Controllers, FSS, and pilots: Ever reported a safety concern to Nav Canada and been stonewalled, or had it go nowhere?

Do tell here, or PM me.

And who might you be with 1 post under your belt?

Does arguing with the NOTAM office about retarded standards count?

Is that you Mr Argus?

You'd be amazed at what doesn't make the news.

Why don't you amaze us then, I don't see what you are trying to get at here.

Braun wrote:Why don't you amaze us then, I don't see what you are trying to get at here.

Well here's one that didn't make the news:

The other day, two airplanes entered our sector and would have come within two miles of each other! I'm just a trainee, but the licensed controller beside me did _nothing_ other than writing a W on the strips. Nothing. I reported this as a safety concern to my instructor, and he totally stonewalled me. Just said, whadja gonna do bout that. I - by myself - had to turn one plane 10 degrees to miss the near collision. And I'm pretty sure one of them flew over an elementary school and hospital somewhere along its route.

And amazingly, nothing made the news!


Edit: Apparently it wasn't as obvious as I intended, but this was an entirely facetious response to the original request.

Were they VFR or IFR??????? I've seen enough very close calls swept under the carpet to make you sick and where possible, the blame put on the pilot after he had been lead down the primrose path...while the OJI was playing with the computer and his student left to fumble the ball.

I'm very happy that I fired "the company".

yrp wrote:

Braun wrote:Why don't you amaze us then, I don't see what you are trying to get at here.

Well here's one that didn't make the news:

The other day, two airplanes entered our sector and would have come within two miles of each other! I'm just a trainee, but the licensed controller beside me did _nothing_ other than writing a W on the strips. Nothing. I reported this as a safety concern to my instructor, and he totally stonewalled me. Just said, whadja gonna do bout that. I - by myself - had to turn one plane 10 degrees to miss the near collision. And I'm pretty sure one of them flew over an elementary school and hospital somewhere along its route.

And amazingly, nothing made the news!

LOL. If you only had to turn him 10 degrees I can see why the controller only put 'w's on the board....because you had all day to solve the conflict! Why would that make the news? your doing your job...

So why would this make the news? As for your instructor that is a different story.

So apparently a few people didn't realize my post was just a joke - ie solving a very simple conflict described in the overdramatized way the media does aviation reporting. I figured the hospital and orphanarium would have made it obvious, but guess not. Sorry to those offended, confused, or simply unamused.

Ah I see, I assumed that post was written by the author of the thread and I didn't even bother to read the name of the poster! lol good one

If you "miss" a "near collision".....does that mean they actually hit?

Reminds me of George Carlin. "When two planes almost collide they call it a near miss. IT'S A NEAR HIT!!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFW6NHbWX0E

I'm talking about incidents that were swept, either immediately, or after the fact once NC Ottawa took a look at it.

PM me if you're a controller that's seen this, and/or crew who never received an adequate explanation for obvious ATC errors where evasive action was required.

Hmmmm.

I would like an adequate explanation of what you're on about. You're not perchance a journo?

Sorry to poke my head in here where many will feel I don't belong, but ... the thread linked below would seem to indicate that - journalist or not - reality_check may have a valid concern.

viewtopic.php?f=54&t=52966

Why should NavCanada be immune from the same "whistleblower" problems that permeate the industry?

Not NavCan, but here's a fella from the US ATC system ... some of you have likely heard of him over the years:

C R A S H - Coalition Revealing the Aviation Safety Hoax
Secret History of Airline Disasters−And Their Many Enablers

Widow wrote:Sorry to poke my head in here where many will feel I don't belong, but ... the thread linked below would seem to indicate that - journalist or not - reality_check may have a valid concern.

viewtopic.php?f=54&t=52966

Why should NavCanada be immune from the same "whistleblower" problems that permeate the industry?

The question has been asked of the poster a few times and has yet to be answered here: "Who are you?" Perhaps if he/she answered with details of who they are and what their agenda is it would lend some credibility to their initial post.

Widow wrote: Why should NavCanada be immune from the same "whistleblower" problems that permeate the industry?

There is no issue of safety cover up at NavCanada, this is ridiculous.

Move on, seriously, this pisses me off. How hard we have trained and continue to train to be accused of this, it verges on libel. I am tempted to "whistleblow" this blatent attempt at defamation to my employer, who in fact is very serious about safety.

tesox2 wrote:

Widow wrote: Why should NavCanada be immune from the same "whistleblower" problems that permeate the industry?

There is no issue of safety cover up at NavCanada, this is ridiculous.

Move on, seriously, this pisses me off. How hard we have trained and continue to train to be accused of this, it verges on libel. I am tempted to "whistleblow" this blatent attempt at defamation to my employer, who in fact is very serious about safety.

GAG

(yes I signed up just to voice my distaste)

There will always be people who just can't accept facts.

At NAVCANADA safety is the number one priority. It is included as the first item in every vision statement/goal/priority they make.

Even if you don't believe that, look at the statistics concerning overall safety within NAVCANADA. A steady decline over the past decade compared to the system prior under Transport Canada.

NAVCANADA embraced a non-punitive approach to safety reporting in order to increase safety through better reporting and it worked. They make the effort to identifty unsafe trends earlier so that the unsafe conditions can be addressed.

When people make mistakes that cause unsafe conditions within the company it gets reported and the priority is on getting the unsafe condition corrected. There is no need to "coverup". anything.

I've used the internal safety reporting apparatus before. It worked well and i was very happy with the results. The contact i ahd was good and the follwed up to see if i was happy with the results. Prior to my complaint nothing seemed to be happening but once i used the reporting program things kicked into gear and it was fixed within a few months (which is lightning speed under normal circumstances).

This is excellent to hear, and not really a surprise that things would be better than under TC supervision - perhaps they could learn from NavCan with respect to following up on safety concerns under the CAIRS.

GilletteNorth wrote: Even if you don't believe that, look at the statistics concerning overall safety within NAVCANADA. A steady decline over the past decade compared to the system prior under Transport Canada.

It's easy to manufacture a decline in incidents when you stop reporting and/or recording those incidents.

Does it surprise anyone that NC would self-publish stats in order to support its purported increase in safety?