9/11 averted if Reagan hadn't fired the air traffic controllers?

[Robin Hood]

Every time I think about 9/11 I always seem to come back to the Reagan/Bush admin. From the rise of the Mujahadeen, Osama Bin Laden, and now the incompetent air traffic controllers that we have on tape from that awful morning of 9/11.

So what do you think? I think that if Raygun hadn't busted the air traffic controllers union and fired all those highly trained and qualified professionals we could of minimized to possibly even averted 9/11 altogether. I don't buy the excuse that nothing could have been done to prevent it. If that is the case, then I want back all those billions of dollars that go into supposedly making us safe.

Failure is not an option.

[Cyrano]

1. Oh, come on. That happened 21 years before 9/11

Posting this kind of stuff makes us sound like freepers who blame Clinton for everything.

[Robin Hood]

3. 21 years or 50 years.

It's still part of a pattern of destabilizing this nation that the Republicans are hell bent on achieving. Busting the union and replacing them with under paid, under trained non union workers obviously left this nation vulnerable to 9/11.

[MercutioATC]

9. You ARE out of the loop. We're unionized and they pay us relatively well.

[aquart]

15. What's the name of the union?

And the PATCO strike wasn't about pay. It was about burnout and retirement.

[MercutioATC]

17. NATCA www.natca.org

The PATCO strike was about many things, but one of the final sticking points was a $10k/yr raise request.

[The empressof all]

2. I thought the same thing

When I heard the tapes this morning I was wondering how long these folks had been on the job. I also wondered when the air traffic controllers were fired if subsequently any operational policies were "updated". Generally I have found that in the wake of key folks departure-and institutional memory compromised-Corporate has an opportunity to make "adjustments" without getting input or objection from the workers.

[Robin Hood]

4. Good point.

"Corporate has an opportunity to make "adjustments" without getting input or objection from the workers."

Exactly what led to the incompetence of the Air traffic controllers on 9/11. Corporate never listens to the concerns of non union workers.

[MercutioATC]

8. Non-union? You'd better let NATCA know that.

National Air Traffic Controllers' Association

...our union.

www.natca.org

[MercutioATC]

5. No, for the following reasons:

1) Reagan fired the controllers in 1981. That was 20 years before 2001. A controller with 20 years of experience is more than capable.

2) Controllers weren't "incompetent". I challenge you to show me one example of incompetence on the morning of 9/11. Actually, controllers demonstrated great skill by landing over 4500 airplanes in about 4 hours, many of them at airports they weren't originally destined for.

Before you start tossing accusations around, you might try to learn something about what we do. American ATC's are some of the best-trained professionals in the world. They did their jobs on 9/11.

[chelsea0011]

6. As I remember, didn't the replaced union get all that the fired

controllers were asking for when they striked? I vaguely remember that the replacement workers in their first negociations asked for and got all that the previous group went out on strike for? Reagan simply couldn't fire the bunch again, could he?

[MercutioATC]

10. No, they didn't. Some of the fired controllers sued to get their jobs

back (for various technical reasons) and some won. However, they didn't get the pay raise they were demanding.

[Pepperbelly]

7. I think that people misunderstand exactly how hard it is ...

to put together what is happening based on fragmentary data and the "bubble" of radar video. I really don't see how they could've put it together quickly enough to avert the attacks in NYC.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

11. No.

Reagan was absolutely wrong for firing the PATCO controllers, but that was in 1981. As a pilot I can say the air traffic controllers who are working now do a terrific job, working in very complex and crowded airspace. It's totally unfair to these great folks, and wrong to conclude the air traffic controllers were to blame for 9/11. It may be fair, however, to conclude that the FAA and the military should have anticipated and trained for the sort of hijackings that occurred. (Oh, wait, Condi Rice said nobody could possibly have anticipated that somebody would hijack an airplane and crash it into a building. Never mind.)

[MercutioATC]

12. Thanks, ocelot! I agree about the FAA/military dynamic.

Pre-9/11 there were at least 5 steps between the controller and NORAD, each requiring an independant evaluation of the situation. The process (which is being changed) was to blame, not the people.

Private or commercial pilot?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

13. You guys are great.

I'm glad to hear they are doing something about the procedures. But I think those controllers did a phenomenal job on 9/11 getting some 4,000 airplanes on the ground in such a short time.

Commercial pilot, CFI-I, instructor for major airline. Lots of contact with ATC, virtually all of it good.

