Swiss ATC with reduced capacity (and VFR suspension ZRH and BSL) due to irresponsible convictions of ATCOs.

Timothy wrote:

Have I mentioned that in the Soviet Union, every TAF ended PROB10 TSGR?

I guess that this was for the same reason – no-one got sent to the the Gulags if the TS didn’t appear, but….

Or the winter version of PROB30 0200 FG. And annoyingly they mostly omit the TEMPO attribute which would allow one to ignore it. Mind, a lot of this can be seen in TAF’s outside Russia with increasing frequency too. Same reason. And it’s a good thing WMO doesn’t actually allow PROB10 because if they did, TAF’s would most probably be a page per airport.

LeSving wrote:

Which is what happens when political/economical goals gets the highest priority, and when the goals are physically and statistically impossible to achieve (no deaths on the roads, no accidents in aviation and so on). You get a perverted system where experts in the field have to argue that things are unsafe, rather than assuming an unsafe reality and doing what is necessary to assure as much safety as possible dispite the real danger.

Doesn’t happen often that I want to print and frame one of your posts @LeSving but this hits the nail on the head so straight that it’s probably emerged in China by now.

What gets lost in this process is risk management in favour of risk avoidance, which very often goes together with cya regulation as nobody is willing to take responsibility for the fact that despite all there still will be accidents unless we ban what causes them altogether.

LeSving wrote:

The best known bring the Space Shuttle accident.

The Shuttle is a classical example, yes. NASA had become complacent after everything went so well for so long including some really dangerous missions during the race to the Moon and they got away with everything. Challenger was a brutal wake up call but after it, they still felt they can run the shuttle safely. When Columbia was lost, the political will to continue the operation (even though using the technology they did to prevent a re-occurrence made the shuttle as safe as it never had been before) was not there anymore. Mind, there were lots of folks who even after the Apollo Fire wanted to scrap the whole space program.

dublinpilot wrote:

Or what about weather forecasters who aren’t 100% accurate?

I am well aware of that possibility as well…

dublinpilot wrote:

Italian seismologists who were convicted of manslaughter for failing to predict an earthquake.

What? When was that? Are there any seismologists still working in Italy after that? They usually don’t hesitate to go on strike there and that would be as good a reason as any.

Thanks Rwy20, you beat me to it. I posted the link before leaving home this morning and meant to come back to it to do what you just did.

I agree that recently things have gone from bad to unacceptable there. The sheer idea that they might have a easterly wind and have to use runway 10 for departure is not any justification for denying slots, if at all, they can stop the traffic if they actually have the concept in action, but even then it is not necessary.

But the whole thing just shows how poisoned the atmosphere has become. The controllers used to be very pragmatic and had a “can do” attitude until this new mindset started within the Swiss regulative bodies, when after every incident the associated procedure was banned in CYA legal action. It is amazing what we can’t do anymore at ZRH just because there was a (resolved) situation at some point in time. No more swing over 14/16, no more VFR traffic circuits even if the place is totally devoid of traffic, no more simultaneous landings on 14 with deps 16, and several other issues mentioned in the letter.

My take on this is that the climate of fear of legal retribution and a unhealthy number of lawyers involved in the regulative process in Switzerland has reached a point where I actually wonder why the ATCO’s did not take a much more drastic action last weekend than “just” banning VFR and IFR CAT A, but for once shut down the whole traffic system in a clear demonstration of solidarity for their colleagues who have been made pariah’s by overzealous prosecutors and judges. Had this happened in France or in other strike prone countries, what do you think would have happened?

I am well aware that most controllers find this oppressive ruling of their competences as bad as we do, but in the face of a legal system which is out to convict until there is nobody left to do the job, there is a very unhelathy climate of fear which imho is diametrically opposed to safety.

I have openly challenged the SUST to produce a report on this: How does the legal threat and the factual abolishment of just culture impact safety? I doubt they will be able to do it or be allowed to, but maybe an extrernal body might do the job.

For me, this is a snake which has started to eat it’s own tail. The Law is threatening every single airman/woman in this country which forces more and stricter regulation which again delivers ammunition to the prosecutors, where will this end? The article this guy was convicted on, what if a pilot does a gear up at an airport where this may cause some delay, will he be convicted of “disturbing public air traffic” as well? In fact, until a runway may be cleared after something like this may represent a much bigger disturbance than an Airprox, which imho did not “disturb” the public transport system at all other than creating a need for an investigation.

I don’t think most people here have thought this one through so far. Those who have are watching in disbelief and debating whether it is worth taking this risk or rather to either take your job elsewhere or take up rabbit breeding instead of flying. That includes airliner pilots as much as us lowly ppls but certainly ATCO’s, FISOs, anyone who operates a radio and has anything to do with aviation at all.

http://www.aeroclub.ch/das-fass-ist-jetzt-uebergelaufen/

Aeroclub, AOPA and VSF sent a joint letter to both Skyguide and FOCA to protest about the treatment of GA in Switzerland as a consequence of the VFR / Light IFR ban following the verdict.