- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 15,263
- Location
- Southeast Tennessee
- Display Name
Display name:
This page intentionally left blank
IFR direct over Chicago...
- Thread starter dans2992
- Start date
Groundpounder
En-Route
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2013
- Messages
- 2,951
- Location
- New Hampshire
- Display Name
Display name:
Emerson Bigguns
Because Southwest. They throw pizza parties for various approach controls around the nation.
wsuffa
Touchdown! Greaser!
CVG was very similar - no practice approaches, little or no Class B clearance, heard one controller tell a FLIB that "Delta owns the airport and doesn't want you here". Then Delta cut back and the controllers were begging for more traffic in fear that staffing would be cutback or they'd eventually lose the Class B.
James_Dean
Pattern Altitude
I don't understand just dealing with going around the bravo. I did a little look at a flight between Cedar Rapids(KCID) and Battle Creek(KBTL) for the saratoga I used to fly. At 5,000 it's 1:58 direct and 2:04 if you hit MOTIF. Six minutes to play nice with the system?
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 15,263
- Location
- Southeast Tennessee
- Display Name
Display name:
This page intentionally left blank
My issue is the ATL bravo, and if going south I go to either HEFN or AHN to go around the bravo. On a typical flight to central FL, it adds 6 minutes. Big deal.
They got the Atlas Air and other DHL stuff going on there now but only very early in the morning.
ATL has a lot of clear space around it. So does CLT. The problem ones are places like BOS and CHICAGO where they don't want to work you and you're blocked from practically going around if you don't want to be way offshore.
wsuffa
Touchdown! Greaser!
Yeah, but the volumes are nowhere near what Delta used to have. And Airborne used to launch out of Wilmington, just northeast of Cincy, and much of their traffic passed through the CVG TRACON area.
Radar Contact
Pattern Altitude
That's a tough one without seeing the situation unfold. There is a chance the 737 was cheating on the speed and was catching you. In that case, I'd make him go around instead of you since he's the one fouling it up. You guys are equally entitled to the airport. There is a chance that the controller got nervous thinking you'd hit the marker and slam the brakes and in that case if you told them you'll do 150 to 1 mile final that should have alleviated that. At MDW specifically I will run it tighter if I know the parallels are open and I will verify that they will side step the GA plane. My final thought I mention often is unfortunately, all controllers aren't created equal. I'm not claiming to be the best ever but I'd have zero problem mixing you into a ORD or MDW final with you telling me the 170/150 speed you mention and I work with many that would do the same.
Radar Contact
Pattern Altitude
You are correct.
It'd be easier to explain to someone if they swung by the facility (I've done this with other local pilots). If you look at ORD and visualize a west flow scenario landing 3 runways west. Aircraft are crossing the shore on downwind anywhere from 100 down to 040. Aircraft are coming back on the finals across the lake a ways at all usable altitudes 110 and below descending. The sear's tower MVA along the shore is 033. There is no way to shoot a gap within gliding distance of shore in the B. Now with that in mind MDW is on the RNAV 22L often when ORD is west flow. They are using anywhere from 070 to 030 from MGC almost all the way up the shore to MDW. It's a lot of planes. On the west side of the airspace during this MDW is departing with silent releases Climbing to 030 and ORD is departing silently on all heading climbing to 050 all needing to get to the flight levels.
While not impossible, there are very few situations that allow for B clearances without disrupting a lot of planes for little time saving rewards. (i.e. PWK GA departures south routinely get routed over ORD at 060 as opposed to going around down low). It is a case by case basis and many are trying to help when able. Most will bend over backwards for wx deviations vs saving 5 or 6 min flight time.
As I mentioned before, it is real time traffic dependent and I've witnessed on both ends (flying and controlling) things improving slowly for GA and hopefully the trend continues. As in most things, I'm sure we can and hopefully will continue to improve for all the flying public.
Kritchlow
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,884
- Display Name
Display name:
Kritchlow
You guys do a great job. And I mean that. I'm an airline guy and used to be based at ORD.
Just my opinion as an airline guy--
It's always nice to accommodate the small GA craft, but in reality to design a system to accommodate a few people does not outweigh accommodating truly tens of thousands of people in the same timeframe.
I truly understand GA's spot here, but often I believe small airplane guys do things just because they can and enjoy stirring the pot.
Don't get me wrong... several situations are valid, but to save 6 minutes may not be one of them (especially since everyone here wants to fly and build time).