[MercutioATC]

36. Thanks! You guys are great to work with, too.

Part of what makes the job go so well is the professionalism and understanding of the pilots. It's never fun to be put in a hold for 45 minutes, but I've rarely heard a complaint. Pilots almost always understand that we'll have to vector them off course at times, play with their speeds and make them fly at altitudes they'd rather not. We really appreciate the help from you.

[KittyWampus]

14. Mercutio, If You Read This Post... Tell Us Whether

notifying the Military would have been standard operating prodecure on Sept. 11th?

Could you give us a time frame... like if a plane's transponder goes off and then goes off course... you wait maybe minutes before calling the military?

[SuffragetteSal]

16. excellent question Cryingshame...

Is notifying the military SOP in these and similar situations? All good questions.

[MercutioATC]

18. That IS an excellent question. I'll try to explain the time lag.

Realistically, It could take 2-5 minutes before a controller that was busy with the morning departure push to observe the plane off course, try to contact the pilot (unsuccessfully) and to notify a supervisor. The supervisor would then observe the situation for another few minutes. If it was deemed to be an issue, the supervisor would contact the area manager in charge who would then observe the situation themselves. The area manager in charge would then call the Command Center, who would, you guessed it, observe the situation and decide whether to call NORAD. THAT'S when NORAD would be contacted.

Aggravating the time lag is the fact that we've all lost contact with planes, lost transponders, and seen planes fly off course numerous times. In every case it's been an equipment issue and there was no reason to expect that this was any different.

Procedures have changed, but this is how it was done on 9/11.

[althecat]

19. Ok Mercutio what is your explanation for this bit of the narrative...

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0406/S00204.htm

NORAD seems to have an amazing amount of difficulty remembering how they screwed up....

****************

Conflicting Accounts

In May 2003 public testimony before this Commission, NORAD officials stated that, at 9:16, NEADS received hijack notification of United 93 from the FAA. This statement was incorrect. There was no hijack to report at 9:16. United 93 was proceeding normally at that time.

In this same public testimony, NORAD officials stated that, at 9:24, NEADS received notification of the hijacking of American 77. This statement was also incorrect. The notice NEADS received at 9:24 was not about American 77. It was notification that American 11 had not hit the World Trade Center and was heading for Washington, DC.

A 9:24 entry in a NEADS event log records: “American Airlines #N334AA hijacked."

This is the tail number of American 11.

In their testimony, and in other public statements, NORAD officials also stated that the Langley fighters were scrambled to respond to the notifications about American 77 and/or United 93. These statements were incorrect as well. The report of American 11 heading south as the cause of the Langley scramble is reflected not just in taped conversations at NEADS, but in taped conversations at FAA centers, on chat logs compiled at NEADS, Continental Region headquarters, and NORAD, and in other records.

Yet this response to a phantom aircraft, American 11, is not recounted in a single public timeline or statement issued by FAA or DOD. Instead, since 9/11, the scramble of the Langley fighters has been described as a response to the reported hijacking of American 77, or United 93, or some combination of the two. This inaccurate account created the appearance that the Langley scramble was a logical response to an actual hijacked aircraft.

Not only was the scramble prompted by the mistaken information about American 11, but NEADS never even received notice that American 77 was hijacked. It was notified at 9:34 that American 77 was lost. Then, minutes later, NEADS was told that an unknown plane was six miles southwest of the White House. Only then did the already scrambled airplanes start moving directly to Washington, DC.

Thus the military did not have 14 minutes to respond to American 77, as testimony last year suggested. It had at most one or two minutes to respond to the unidentified plane approaching Washington, and the fighters were in the wrong place to be able to help.

They had been responding to a report about an aircraft that did not exist.

Nor did the military have 47 minutes to respond to United 93, as would be implied by the account that it received notice about it at 9:16. By the time the military learned about the flight, it had crashed.

At one point the FAA projected that United 93 would reach Washington, DC at about 10:15. By that time the Langley fighters were over Washington. But, as late as 10:10, the operating orders were still “negative clearance to shoot” regarding non-responsive targets over Washington, DC. The word of the authorization to shoot down hijacked civilian aircraft did not reach NEADS until 10:31.

We do not believe that an accurate understanding of the events of that morning reflects discredit on the operational personnel from NEADS or FAA facilities.

******

YEAH RIGHT!!!

