[pc86]

"Funny" enough if this controller had had a medical emergency (or just bad sushi) and been off the radios, this wouldn't have happened because the fire truck would not have received clearance to cross the runway and wouldn't have. Or at least would have crossed like the airport was uncontrolled, been much more careful and announced itself, and likely have seen the landing aircraft.

[penultimatename]

And if an aircraft needs to land due to an emergency? It’s amazing things work as well as they do, the system relies on only one thing going wrong at a time. This accident was an example of multiple things going wrong at the same time.

[pc86]

Every accident is an example of multiple things going wrong at the same time.[0]

I'm going to pretend to know exactly what would happen in that precise scenario but I'm confident most commercial pilots get enough training to be able to handle it.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_cheese_model

[inaros]

>> Every accident is an example of multiple things going wrong at the same time.

You are defeating your own argument :-) Its exactly because every accident is an example of multiple things going wrong at the same time...that you need...multiple layers of control and safety to catch it through each hole of the cheese.

Like...another controller?

[bombcar]

One of the things you learn as a pilot is how to recognize that you need to go into emergency mode if you will. Call it high-alert if you want.

You need to recognize when something is out of the ordinary and treat it as an emergency (perhaps not a literal pan-pan/mayday emergency) sooner rather than later, and do things that may end up to have been unnecessary (like executing a go-around because emergency vehicles were on the move).

One controller on two frequencies is another example - that works fine in normal situations, but during an emergency response, perhaps the channels should be mixed; giving the pilots in the air a chance to hear the incorrect clearance onto their runway.

After all, an active runway is really more of an "air" control thing than a ground one.

[inaros]

An empty tower at La Guardia with a bunch of airplanes in the air not getting a reply to their calls is Die Hard 2 stuff. Spare me the Pete Hegseth school of ATC...

[pc86]

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. The GP is literally about a lone controller in the tower having a medical episode and what would happen after that.

[bombcar]

The pilots would execute untowered approach procedures, a small airport with little to no traffic and VFR flight you may self-announce on frequency, a larger airport you go back to approach, etc.

[tadfisher]

Each of those flights should have an alternate and be prepared (have enough fuel) to divert. If there is a fuel emergency then self-announcing is likely appropriate as the plane is coming down anyway, but that is multiple things going wrong.

[bombcar]

A big part of it is what category of airport it is, and plane. General aviation almost always goes to self-announce (which includes some business jets perhaps, they often land at untowered airports) but not category 135 air travel or whatever it is.

[MeetingsBrowser]

I can’t find a way to read this other than

“If we remove regulation and safety controls, things will be safer because everyone will be more careful.”

[pc86]

You should try harder, because I'm not making any comment on regulation whatsoever. There are procedures that every controller and pilot knows for how to handle loss of radio contact.

[MeetingsBrowser]

Am I misunderstanding the implication in your comment that things would have been safer had there been no ATC at all?

Because the parties involved would be more careful if there were no ATC?

[inaros]

And we know how well that works: https://youtu.be/AWM0l8_F_X0?t=411