Flame away.
donjohnston
Pattern Altitude
Here's something I've always wondered (chart attached for those not familiar with the Chicago area):
Since I started flying in the Chicago area around 1999, when approaching from the south, bound for 3CK (Lake In The Hills). About 50 miles out I would always get the call "we have an amendment to your routing, advise when ready to copy." And it would ALWAYS be JOT-OBK-3CK (blue route). Which seemed like the worst thing in the world for you guys if I ever went NORDO in IMC. Now in the real world, about 5 miles from JOT, I get a vector of 330 until well past ARR and DPA and then get direct to destination.
But lately, I started getting JOT-DPA-3CK (red route). Which makes a lot more sense.
So the question(s) is:
1) Why the JOT-OBK routing when it seems like that would make everyone's life hell if it had to be flown?
2) What happened that caused the change in that standard routing?
Attachments
If only I could get one of those routes. C90 insists on sending me to KELSI.
Radar Contact
Pattern Altitude
I have no idea why that was the standard routing at the time it was decided. I know after I got here, we worked on fixing some of these issues and the resolution was what you are getting now. As you mention, way better now if you went NORDO!
Radar Contact
Pattern Altitude
I don't believe C90 is sending you there. That is 20-30 miles outside our airspace and I have never asked for the center (or heard anyone ask) to send someone there. I believe that is a Chicago Center issue. What route are you on when you get sent there? Maybe I can help
Coming up from the SE (FWA, sometimes BVT) eading to OSH. While the routing might have been issued by ZAU, I'm pretty sure I got handed off to C90 and once asked if there was any way to avoid the KELSI leg.
James_Dean
Pattern Altitude
Happens all the time. I usually get MOTIF rather than KELSI lately on my transit from KSPW to KCMH.
Doggtyred
En-Route
So the airline pilot let ATC vector him into a VFR target? How is that the corporate chief pilots fault? The corporate guy was flying legally where he had a right to be. With his transponder on, I'm sure. And there was approach radar AND TCAS in play, no? Not to mention the Mark 1 Mod 1 Eyeball?
Kritchlow
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,884
- Display Name
Display name:
Kritchlow
Just curious... do you have all the facts or just what you have read in this thread?
Somehow you are making this the airline pilots fault.
Doggtyred
En-Route
No more so than other people chose to make it a corporate pilots fault who was allegedly legally operating in Class E airspace. If the letter happened as alleged, it was a douche move.
Kritchlow
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,884
- Display Name
Display name:
Kritchlow
If....
Sheesh... shouldn't have to say this, but do you really take fourth hand reporting on an internet board as gospel???
dtuuri
Final Approach
I think the airline pilot's normal separation from IFR traffic was compromised by a risk-taking "cowboy" in a corporate jet and didn't like it. Or maybe he was turned to avoid said cowboy and didn't like being inconvenienced. I didn't see the letter myself. They didn't have TCAS in the 1970s, btw. I was a corporate pilot myself and wouldn't cancel instruments over top of a TCA (class B nowadays) just because I didn't like the treatment. I would (and have) complained via phone after landing. I agree with the airline pilot--that was bad judgment. The CEO, no doubt, didn't like having his life risked for a few seconds of expediency or his company's name tarnished by some renegade pilot.
I do know this pilot canceled IFR departing New York City as soon as he got above the TCA and turned direct to his destination while climbing unrestricted to avoid the routing and step climbs of ATC. What do you think of that decision?
dtuuri
Last edited:
Thanks @Radar Contact for adding your perspective. Really helpful!
RudyP
Cleared for Takeoff
I agree. Thanks Kevin! It is very helpful to get your input from the other side of the radio.
Radar Contact
Pattern Altitude
That's also not in our airspace. I don't doubt Chicago Center is routing you guys around the airspace. What altitudes are you cruising at getting those routings?
I'm not an ATC expert, but a long time GA pilot; the critical element of separation (it seems to me) is altitude, and we (GA) don't go up (or down) very fast. In constricted airspace, it's gotta be tough mixing aircraft with such widely varying performance. Add in some weather, and now the controller has even less room to fit us all in. I recall an anecdote about an IFR Cheyenne (admittedly a higher-end GA aircraft), getting a vector to avoid traffic in a sky full of thunderstorms. The turn would out him in a cell, and he declined ("unable") - some fairly frantic back and forth ensued, with the Cheyenne canceling IFR and changing to a VFR altitude. It wrecked the controller's planning, cause of whatever his separation minimums were. No one was being a jerk - the controller was trying to follow his rules, and the Cheyenne pilot wanted to survive . . .the system wasn't up to the stress the approach procedures, weather, rules, and aircraft performance put on it.
If the VFR guy was legal, and the other guy (airliner) didn't like the separation, his beef was with the system (or ATC), as I see it. BUT . . . the VFR guy was being a selfish jerk, too, even if legal.