******

The NEADS commanders and floor officers were proactive in seeking information, and made the best judgments they could based on the information they received. Individual FAA controllers, facility managers, and Command Center managers thought “outside the box” in recommending a nationwide alert, in ground-stopping local traffic, and, ultimately, in deciding to land all aircraft and executing that unprecedented order flawlessly.

In fact, it was inaccurate accounts of what happened that created questions about supposed delays in the military’s interception of the hijacked aircraft. They also had the effect of deflecting questions about the military’s capacity to obtain timely and accurate information from its own resources. They overstated the FAA’s ability to provide the military timely and useful information that morning.


*************

Mercutio... if I read this correctly.. then I reckon what they are saying is that it was all FAA's fault?

What says Mercutio?

[MercutioATC]

20. As I've said, I believe it was the "fault" of the system and complacence.

We had a system that required multiple people to assess the situation, each step taking time. We had seen hundreds of lost transponders and lost communications situations before and never had anything like this happen. The combination of these two things is where I believe the "blame" lies.

[stickdog]

24. We also had brains. All brains would say "Scramble a fighter to intercept

Flight 93 ASAP" at 9:40 EDT on 9/11.

Why didn't we listen to our brains?

[MercutioATC]

27. Umm, because the "brains" who had the power to do that didn't have

the information in a timely manner???

That's exactly what I've been saying. The system caused delays. Once again, controllers don't have direct access to NORAD.

[stickdog]

28. But some controllers in are known to have picked up the phone &

called NEADS.

What's stopping a controller from going around the FAA in a clear national emergency?

And does everybody at the FAA lack a brain?

[MercutioATC]

31. I don't know of a single controller who contacted NEADS.

FAA management, yes, but not controllers. The simple fact is that we have no way of contacting NEADS (or any other defense agency) from the sector. We don't even have the phone numbers posted in the areas. The area manager in charge handles that.

As far as your second question, we safely landed 4500 planes in about four hours, so at least some FAA employees must have brains.

We've covered this ground. If you'd be more specific, maybe I could better answer. If you present me with what you think SHOULD have happened, I can tell you why it would or would not have worked on 9/11.

[stickdog]

62. I saw a video summary of a 9/11 Commission hearing on public television.

It said ATC called the FAA and the FAA told them they were already in a high level meeting about the situation. Then ATC, "uncertain that the military had been notified," took it upon themselves to call NEADS.

Then they played the call.

The call went like this:

"Hey, we just wanted to make sure you knew that there's this hijack flying right toward NYC."

"Real or exercise?"

"What the fuck do you mean, real or exercise? Real! As in, get off your ass and get going!"


But I suppose that Cleveland ATC could just suck compared to NYC ATC.

Except that, with Flight 93 bearing down on Pittburgh, Cleveland ATC was yelling at some FAA dolt to get a fucking plane scrambled as well!

[MercutioATC]

64. Is there a special reason you're so hostile?

Is there a problem with discussing this like adults?

[stickdog]

65. Sigh.

"Oh, God, I don't know."

"Everybody just left the room."

[MercutioATC]

68. ???

What are you trying to say?

[FlaGranny]

29. It was pretty obvious almost

immediately that the first plane was hijacked, when passengers started making 911 calls from their cellphones. One stewardess was even on the phone with American Airlines. Evidently no one thought it important? No one told anyone else and waited for the ATC system to figure it all out?

[MercutioATC]

30. Controllers at Cleveland Center first heard about the crashes on CNN.

(the twin tower crashes)

There was no "red phone" that notified everybody when a major event occurred. Controllers on break saw the footage on CNN and came back into the control room to tell their co-workers.

There'd certainly be no way that cellphone calls would generate an immediate response from the FAA. Again, there is a chain of command that's followed, and it takes time.

Nothing happens "immediately".

[stickdog]

42. But everybody knew what was going on. So everybody

along the chain of command knew that lives depended on how quickly they relayed orders up the chain of command.

So where did the chain of command fail? Who along the chain of command decided they needed scrambled eggs instead of scrambled fighters?

[MercutioATC]

47. My point is that everybody did NOT know what was going on.

Once again, the system failed, not the people. I don't know of any specific person who made a "bad" decision. What I do know is that there were serious impediments to the rapid transfer of information.

[stickdog]

48. Who didn't know what was going on?

SomeBODY blew it. There WAS a chain of communication from the ATC to NORAD, and on 9/11 this chain should have been quasi-immediate. So who was the weak link? Who sat on this critical information instead of communicating it up the chain immediately?

