It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Jbird
I agree, W' , do you think it would be fruitful to shoot them a question or two about it's origin?
h. FAAO 7210.56, Air Traffic Quality Assurance, defines situations requiring a Quality Assurance Review (QAR) and the procedures to be followed to accomplish the review. Promptly notify personnel responsible for conducting the review upon identifying the need for a QAR. Record QARs with the minimum detail necessary in order to identify the initiating incident (e.g., unusual go-around) and how it was identified (e.g., in-flight evaluation). Facilities may establish local forms and procedures for recording, disseminating and documenting the resolution of QARs. Local forms used for recording this information are considered supplements to FAA Form 7230-4 and shall be filed with it.
Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
Ok, so this is what was referred to in the log as QAR and it means that there is secondary paperwork describing the event.
Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
I haven't checked this thread for a few days and just found this info in a link posted by roadgravel
h. FAAO 7210.56, Air Traffic Quality Assurance, defines situations requiring a Quality Assurance Review (QAR) and the procedures to be followed to accomplish the review. Promptly notify personnel responsible for conducting the review upon identifying the need for a QAR. Record QARs with the minimum detail necessary in order to identify the initiating incident (e.g., unusual go-around) and how it was identified (e.g., in-flight evaluation). Facilities may establish local forms and procedures for recording, disseminating and documenting the resolution of QARs. Local forms used for recording this information are considered supplements to FAA Form 7230-4 and shall be filed with it.
Ok, so this is what was referred to in the log as QAR and it means that there is secondary paperwork describing the event. Was somebody working on an FOI request? If so, they need to be sure and ask for a copy of this QAR generated along with the log.
Originally posted by sickboy1313
chicagos fox news is airing a "mysteries in the skies report" within the next hour 9pm central.
Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
Hey I just noticed that the ATC log was edited at some time.
2303 QAR C'___' ABOUT DISC
0148 WAIVER 98-T-53F IS IN EFFECT FOR RWY 32LT10 32RV
2340 UAL562 WAS SENT AROUND ON RWY 22R DUE TO COMPANY ON THE RWY
0049 CONFIGURATION CHANGE PLAN X TRIP
0110 D.DOBRINICH ON WCLC
"i dont know whats scarier. losing a nuclear weapon or the fact that it happens enough to have a code name for it"[/qutoe]
Originally posted by Damocles
Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
Hey I just noticed that the ATC log was edited at some time.
2303 QAR C'___' ABOUT DISC
0148 WAIVER 98-T-53F IS IN EFFECT FOR RWY 32LT10 32RV
2340 UAL562 WAS SENT AROUND ON RWY 22R DUE TO COMPANY ON THE RWY
0049 CONFIGURATION CHANGE PLAN X TRIP
0110 D.DOBRINICH ON WCLC
ok, so lets pretend thats a direct reference to the 'object'. is it just me or is it odd that for a 'weather phenom' it has a word associated to it that can only mean one thing? IF ufo's arent real, why is there a apparently standardized code word for it?
or is it just my lack of sleep clouding things in my mind again?
[/qutoe]
"Company" does not, necessarily have to mean "UFO", ie. "Alien Spacecraft", of course. Could just refer to an unauthorized vehicle (air or ground) in a restricted area, or an area reserved for another, authorized vehicle.
I'm sure ATC's would be a bit skittish about using the term "UFO" in official records.
But, as your second quote implies, having a euphamistic term at the ready, so to speak, indicates that such unauthorized intrusions do occur frequently enough to justify an "officially accepted" short-hand notational form.
No matter what the True nature of the "intruder" might be.
My question and a question many others have asked, repeatedly (Thank You 'A Sinclair") is" What response procedures are in place to deal with such Company; and were those procedures followed by the authorities at O'Hare that day?
If so, is there a record of what was dertermined about the "Company" on the runway.
If the procedures were NOT enacted in this incident, Why Not?
If there are no procedures.....WTF!
[edit on 21-2-2007 by Bhadhidar]