If the VFR guy was legal, and the other guy (airliner) didn't like the separation, his beef was with the system (or ATC), as I see it. BUT . . . the VFR guy was being a selfish jerk, too, even if legal.
James_Dean
Pattern Altitude
Below 15k. The one that I find silly is when I'm flying to Gary and the make me go to BDF for the LUCIT.one arrival. That's getting pretty greedy with your airspace when direct lucit would keep things clear.
Doggtyred
En-Route
Exactly my point.
dtuuri
Final Approach
I'm forced to conclude you think more regulation of pilot behavior is required to prevent jerks from using bad judgment. I prefer the airline pilot's method myself--it sent a message without penalizing those who use good judgment.
dtuuri
Jim_CAK
Line Up and Wait
I don't have any experience with the Chicago Bravo but I do fly near the Cleveland Bravo and go through it a few times a year. The route depends largely on the landing direction at CLE. If I am going from CAK to PCW and CLE is landing to the east, I get routed around the arrival corridor. If they are landing to the west, I generally get cleared direct from CAK. CLE Bravo controllers have always been accommodating.
I don't think I've ever been denied a deviation for weather. It's not really a request from me. I'm going to do it. I'm not going to get rocked by a CB cloud.
MarkZ
En-Route
As well you shouldn't. The key is, if you are operating with ATC, communicate your intentions as soon as possible. If I know what you need to do, I can implement a plan to let you do so while keeping Grandma Sue's* airliner out of your grill.
Please understand that while my weather radar might be pretty good, it's no substitute for your eyes while behind the yoke. My weather radar typically only shows precipitation. Your eyes show the developing anger in those cumulonimbus skies. If you tell me or my colleagues what's going on, we can not only help you get through the weather, but ensure those pilots and passengers behind you don't have to endure the same conditions.
*if your grandma isn't named Sue, I apologize. Kindly re-insert your real grandmother's name in place and utilize the same analogy.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Kritchlow
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,884
- Display Name
Display name:
Kritchlow
A number of years ago I had a complete battle with a NY center controller (could have been tracon, can't remember exactly).
Anyway, we were holding for one of the NYC airports and we could not do it. The pattern out us directly into a ominous looking cell. Not a CB, a true cell.
We said no but the ATC guy said NO deviations do to traffic and airspace. We said we have no choice and must deviate NOW. He said NO, unapproved. Traffic and airspace....
we could NOT go through what was in front of us. I'm a pretty hearty fellow, but this monster wasn't didn't look uncomfy, but I truly feared for the wing attachments.
I said we CANNOT go straight ahead. If you say we must the "e word" will come out. A different voice came on the radio and vectored us away.
Anyway, we were holding for one of the NYC airports and we could not do it. The pattern out us directly into a ominous looking cell. Not a CB, a true cell.
We said no but the ATC guy said NO deviations do to traffic and airspace. We said we have no choice and must deviate NOW. He said NO, unapproved. Traffic and airspace....
we could NOT go through what was in front of us. I'm a pretty hearty fellow, but this monster wasn't didn't look uncomfy, but I truly feared for the wing attachments.
I said we CANNOT go straight ahead. If you say we must the "e word" will come out. A different voice came on the radio and vectored us away.
Doggtyred
En-Route
Your conclusion would be inaccurate. The corporate jerk was someplace he had a right to be, jerk or not. The airliner was on vectors and IFR and the controller told him where to go. In other words, I dont feel the jerk was at fault nor did he break any rules. And I dont feel the airline captain sending a letter trying to get the jerk fired for something that didn't break the rules was appropriate either. If you disagree with the jerk being VFR 500 feet or however much above the class b, then YOU can advocate for surface to 18000 for Class B's.. but that or any other regulations are not my idea for what the solution would be.
I would respectfully suggest that ATC refrain from vectoring or climbing the big fast movers into VFR traffic in Class E airspace above the Class B though. I'm sure that can be accomplished without new rulemaking.
dtuuri
Final Approach
I think we need to "go along to get along" sometimes and this was one of those times. I'm not in favor of having government settle every little issue, calling the cops on your neighbor when you could simply discuss it directly for instance. I see what the airline pilot wrote to the CEO as doing just that. Bottom line? The CEO agreed. I'd put it in the same category as drivers who pass a line of cars backed up due to a lane closure and then butt in line up ahead. Legal? Sure. Good judgment? Nope.
dtuuri
MarkZ
En-Route
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile...nd-lane-mergers-are-good-for-traffic.amp.html
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
dtuuri
Final Approach
LOL! Ha, ha. I've driven in Chicago. Houston too. They don't let you in after you speed by in a closed lane there! Maybe Denver drivers are more, uh, mellowed out these days and wave you in?
dtuuri