Fibbed to ATC. Got Caught. Was given number to call

Sinistar said:
For my deviation they wanted all pilot AND aircraft logs, met them at FSDO and they scoured through all of them. Hopefully your airplane was airworthy at the time.
Click to expand...
If you don’t mind sharing, what was your deviation about?
 
Kritchlow said:
The only possible thing I can think of is lack of pre flight planning. That said, that’s really not an ATC deviation.
Unfortunately, at larger airports at times we get as many as 10-15 pages of NOTAMS. There is no way to go through all of those to the point of memorization.
Click to expand...
Which is why important stuff—closed runways, taxiways, lighting or ILS out, etc.—is in the ATIS.
 
TCABM said:
At its core, aviation is an honesty contract. If you can’t be honest about a minor error and then not be willing to learn from that error, how can you be trusted with the lives of paying customers?
Click to expand...

How dare you expect someone to be able demonstrate being responsible !!
 
RyanB said:
How do you know this isn’t a member?
Click to expand...

I don’t, but why not just post anonymously as a member instead of anonymously as a guest? Does the forum setup allow admins to see which member is posting anonymously? If so, that’s a deterrent to its use.
 
TrueCourse said:
I don’t, but why not just post anonymously as a member instead of anonymously as a guest? Does the forum setup allow admins to see which member is posting anonymously? If so, that’s a deterrent to its use.
Click to expand...

Even as a guest you aren't truly anonymous.
 
Kritchlow said:
I missed this very same thing tonight in the Airbus. I requested a closed runway after I reported the atis.
I simply missed it. Really, no big deal. Not even a little deal.
Click to expand...

The big deal is the repeated lying and then not calling a given number. Pretty sure you didn't do that ...
 
Why would you not get the ATIS way before the handoff since you know you’ll need it? That way on initial contact you can say, “Approach, Bugsmasher 3AB, 20 miles south, landing Podunk with Hotel.”
 
It’s ironic that the phrase “I can’t afford to -“ is now so often used to describe the penalty one doesn’t want to face to take accountability for one’s poor choice(s)…

“I can’t afford to go to jail”-after committing crime

“I can’t afford to have a kid”-after participating in a known act without precautions (and no, this isn’t a reference to a recent SCOTUS case)

“I can’t afford to lose my job”-after stealing or fudging time cards

And on…

-you lied to ATC when you didn’t have to (2-3x).

-your lie caused ATC to have to point out you missed a key safety portion of the ATIS.

-now you don’t want to call because you “can’t afford a revoked certificate” because you want to fly in the airlines.

This is called situational ethics, ie, ethics when it is convenient for you.

Please find another career. I don’t want you anywhere near the flight deck of an aircraft with others depending on you for their safety. After all, you’d probably lie about being ill or otherwise unable to fly because you “can’t afford” to take a sick day.
 
DesertNomad said:
Why would you not get the ATIS way before the handoff since you know you’ll need it? That way on initial contact you can say, “Approach, Bugsmasher 3AB, 20 miles south, landing Podunk with Hotel.”
Click to expand...

And even if you don't have it, it's no big yank. I've been on with approach where they sounded like an auctioneer, throwing out vectors, and I was like "nope, not gonna miss a call trying to get ATIS."

After handoff it goes something like:

"Podunk Tower 12345 5 miles south"
"Do you have information Sierra?"
"No, wasn't able to get it while talking to approach"
"Make left base runway 27, winds are xx altimeter is nn.nn, what's your destination on the field?"

The horror of admitting you don't have ATIS!!!!
 
Velocity173 said:
ATC shouldn’t have been playing ATIS gotcha. That’s not their job.
Click to expand...
You’re the pro for this but I did have an experience where we were at a towered field for a few days of training and one runway was closed and the other had a significantly displaced threshold, both noted in the ATIS. I checked in and was sloppy and said “Nxxxx with the ATIS, ready for taxi”. “I need you to tell me which ATIS” “Oh - sorry - Golf” “Thanks. I needed to confirm you got the message about the closed runway and the displaced threshold”. I also had to refer to the shortened runway as “26 shortened”. Had I checked in with “with Golf” it would apparently have saved us both some time. Lesson learned.


Velocity173 said:
Call them if you want or don’t call them. It’s up to you.
Click to expand...
The more I think about it the more I think there’s no reason not to call, even if not required - assuming I can act politely. Worst case they file a possible pilot deviation, which I think they’d be more likely to do had I not called. Best case they “coach” me, feel better about “doing something” in the interest of safety, and we both move on. I’m not sure I actually see a down side but am open to learning.
 
