Badger
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2001
- Posts
- 95
near miss.
no. I'm sorry for the uncalled for comment. I guess on a more productive note from what I've noticed...
Loss of separation & FSDO actions...
Rule 1: the controller is fellow FAA, don't go after him no matter what. It's serious business when an atc'er gets a black mark.(like it isn't for a pilot?)
Rule 2: Airline vs. 135 ... go after the 135, he doesn't have the union behind him, an easy way to place fault and close the issue.
Rule 3: The controller is in paperwork avoidance mode. (i.e. bury the incident).
I guess it's a lesson for dilligence in VFR conditions. In your own best interest, fsdo's are to be avoided.
no. I'm sorry for the uncalled for comment. I guess on a more productive note from what I've noticed...
Loss of separation & FSDO actions...
Rule 1: the controller is fellow FAA, don't go after him no matter what. It's serious business when an atc'er gets a black mark.(like it isn't for a pilot?)
Rule 2: Airline vs. 135 ... go after the 135, he doesn't have the union behind him, an easy way to place fault and close the issue.
Rule 3: The controller is in paperwork avoidance mode. (i.e. bury the incident).
I guess it's a lesson for dilligence in VFR conditions. In your own best interest, fsdo's are to be avoided.