3 ms·

>Only one air traffic controller, Peter Nielsen of ACC Zurich, was controlling the airspace through which the aircraft were flying.[10] The other controller on

>Only one air traffic controller, Peter Nielsen of ACC Zurich, was controlling the airspace through which the aircraft were flying.[10] The other controller on duty was resting in another room for the night. This was against SkyGuide's regulations but had been a common practice for years and was known and tolerated by management.[10] Maintenance work was being carried out on the main radar image processing system, which meant that the controllers were forced to use a fallback system. >Skyguide, after initially having blamed the Russian pilot for the accident, accepted full responsibility and asked relatives of the victims for forgiveness. >Under international aviation laws,[failed verification] the compensation amount was about CHF 30,000 ($34,087) to CHF 36,000. The Swiss Federal Court turned down appeals from some relatives for higher compensation in 2011. >A criminal investigation of Skyguide began in May 2004. On 7 August 2006, a Swiss prosecutor filed manslaughter charges against eight employees of Skyguide. The prosecutor called for prison terms of up to 15 months if found guilty.[29] The verdict was announced in September 2007. Three of the four managers convicted were given suspended prison terms and the fourth was ordered to pay a fine.[22] Another four Skyguide employees were cleared of any wrongdoing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_%C3%9Cberlingen_mid-air_collision https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_%C3%9Cberlingen_mid-air_c... How so?

mlyle 7y ago
So a guy gets left to manage airspace by himself and was overloaded (not by his decision). A ground based collision warning system was shut off for maintenance. And he made a critical mistake and a lot of people died. It's now "just" as a result to stab this guy to death in front of his young children? And the murderer can come home after a light punishment to celebration and acclaim? Gross, man. So gross. It's just so absolutely misguided: "taking justice into ones' own hands," creating secondary victims in the guy's children, and further-- just chose the person who happened to be on duty and not anyone actually responsible for the policies and procedures that really created the accident.
- SkyBelow 7y ago
  The comment made was "Russia has a cancerously warped morality." The slap on the wrist the company received, the fighting over how much compensation to pay out, the Swiss government valuing the time they spent holding the murderer as higher than the lives of the children combined, the management who cut corners to the point dozens died. All of these are just as equal if not worse cancerously warped senses of morality. So given that as the baseline and what can count as normal (can, not should), I don't see where one has the ability to condemn that one specific part of the incident as being so much worse. >And the murderer can come home after a light punishment to celebration and acclaim? Gross, man. So gross. More gross than the murderers responsible for the death of dozens getting fiscal rewards by the other governments involved due to the legal systems they choose to enable? If anything, given the level of culpability and punishments handed out I would say that this particular individual did not receive the grosses treatment. >"taking justice into ones' own hands," creating secondary victims in the guy's children Which is why it is so important for the existing legal systems to create a sense of justice enough that people do not burn their one use of total social disregard for vengeance. When you deal with a case like this, discussions of right and wrong have little bearing on individuals who feel like they have lost everything seeking on vengeance for wrongs they do not feel were redressed. This is not advocating such behavior, only recognizing that until we achieve some level of mind control people will always have the option of throwing everything else away for the sake of vengeance. Not the right to do; the innate option and ability to do so. It isn't that such behavior is just or what is moral or what is right. It is about that (most) all of us have the ability to disregard all others and act as we desire until others use force to stop us and how society seeks to prevent people from choosing that option of last resort. This is a factor in numerous anti-social behaviors and one reason why some behavior, no matter how much we pass and strengthen laws to stop it, continues unabated.
  - mlyle 7y ago
    Well, fine, you've convinced me: if I'm wronged, it's perfectly OK to kill someone tangentially involved. As long as someone else involved did something that I consider worse, all's fair. /s Complicated systems made out of many humans and policies break down and result in deaths. We try and make the systems better and deaths less, and look-- commercial aviation is safer than ever. But decisions made in this type of environment do not have a nice predictable cause and effect relationship like stabbing someone does.
- rasz 7y ago
  You can be sure the next air traffic controller in similar situation (gear in service, lone shift) will voice his concerns and deny work instead of putting people in danger.

mlyle 7y ago

So a guy gets left to manage airspace by himself and was overloaded (not by his decision). A ground based collision warning system was shut off for maintenance. And he made a critical mistake and a lot of people died. It's now "just" as a result to stab this guy to death in front of his young children? And the murderer can come home after a light punishment to celebration and acclaim? Gross, man. So gross. It's just so absolutely misguided: "taking justice into ones' own hands," creating secondary victims in the guy's children, and further-- just chose the person who happened to be on duty and not anyone actually responsible for the policies and procedures that really created the accident.

SkyBelow 7y ago
The comment made was "Russia has a cancerously warped morality." The slap on the wrist the company received, the fighting over how much compensation to pay out, the Swiss government valuing the time they spent holding the murderer as higher than the lives of the children combined, the management who cut corners to the point dozens died. All of these are just as equal if not worse cancerously warped senses of morality. So given that as the baseline and what can count as normal (can, not should), I don't see where one has the ability to condemn that one specific part of the incident as being so much worse. >And the murderer can come home after a light punishment to celebration and acclaim? Gross, man. So gross. More gross than the murderers responsible for the death of dozens getting fiscal rewards by the other governments involved due to the legal systems they choose to enable? If anything, given the level of culpability and punishments handed out I would say that this particular individual did not receive the grosses treatment. >"taking justice into ones' own hands," creating secondary victims in the guy's children Which is why it is so important for the existing legal systems to create a sense of justice enough that people do not burn their one use of total social disregard for vengeance. When you deal with a case like this, discussions of right and wrong have little bearing on individuals who feel like they have lost everything seeking on vengeance for wrongs they do not feel were redressed. This is not advocating such behavior, only recognizing that until we achieve some level of mind control people will always have the option of throwing everything else away for the sake of vengeance. Not the right to do; the innate option and ability to do so. It isn't that such behavior is just or what is moral or what is right. It is about that (most) all of us have the ability to disregard all others and act as we desire until others use force to stop us and how society seeks to prevent people from choosing that option of last resort. This is a factor in numerous anti-social behaviors and one reason why some behavior, no matter how much we pass and strengthen laws to stop it, continues unabated.
- mlyle 7y ago
  Well, fine, you've convinced me: if I'm wronged, it's perfectly OK to kill someone tangentially involved. As long as someone else involved did something that I consider worse, all's fair. /s Complicated systems made out of many humans and policies break down and result in deaths. We try and make the systems better and deaths less, and look-- commercial aviation is safer than ever. But decisions made in this type of environment do not have a nice predictable cause and effect relationship like stabbing someone does.
rasz 7y ago
You can be sure the next air traffic controller in similar situation (gear in service, lone shift) will voice his concerns and deny work instead of putting people in danger.