Tantalum said:
Sadly, this is a model many (most?) today, aviation or not, prescribe to
Click to expand...
That is absolutely true and completely transcends political, religious, gender, or other orientation

Add: what also transcends all of the above is “well, I’M justified in situationally doing X but THEY aren’t!”
 
If you had made the call the controller would of probably given you a stern lecture? by not calling you only make the problem worse?
 
Llewtrah381 said:
You’re the pro for this but I did have an experience where we were at a towered field for a few days of training and one runway was closed and the other had a significantly displaced threshold, both noted in the ATIS. I checked in and was sloppy and said “Nxxxx with the ATIS, ready for taxi”. “I need you to tell me which ATIS” “Oh - sorry - Golf” “Thanks. I needed to confirm you got the message about the closed runway and the displaced threshold”. I also had to refer to the shortened runway as “26 shortened”. Had I checked in with “with Golf” it would apparently have saved us both some time. Lesson learned.



The more I think about it the more I think there’s no reason not to call, even if not required - assuming I can act politely. Worst case they file a possible pilot deviation, which I think they’d be more likely to do had I not called. Best case they “coach” me, feel better about “doing something” in the interest of safety, and we both move on. I’m not sure I actually see a down side but am open to learning.
Click to expand...

Yeah, ATC is required that you report the ATIS code on initial contact (if able). They even have to tell you to report back with the current code if you didn’t check in with it. As far as “shortened” phraseology. There’s no requirement for you to state it, only ATC. “Cessna 345, runway 3L shortened, cleared for take off.” If you want to read back verbatim, that’s up to you.

As far as calling, I’d call just to see what they wanted. The OP isn’t obligated in anyway to admit fault though. Personally I’d admit the mistake. Even if they send it to FSDO, they’re not going to lift a finger to investigate something like this. Really the whole thing should’ve gone down like Kritchlow’s situation.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Lol
That’s funny
Click to expand...

The only info I just uncovered on anonymous posting by members is a 16 year old post which says the feature is no longer available. Is that what’s funny? Never looked for it until now, just thought the feature existed.
 
Messedupbad said:
This is where I messed up. I was juggling things so quick in a new airplane and got a little behind. I didn’t get the ATIS due to workload but when ATC asked if I had information Sierra, I just told them yes. The real mess up was when I requested to land on a closed runway, which I would’ve known had I actually listened to the ATIS.
Click to expand...

When I look at this again I realized you have this backwards. The “real mess up” was when you said you had the ATIS. Twice. And shrugging it off when questioned a final time. The fact you asked for a closed runway that was announced on the ATIS was the “busted” moment.
 
TrueCourse said:
When I look at this again I realized you have this backwards. The “real mess up” was when you said you had the ATIS. Twice. And shrugging it off when questioned a final time. The fact you asked for a closed runway that was announced on the ATIS was the “busted” moment.
Click to expand...
What would have happened if it hadn't been a towered airport?
 
TrueCourse said:
When I look at this again I realized you have this backwards. The “real mess up” was when you said you had the ATIS. Twice. And shrugging it off when questioned a final time. The fact you asked for a closed runway that was announced on the ATIS was the “busted” moment.
Click to expand...
But he said exactly that in the original post…
 
TommyG said:
It was almost believable until he said he heard he didn’t have to actually call tower. I call BS on the post.
Click to expand...
Why? Here is what he said.
Messedupbad said:
When I landed on 3R (the active) he gave me taxi instructions followed by a number to call. I have yet to call it as I’ve read that I’m not obligated to,
Click to expand...
100% accurate.
 
TrueCourse said:
The only info I just uncovered on anonymous posting by members is a 16 year old post which says the feature is no longer available. Is that what’s funny? Never looked for it until now, just thought the feature existed.
Click to expand...
What’s funny is you think limiting guest posts would stop the trolls. The trolls are members most of the time. They will find a way.
 
RyanB said:
But he said exactly that in the original post…
Click to expand...

I interpreted the OP the way TrueCourse did. Not that the mess up was lying, but the getting behind the plane was the mess up. And he then doubled down with the "real messup" being asking for the closed runway.

The mess up is the lying, but the way the OP conveys it, it's almost like lying is just fine, and has zero societal awareness.
 