We had the fighters. We had the pilots. We had enough time. We had a well known emergency situation and even a moron could have figured out that all potential hijackings required immediate military interceptions.

So who didn't do what any moron should have known to do?

[MercutioATC]

50. See below:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1808155&mesg_id=1810058

[stickdog]

61. That's not an answer. That's a weak excuse.

In the context of 9/11, a national emergency in which two planes had already hit the WTC:

1) anybody in the chain of communication could and should have taken it upon her or himself to go around protocol and contact the highest person in the chain of communication that he or she could reach directly

2) anybody in the chain of communication who felt it was necessary to "take a few minutes to observe the situation for themselves" before advancing the critical message that THERE WAS ANOTHER POTENTIAL HIJACKING!!! up the chain on 9/11 should have been summarily fired.

Don't you agree?

[MercutioATC]

63. You may not like it, but it IS an answer.

You DO realize that you're arguing that it's a "weak excuse" not because anybody screwed up, but because people did what they were supposed to do...

...which kind of supports my position. The system was to "blame", not the people.

[stickdog]

67. No. People didn't do what they were "supposed" to do.

They were "supposed" get a plane scrambled in a timely manner.

Yet 100 minutes into a national emergency with planes being used as WMDs, and they failed to do so.

Some PEOPLE blew it. Yes, the "system" might have contributed, the same way that the "system" makes people lie, cheat and steal. But some PEOPLE did not advance communications as quickly as they should have given the circumstances of 9/11.

Who were those PEOPLE? What do they have to say for themselves?

Finally, why are you trying to cover for them? Were you one of them?

[MercutioATC]

69. Yes, but there was a procedure to follow, and it was followed.

So, the PEOPLE did what they were supposed to but the SYSTEM that dictated their actions was inadequate.

If you had been around a while, you'd have known that I was at the FAA Tech Center working on a project on 9/11. I wasn't involved.

[Ouabache]

59. How much was the 'drill' that day resposible for all the confusion

Supposedly there was a simulation drill of a scenario very similar to 911 taking place on, what a coincidence, 911. Did that exercise and drill in anyway interfere or complicate the actual response to the REAL hijackings ? Seems like it would have. In all the discussions here and in all the 911 Commision hearings and preliminary reports I am hearing no reference to the 'simulation drill' scheduled and presumbably in progress when the actual hijackings occurred.

Why has that simulation dropped off all radar screens now?

[althecat]

21. I think the above piece of the narrative puts a different perspective...

... on this.

I understand that in normal circumstances there would be such lags. But how does this theory hold up when well after two planes have been hijacked and crashed into buildings.

According to the narrative now

"but NEADS never even received notice that American 77 was hijacked."

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0306/S00031.htm

Flight 77 took off from Dulles International Airport near Washington at 8:20, ten minutes after the scheduled departure time. <8:20, CNN, 9/17/01, Guardian, 10/17/01> Its last routine radio communication was made 51 seconds after 8:50, and then it failed to respond to a routine instruction. According to a USA Today map, it likely had already turned about 90 degrees from its scheduled flight path by this time (see the flight path map above). According to the New York Times, "a few minutes" after 8:48, flight controllers learned that Flight 77 had been hijacked. But, as with Flight 11, they clearly violated regulations and failed to immediately notify NORAD.

A few minutes later, Flight 77 began turning around over northeastern Kentucky, and eventually headed back toward Washington. At 8:56, Flight 77's transponder signal was turned off. The New York Times later pointed out that "by 8:56 a.m., it was evident that Flight 77 was lost." Starting at 8:56, flight controllers repeatedly called for Flight 77 over the radio and received no reply. Even though Flight 77 had already turned around before the transponder was turned off, flight controllers failed to notice that and continued to look for its signal further west, instead of east where it was headed. West Virginia flight controllers finally noticed it entering their airspace around 9:05. But again, supposedly now both West Virginia and Washington flight control apparently failed to notify NORAD. In fact, if NORAD can be believed, the FAA didn't notify NORAD until 9:24 or 9:25, and even then only suggested that it "may" have been hijacked! That's half an hour after the New York Times says the FAA decided Flight 77 had been hijacked!

How exactly can something like this happen... by 8.56am it was fairly clear the plane was another flying bomb... but nobody told Norad.

Meanwhile Norad has twice given testimony on this and provided two different times of notification. Now the official narrative says they were never notified.

