a second air controller in the tower is a security issue. Do you see only one pilot inside a commercial airplane when only one is needed to operate the aircraft? Why not??? If you really can't see how a second person in the tower could have prevented this incident, I'm sorry, you are way beyond any sense of hope. Did your parents have any kids that lived???
The controller was working alone at the D.C. airport around midnight Tuesday when the tower went dead and two flights required help from at an FAA facility 40 miles away to land.
Planes often land at smaller airports without the help of air traffic controllers, but larger airports, like Reagan National, are staffed around-the-clock.
Regional air traffic controllers, like the ones in Warrenton, typically manage aircraft within a 50-mile radius of an airport.
I'll point to the obvious in the article. Which some seem to have missed.
My opinion is that one controller is all that is needed.
Reference the bolded lines taken straight from the article.
A second tower provides backup to the Reagan National Airport tower.
This tower is situated well within the normal boundaries of managing air traffic in that area.
The tower at Warrenton is in essence that second "employee" many of you have called for.
Why was a second employee hired then?
A simple PR move to appease the public.
0
The controller was working alone at the D.C. airport around midnight Tuesday when the tower went dead and two flights required help from at an FAA facility 40 miles away to land.
Planes often land at smaller airports without the help of air traffic controllers, but larger airports, like Reagan National, are staffed around-the-clock.
Regional air traffic controllers, like the ones in Warrenton, typically manage aircraft within a 50-mile radius of an airport.
I'll point to the obvious in the article. Which some seem to have missed.
My opinion is that one controller is all that is needed.
Reference the bolded lines taken straight from the article.
A second tower provides backup to the Reagan National Airport tower.
This tower is situated well within the normal boundaries of managing air traffic in that area.
The tower at Warrenton is in essence that second "employee" many of you have called for.
The problem with you right-wing anti-union jerk-offs is you have selective memory.
Let's take the time machine back to the summer of 2006...
As Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) investigators look into the
causes behind the fatal Comair crash that killed 49 people in Kentucky
over the weekend, one leading cause is clear: The FAA violated its own policies when it assigned only one air traffic controller to the Lexington control tower.
Story LINK
WTF do you people NOT UNDERSTAND?????
Maybe some of you need a tragic event to befall your own family or friends in order to sober up and smell the coffee.
Talking to right-wingers =
~~~~~ZOSO~~~~~
0
The problem with you right-wing anti-union jerk-offs is you have selective memory.
Let's take the time machine back to the summer of 2006...
As Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) investigators look into the
causes behind the fatal Comair crash that killed 49 people in Kentucky
over the weekend, one leading cause is clear: The FAA violated its own policies when it assigned only one air traffic controller to the Lexington control tower.
Story LINK
WTF do you people NOT UNDERSTAND?????
Maybe some of you need a tragic event to befall your own family or friends in order to sober up and smell the coffee.
The problem with you right-wing anti-union jerk-offs is you have selective memory.
Let's take the time machine back to the summer of 2006...
As Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) investigators look into the causes behind the fatal Comair crash that killed 49 people in Kentucky over the weekend, one leading cause is clear: The FAA violated its own policies when it assigned only one air traffic controller to the Lexington control tower.
Maybe some of you need a tragic event to befall your own family or friends in order to sober up and smell the coffee.
Talking to right-wingers =
You're going to have to do better than citing "America's Union Movement" blogs, if you want to change our opinion.
0
Quote Originally Posted by TheGoldenGoose:
The problem with you right-wing anti-union jerk-offs is you have selective memory.
Let's take the time machine back to the summer of 2006...
As Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) investigators look into the causes behind the fatal Comair crash that killed 49 people in Kentucky over the weekend, one leading cause is clear: The FAA violated its own policies when it assigned only one air traffic controller to the Lexington control tower.
I don't know what the job function of an air traffic controller is???
For one, to make certain that the runway is clear for the pilot to safely land his passengers. How the hell do you know there are not any maintenance people out there on the runway? Larger airports perform most runway maintenance during off hours, do they not?
You are basically sluffing this incident off as being inconsequential when, in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Maybe you would have enjoyed being in that pilots shoes, not being able to contact the tower, and landing blindly? Or maybe you would have enjoyed being one of the passengers in the third plane, the one that finally landed thirty minutes late?
For the umpteenth time, not having a second air controller in the tower is a security issue. Do you see only one pilot inside a commercial airplane when only one is needed to operate the aircraft? Why not??? If you really can't see how a second person in the tower could have prevented this incident, I'm sorry, you are way beyond any sense of hope. Did your parents have any kids that lived???
let me make this as clear as possible, WHY WOULD HAVING A 2ND AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER PRESENT HAVE PREVENTED THE INCIDENT AT REAGAN AIRPORT?
i dont understand why you wont answer this question? surely if you are so adamant in your belief, explaining said belief shouldnt be an issue
0
Quote Originally Posted by TheGoldenGoose:
I don't know what the job function of an air traffic controller is???
For one, to make certain that the runway is clear for the pilot to safely land his passengers. How the hell do you know there are not any maintenance people out there on the runway? Larger airports perform most runway maintenance during off hours, do they not?
You are basically sluffing this incident off as being inconsequential when, in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Maybe you would have enjoyed being in that pilots shoes, not being able to contact the tower, and landing blindly? Or maybe you would have enjoyed being one of the passengers in the third plane, the one that finally landed thirty minutes late?
For the umpteenth time, not having a second air controller in the tower is a security issue. Do you see only one pilot inside a commercial airplane when only one is needed to operate the aircraft? Why not??? If you really can't see how a second person in the tower could have prevented this incident, I'm sorry, you are way beyond any sense of hope. Did your parents have any kids that lived???
let me make this as clear as possible, WHY WOULD HAVING A 2ND AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER PRESENT HAVE PREVENTED THE INCIDENT AT REAGAN AIRPORT?
i dont understand why you wont answer this question? surely if you are so adamant in your belief, explaining said belief shouldnt be an issue
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
