Grant, Don't they still post flight progress strips and the fix posting should show two aircraft at the same altitude. Or are you saying they don't use and/or check strips in a radar sector over there? Al ----- Original Message ----- From: "Grant McKenzie" <grantmckenzie@optushome.com.au> To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 10:29 PM Subject: Re: NYTimes.com Article: Doomed Planes Tried to Avoid Collison > TCAS doesn't communicate with ground ATC. It's essentially a last line > of defence type of device which goes into action when planes start > getting seriously close. If a TCAS RA is issued the acft are already in > conflict by the ATC definition of the term. > > And yes, procedural control (which uses flight progress strips) is > designed to highlight potential conflicts although I think this conflict > occurred in a radar sector. > > Grant > SYD > QF > > allan9 wrote: > > > John, > > Unless they have made some radical improvements since I retired TCAS doesn't > > communicate with the controllers. Don't they use flight progress strips? > > It would seem as though the strip postings would have shown a potential > > conflict before the controler even worked the aircraft. DoDo just doesn't > > happen. > > > > Al > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "John Kurtzke" <kurtzke@up.edu> > > To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> > > Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 1:19 PM > > Subject: Re: NYTimes.com Article: Doomed Planes Tried to Avoid Collison > > > > > > > >>Does TCAS communicate with ATC? If not, this crash makes it look like it > >>should. What is the sense of a system figuring out what the two planes > >>should do, tell each other, and not tell ATC automatically. > >> > >>john > >> > >>On Sat, 20 Jul 2002, Grant McKenzie wrote: > >> > >> > >>>Hi Scotty, > >>> > >>>Long time no natter. > >>> > >>>It's sounding more and more like the Swiss ATC guy screwed up. Or, more > >>>accurately, the system screwed up and the poor sod up the sharp end was > >>>left wearing it. A mate of mine who was over in Geneva for a ATC > >>>conference a couple of years back and was taken to the ATC simulator > >>>which also takes a live feed from Eurocontrol, including the sector in > >>>question and he said it is a hellishly complicated piece of airspace. > >>> > >>> > >>>Grant > >>>SYD > >>>QF > >>> > >>>Scotty wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>----- Original Message ----- > >>>>From: "Grant McKenzie" <grantmckenzie@optushome.com.au> > >>>>To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> > >>>>Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 11:55 AM > >>>>Subject: Re: NYTimes.com Article: Doomed Planes Tried to Avoid > >>>> > > Collison > > > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>When I worked in ATC, a command from the ground was supposed to have > >>>>>priority. I would imagine Bashkirian Airlines (if their chief > >>>>>pilot/regulatory overseer were doing their job properly and, with all > >>>>>due respect to Scotty's passions on the subject of all things Russian, > >>>>>I'm not convinced was a given) would have a compliance instruction > >>>>>written into their operations manuals. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>It is written into their manual from what I was told by a Tu-154 > >>>> > > navigator. > > > >>>>KrasAir has it written into their ops manual, and he told me that it > >>>> > > appears > > > >>>>that BAL has it written into theirs as well. This is why I stated that > >>>>Russian officials were 100% correct. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>-- > >>John F. Kurtzke, C.S.C. > >>Department of Mathematics > >>278 Buckley Center > >>University of Portland > >>Portland, OR 97203 > >>503-943-7377 > >>kurtzke@up.edu > >> > >> > >