According to you Mercutio this is because some twit in the chain of command at FAA was sitting on the information????

I find this extraordinarily hard to beleieve.

[althecat]

22. And if this is true... then who was the twit!!!!

.. you a controller are claiming it was one of your colleagues. Or several of them perhaps. Have these people still got their jobs? Did they get disciplined?

[MercutioATC]

58. When did I claim that one of my colleagues erred?

I've made it very clear that the system of information transfer was where the delays came from.

[stickdog]

25. You've obviously not dealt with MercutioATC before.

Hard to believe non-explanations are one of his fortes.

[MercutioATC]

34. Gee, it's nice to know I'm so loved by the CT crowd...

Why, though, do the most vocal CT'ers here have one thing in common...attacking the messenger instead of the message?

It seems that every time I make a statement that doesn't jive with the CT crowd, I get another personal attack. I don't take it personally, I'm just curious why.

For all of my alleged faults, I deal with the material, not the person presenting it.

[stickdog]

43. I was just warning althecat that your "answers" are often much

like the 9/11 Commissions'.

But perhaps you'd like to answer his questions on this thread so he can see for himself?

[MercutioATC]

46. I'd love to, thanks.

As far as my answers being like the 9/11 Commission's, that may be. Even though they tend to misinterpret facts at times, we're both working with factual data.

Althecat can make an independant decision, I'm sure.

[stickdog]

60. That makes sense in the context of a regular day -- not in the context of

9/11.

Are you really trying to sell us the idea that the supervisor HAD TO waste time and the area manager HAD TO waste time and the Command Center HAD TO waste time on 9/11? What would have possibly FORCED THEM to waste precious minutes "observing for themselves" after two known hijacks had already smashed into the WTC?

Furthermore, IF EVERYONE ALONG THE CHAIN OF COMMAND KNEW THOUSANDS OF LIVES COULD BE LOST FOR EVERY MINUTE DELAYED, couldn't an ATC -- just this once -- call the area manager or the Command Center directly? Or couldn't a supervisor -- just this once -- call the Command Center directly? I realize that that wasn't protocol, but we're talking about KNOWN hijacks on a day when two other KNOWN hijacks had already hit the WTC!

If there was ever a time to advance communication quickly, or even around protocol, wasn't between 9:05 EDT and 11:00 EDT on 9/11/01 that time???

[althecat]

23. Kick in the hope Mercutio will answer the question above?

[MercutioATC]

35. I'll try, althecat. Which question, specifically?

I answered the thread subject post. I'll try to answer anything else you're curious about.

Ask away...

:)

[althecat]

40. This question above...

#21

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1808155&mesg_id=1810108

How do you reconcile the realisation that flight 77 was hijacked at around 9am with the non notification of NEADS till 9.35am by which time the plane had crashed?

And please do not simply say procedures, by 8.50am the WTC has been hit and surely procedures would have been streamlined.

Secondly... why do you think NEADS twice gave incorrect evidence to the commission? Bad records? Bad procedures? Bad memories?

[MercutioATC]

53. I have no idea why the military does what it does.

What I DO know is that all of the supposed notifications are suspect and that the FAA claims that notification was made at 9:15 or 9:16 (if I remember correctly).

Why aren't the records clearer? I have no idea. You'd think it would be a relatively simple thing to record (accurate to within a minute or two, at least).

[althecat]

55. Thanks for that.... so I guess someone is lying then...

[MercutioATC]

56. Either lying or keeping lousy records...

...since I don't have the facts, I really don't know which.

You'll have to agree that the accounts don't match. SOMEBODY is mistaken..

[ConsAreLiars]

26. NORAD and the Air Traffic Controllers were unprepared because

they were not told to ramp up their defenses. When the CIA sent a memo about Bin Laden's plans to the FundieCon crowd it was ignored. They did nothing, because they were still working their loot-and-plunder scam on the people of the US and planning military conquest in the Middle East.

As for PATCO, by firing all the Air Traffic Controllers whose experience covered the time period in which hijackings were relatively common, they created a new generation whose "normal" responses to unusual events left them clueless. That said, the snippets I've heard suggest the the ATC's, once they caught on, did the right thing, but they were denied the information they needed to act quickly and effectively.

[ArkDem]

32. Raygun was definately MIHOP.

[theboss]

33. How were the air traffic controllers incompetent?

If anything, air traffic control did a pretty remarkable job grouding the entire US fleet as quickly as they did.

