Search results

This is the best post of this thread.

Fixed that for you. We don't know if the ZLC controller issued 14,000 feet or 16,000 feet. We do know that the NTSB report hadn't mentioned the altitude clearance, so it stands to reason that the controller didn't issue an altitude below the MIA. How is the controller supposed to know the...

Didn't the report say the controller did not have radar identification of the aircraft, or that it was spotty? How can a controller turn an aircraft around if he doesn't know where the aircraft is? That could make matters worse and also be against procedure, as the turn would happen below the...

I agree. So many ADM errors. But when someone augers it in, the lawyers will find a way to spread the pain. The pilot's estate won't be satisfied unless there is a way to blame something else.

If the tower controller amended the flight plan to include portions of flight into uncontrolled airspace, and did so without pilot request...that's where the problem starts. Also, amending the RAL from 16,000 to 14,000 (below the MEA for the segment).

Correct, but the NTSB report (which raises more questions than it answers) points out disconnects in the local and enroute controller's working of the accident aircraft. What the NTSB report DOES NOT include is the fact that ZLC was one of the first of the Z's to install ERAM. They were a...

I'm done ...some people just want to argue...

I'd handle it by avoiding having to issue the safety alert, in much the same way Henning described in post 209. If I issue a simple vector to follow the traffic, no one has to panic.

This!

You're glossing over what I wrote, or more likely I wasn't eloquent enough to illustrate the situation I described for you. Just to be clear. You are providing radar services to aircraft A. Aircraft A's track conflicts with another VFR target at the same altitude. According to your...

5-6-1 is the reference you are looking for. You share the same priority as any Certified Professional Controller. I wasn't aware ATC gave "unnecessary vectors." 2-1-1 and 2-1-2 If you are talking to a VFR aircraft, you observe the aircraft's track will conflict or merge with an...

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/37089870.jpg

You're welcome! I thought it was a good article as well, and captured what a lot of us were thinking that day.

If that is your attitude, why bother getting radar services? The OP also said the controller was busy, and very soon after that transmission, the controller acknowledged the OP's request and terminated radar services.

The only difference between different classifications of controlled airspace is the VFR radar separation minima. Class E, D, C, or B...it doesn't matter... ...ATC is authorized to issue vectors in controlled airspace at any altitude, and in uncontrolled airspace only on pilot request...

That is not true, and was the subject of this year's latest recurrent training syllabus. Pilots are expected to comply with any instructions ATC issues, however the PIC needs to advise ATC if compliance will result in the aircraft entering IMC or an unsafe situation. The PIC is always the...

http://www.flyingmag.com/technique/proficiency/radio-silence-chicago-air-traffic-control-fire?page=0,0

Typical "company man" answer. [emoji23] (I kid I kid!)

There is no covering up a TFR bust. Heck, if an altitude bust causes an RA or other evasive maneuver, there is no covering that up either. It's no sweat. It happens. I wasn't there, and I don't have audio or radar playback, so I can't begin to speculate what the controller was or was not...

I was relieving a guy working satellite. He was busy, and had quite a few strips (we use one strip per aircraft we are working) in front of him, all of them VFR aircraft. As I assumed the position, one of the VFR aircraft wanted to cancel but I didn't catch his call sign. Another aircraft...