TrueCourse said:
The only info I just uncovered on anonymous posting by members is a 16 year old post which says the feature is no longer available. Is that what’s funny? Never looked for it until now, just thought the feature existed.
Click to expand...
That would be incorrect, the feature is absolutely still available. Members and non-members (guests) can post anonymously and you wouldn’t be able to determine the difference - it will appear the same.
 
Salty said:
What would have happened if it hadn't been a towered airport?
Click to expand...
From a flight a number of years ago, where I had checked NOTAMS for a field I thought I was going to use for a gas stop going up but then picked a different field, then en route on the way home two days later I diverted in the air to said field:
"Confirm you have the weather and NOTAMS"
"Cherokee 123 has weather and NOTAMS" (I had the weather and THOUGHT I had the current NOTAMS)
"Runway 2/20 closed. State intentions" (the only runway, of course)
<gulp>
"Stand by"
"Cherokee 123 requests reroute to..."
A little smugness in the controller's voice afterwards but, luckily, no phone number.

I do a better job of checking NOTAMS now, including calling FSS for NOTAMS if I change destinations in the air.
 
Garmin Pilot highlights closed runways with banners. OP might want to invest in an EFB.
 
Mistakes happen every day, but there was zero reason to lie 2X. Every pilot has the obligation to the aviation community to be as safe as possible. His lack of preparation and not listening to ATIS could get him or someone else hurt/killed. Scenario that come to mind: runway closed for repairs, non-towered airport, night or MVFR, equipment/barriers on the runway, etc...
 
FF does, too. There is a red bar across the top of the approach plate.

I can see this happening. If you are working with a busy approach, you may not have the opportunity to listen to ATIS from beginning to end. I find myself bouncing between Approach and ATIS. If I get the altimeter, winds and active, I may not pick up the rest. I may hear "30.29" and "Landing and departing Runway 33." and "Information November" and consider it good. I really do not want to miss a call from Approach, so ATIS can be chopped up in several parts. Most of the time I can listen to ATIS uninterrupted, but to me it is understandable. I must say that this thread will make me be more careful in the future, which is perhaps what OP might have been told had he called.
 
RyanB said:
That would be incorrect, the feature is absolutely still available. Members and non-members (guests) can post anonymously and you wouldn’t be able to determine the difference - it will appear the same.
Click to expand...

I figured this out and I'm glad it's over with. "Don't log in, then post" is the answer. When you go to the forum front page and look at the Confidential Subjects header, you find this gem that needs editing.

Forums in this category may be posted to anonymously to prevent identification of a poster. To post anonymously you must click Post Anonymously? when submitting your post. You may also log out and post as an unregistered guest.
Click to expand...

I usually just click "New Threads" and rarely start out on the main page, that's why I missed the Confidential Subjects header.

I now have an education in How to Be a Troll.
 
RyanB said:
If you don’t mind sharing, what was your deviation about?
Click to expand...
Landed on wrong runway during PPL training. I believe "Expectation Bias" would be the right prognosis. Plus a confusing directive (my opinion) by the tower (who are great people BTW). Got the "here's a number to call". Landed, shutdown, called them right away. They explained the (obvious) problem. I went home, filed the ASRS report, called CFI. He said keep doing solo flight. I have a whole thread on if from a few years ago. I received a letter, called local FSDO back. He gave me choice to meet at the airport or go there. I didn't feel comfortable having them at or around the plane so met them there. They required all pilot logs and aircraft logs. They played back the ATC exchange. Was obvious I read back the correct runway but landed on wrong runway (parallels). Thankfully no traffic on the wrong runway, no FBO vehicles, etc. The CFI and I worked on some things before hand and in the end no action, no special checkride and after 1yr I believe it cleared but still not sure that that means. Took around 4-5 weeks from day of event to FSDO contact. For this particular airport there have been quite a few wrong runway landings or taxi crossing events so they also spent some time talking about what they were studying, etc.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Why? Here is what he said.

100% accurate.
Click to expand...

So he refuses to call the tower which is accurate that he doesn’t have to, but then post online about the whole situation. I call BS post.

If it’s not this pilot should not be a pilot. He got caught playing games, and is too scared to face the music? If it were me I would rather call and get it over with, then have to constantly wait for possible repurcussions. And then it goes from a quick tongue lashing from tower that they may bump over to FSDO. Who would you rather deal with.
 
This is slightly better reddit-tier bait than the 172 fireworks post.

Slightly.

Fancy G
Troll recognizes troll.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top