No mercy from ATC. Violate every pilot error says FAA

D

docmirror

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
12,008
Display Name
Display name:
Cowboy - yeehah!
Cross posted from Avweb, and the red board:


Controllers As Airspace Police?
atc_tower_controller.jpg
If you've ever missed a turn, set the altitude bug incorrectly or committed any of thousands of sins that air traffic controllers routinely catch and help correct every day without much fuss, those days are apparently over. The FAA has apparently ordered controllers to violate pilots for any and all errors and has threatened to discipline them if they don't file the reports. While the FAA says it's just enforcing rules already in place, the head of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association say it's yet another burden an an already-overworked workforce that will pit controllers against pilots. "We are not the FAA police! The FAA's and controller's mission is to provide the safe and efficient movement of live air traffic," said NATCA President Patrick Forrey. "The fact that the FAA is now disciplining controllers for not 'policing' pilot actions as they relate to flight regulations is indicative of the tyrannical and oppressive culture the FAA has created." The FAA, as might be suspected, has a different view.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I suspect it's going to increase radio congestion a lot with every pilot asking for a verification of every instruction. My comm is going to 'off' more now than it used to.
 
Very unfortunate. I've helped controllers as many time as they've helped me when something didn't go right. This isn't supposed to be an adversarial system; this is supposed to be a system where everyone helps one another to make us all safer.

Just hate to see this attitude.

Best,

Dave
 
It's brilliant, when you think about it... pilots will be turning their transponders off in droves, and never admitting any errors to ATC. Heck, maybe pilots will start flying without ATC at all- even IFR, why not?

Then they won't have to worry about replenishing the controller ranks or upgrading systems... and the crashes can all be blamed on "pilot error". :D
 
I already fly as though I'll get written up for the slightest error in following ATC instructions...
 
rottydaddy said:
It's brilliant, when you think about it... pilots will be turning their transponders off in droves, and never admitting any errors to ATC. Heck, maybe pilots will start flying without ATC at all- even IFR, why not?
Click to expand...

To minimize the possibility of colliding with another airplane in the clouds?
 
jmaynard said:
I already fly as though I'll get written up for the slightest error in following ATC instructions...
Click to expand...

Yep, me too. They've always had the ability to write you up for a violation, it's just a question of whether or not they want to.

I agree that this is sad. I have found ATC to generally be very helpful. They work with me, not against me. As it is, far too many pilots fly without flight following because they're afraid of talking on the radio, and potentially getting written up for an error. We should be trying to decrease the number of people who do this, not increase, especially as the skies only get busier.
 
rottydaddy said:
It's brilliant, when you think about it... pilots will be turning their transponders off in droves, and never admitting any errors to ATC. Heck, maybe pilots will start flying without ATC at all- even IFR, why not?
Click to expand...

Because that is blatantly illegal and beyond the definition of "stupid"?

Then again, I'm sure there are people who'd try it...
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Yep, me too. They've always had the ability to write you up for a violation, it's just a question of whether or not they want to.
Click to expand...

The fact is if you fly enough, you'll do something that can be cited under catch-all FAR 91.13.

I agree the relationship should not be adversarial.
 
Attempt by FAA to get NATCA to 'hate' GA as well?

"...if we can get the controllers fed up with dealing with GA, they'll jump on board with the funding issues..."

FAA already tried to get Airlines vs. Biz Aviation. Why not pit the controllers against GA? Get everyone fighting amongst themselves so they can't all join together to fight the big dog on the block.
 
CJones said:
Attempt by FAA to get NATCA to 'hate' GA as well?

"...if we can get the controllers fed up with dealing with GA, they'll jump on board with the funding issues..."

FAA already tried to get Airlines vs. Biz Aviation. Why not pit the controllers against GA? Get everyone fighting amongst themselves so they can't all join together to fight the big dog on the block.
Click to expand...
Normally I'd ask where your tinfoil hat was at except that type of conspiracy makes a lot of sense.

The converse of this action by the FAA will also start to get us pilots reporting controller as well. Then the FAA can also use that as a reason to fire some of the trouble makers.
 
I wish I had heard about this when I had the FAA administrator right in front of me, both the get his take and allow the FAA brass to get ours.
 
I heard the interim FAA boob speak at Oshkosh. Everything he said he wrapped around 'safety'. I call BS. My take is that all the stepped-up enforcement of the regs isn't going to increase safety one bit. It'll push the small operators like me further off the grid, and make go/nogo decisions more precarious.