[kirkm76]

37. Umm, don't they have to retire at 55?

This is a real stretch. I believe they have a mandatory retirement age of 55, so how many of those Reagan fired would be on the job still. Yes, it was a bad thing Reagan did to those guys, but come on.

[MercutioATC]

52. 56, actually, and the older controllers are exempt.

Still, they're usually in supervisory positions when they reach that age. ATC is a young person's occupation. Most people just slow down too much after 56.

[TexasSissy]

38. I thought the controllers did excellent job.

It was their supervisors who chose not to call the military. And in fact, one did....without going through the proper chain of command, he took it upon himself to call the military, just to make sure they knew.

[KittyWampus]

39. Mercutio- If The ATC Had Been Notified To Expect Hijackings

is it within the realm of possiblity that they could've expedited the flow of information on 9/11?

Were ANY provisions in effect that would have enabled things to have been handled more efficiently.

I mean, if the FBI had sent out warnings to ATC in August... to have high alert...

Thank You for answering our questions.

[donhakman]

41. Even after 21 years

[MercutioATC]

51. Had a procedure been in place to specifically deal with this situation

in a different manner than the norm? Sure, that could have helped. Had we been briefed to expect hijackings? Yes.

Before anybody jumps on this statement by saying that there were existing procedures, allow me to draw the following illustration:

There are traffic laws about following too closely to the car in front of us, yet we all do it from time to time and accidents are the occasional result. If somebody specifically told you that on your next trip to work, a driver in front of you would slam on their brakes, would that raise your awareness and help avoid the accident? Most likely.

It's no different than any other profession in that manner. If we know something's coming, we can be better prepared for it.

[symbolman]

44. Watch my latest flash movie called "Mourning FOR America"

talks about this..

It compares Bush with Reagan (who doesn't even measure up to the 'gipper') and then shows people exactly how the "Reagan Revolution" screwed the whole country over and what it really did to our nation.



http://web.takebackthemedia.com/geeklog/public_html/staticpages/index.php?page=20040618050418549

Don't forget to sign up and post - we have lots of features at the newly redesigned Take Back the Media.com

[Slickriddles]

45. Don't know much about history

I think Liberal Guerilla is on to something here and it definitely should not be an attempt to blame the ATCs. Down thread it all gets a little bit hot and I think the original point is to look at the possible consequences of Reagan's union-busting actions in 1981. To say "oh that was 20 years ago" is ahistorical thinking of the worst sort. Consider, the Tiden-Hayes compromise of 1877 removed Federal troops from the South and led to the ignoring of the 14th and .15th Ammendments for close to 100 years and allowed Jim Crow and lynch-terror in the Southern States. Do I hold Rutherford B. Hayes personally responsible? No!! of course not, but the cause and effect is pretty clear. Now, consider what would happen to any institution if you fired all the employees at once and replaced them. A hockey team? maybe no difference 20 years later but I doubt it. How about a university that fires all it professors? Who mentors? Who has experience? Who has experience in different eras? People are what makes an institution and when you change those people you change the institution. Sometimes that can be a good thing. I don't think it was in Reagan's case. It was a mean, nasty anti-worker thing to do, and if THEY want to give him the credit for (dare I say it here) Ending the Cold War without firing a shot then I think his legacy bears some responsibility for the long range ripples of that action. Slick

[OpusOne]

49. Utterly ridiculous.... you shouldn't be allowed to vote. lol

[DemBones DemBones]

54. The Reagan-fired ATCs were concerned about SAFETY.

They saw it being compromised. After they were all fired and replaced, and being in a position where I was free to choose, I didn't choose to fly commercially again for almost fifteen years.

But, although the ATCs in PATCO had legitimate concerns and Reagan used them to shove a knife in American unions, I doubt that the PATCO firings led directly to the failures of 9/11. I think it was a new generation of incompetents and a new age of incompetence, spreading through several groups involved.

The PATCO firings did set a tone that perhaps helped facilitate the incompetence.

[MercutioATC]

57. So the "new" ATCs aren't concerned about safety?

I guess it must be because we're the "new generation of incompetents".

We work more than twice the aircraft PATCO controllers did with less staffing. I'm not beating up on PATCO controllers, but they never experienced anything close to the volume we work today.

Talk to a "new", "incompetent" controller sometime. I think you'll find that we're every bit as concerned about safety as PATCO controllers were.

[MercutioATC]

66. oops...wrong post

...