There's no F U in 'team'.
 
jmaynard said:
I already fly as though I'll get written up for the slightest error in following ATC instructions...
Click to expand...
I observed a dramatic pilot deviation on Tuesday. It was not pretty. An aircraft turned directly at another aircraft.
Nobody likes mistakes. Everybody makes them. We do everything that we can to avoid them.
What motivates us to be accurate? What reason do we have to be careful?
Lives depend on it.:blueplane:
ApacheBob
 
CJones said:
FAA already tried to get Airlines vs. Biz Aviation. Why not pit the controllers against GA? Get everyone fighting amongst themselves so they can't all join together to fight the big dog on the block.
Click to expand...
I don't see anything in that article that says that ATC is targeting GA as opposed to the airlines or anyone else. So in the absence of any other evidence I don't believe in that conspiracy theory.
 
Everskyward said:
I don't see anything in that article that says that ATC is targeting GA as opposed to the airlines or anyone else. So in the absence of any other evidence I don't believe in that conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...

Good point. In my original post, I actually had "Pilots" in and changed it to "GA" before posting. ;)

In any case, I could still see it as a ploy to keep large divisions between the major players in the FAA funding issue. I only hope that we, as pilots, don't take the increased number of "I have a number for you to call. Advise when ready to copy." as a group of pi**ed off controllers, but rather a group of underpaid professionals that are forced to perform the dirty deeds of their tyrannical bosses.
 
So we can now violate them when they make a mistake too. Right?

:rolleyes:
 
Without getting into politics, perhaps we can all hope for a positive change in direction after the end of the current administration in January.
 
Can someone please remove the two posts from directly above.
 
docmirror said:
Can someone please remove the two posts from directly above.
Click to expand...
Care to cite a reason or are you jsut in a pro-censorship mood today?

It is entirely within scope of this group to hope that under a new regime that the FAA will be staffed by people that are less prone to user fees and the restriction of GA through onerous security measures. It is obvious that the current FAA leadership is not going to sway from the direction that htey are being pushed by the administration that they answer to.
 
If the controllers start writing up pilots like that, you can be sure I'll start writing up the controllers for things like clearing me direct to the FAF, giving me vectors to final that intercept inside the final approach gate, etc., in violation of FAA Order 7110.65. I just sent the following email to NATCA's Director of Communications (dchurch@natcadc.org), and I urge all of you to do the same:

Dear Mr. Church:

I just read the AvWeb report titled “Controllers as Airspace Police” (http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/ControllersAsAirspacePolice_198538-1.html). Please remind your members that air traffic is a cooperative enterprise, and it takes both pilots and controllers to make it work safely and efficiently. Let your members know that many pilots are well-versed on FAA Order 7110.65. If controllers start writing up pilots for every slight error detected by controllers, you can expect pilots to do the same for every slight error by controllers detected by pilots. If your members want that adversarial relationship, so be it. If not, let’s cooperate to keep the system running.

Thank you,
Ronald B. Levy, ATP, CFI
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
If the controllers start writing up pilots like that, you can be sure I'll start writing up the controllers for things like clearing me direct to the FAF, giving me vectors to final that intercept inside the final approach gate, etc., in violation of FAA Order 7110.65.
Click to expand...
That is what I was mentioning earlier.

Yesterday you and I were discussing an approach where I was given a bad instruction. You pointed out, correctly, that the ATC supervisor should be notified. I had elected at that time to not do so. Mostly because the controller and I resolved the issue, it was my gut feeling he figured out it was his screw up, and it would not have done much to build any good will between Chi-App controllers and GA. We already have a pretty strained relationship.
 
smigaldi said:
That is what I was mentioning earlier.

Yesterday you and I were discussing an approach where I was given a bad instruction. You pointed out, correctly, that the ATC supervisor should be notified. I had elected at that time to not do so. Mostly because the controller and I resolved the issue, it was my gut feeling he figured out it was his screw up, and it would not have done much to build any good will between Chi-App controllers and GA. We already have a pretty strained relationship.
Click to expand...

I would tend to agree. ATC has screwed up with me about as much as I have with them. Thankfully, neither is all that frequent, but it certainly happens. However, I've generally felt a good relationship with them because we work to resolve the issue. The emphasis, though, is that we work together. Best to keep it that way for everyone's safety.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I would tend to agree. ATC has screwed up with me about as much as I have with them. Thankfully, neither is all that frequent, but it certainly happens. However, I've generally felt a good relationship with them because we work to resolve the issue. The emphasis, though, is that we work together. Best to keep it that way for everyone's safety.
Click to expand...
yep +1
 
smigaldi said:
That is what I was mentioning earlier.

Yesterday you and I were discussing an approach where I was given a bad instruction. You pointed out, correctly, that the ATC supervisor should be notified. I had elected at that time to not do so. Mostly because the controller and I resolved the issue, it was my gut feeling he figured out it was his screw up, and it would not have done much to build any good will between Chi-App controllers and GA. We already have a pretty strained relationship.
Click to expand...
It won't be the ATC watch supe I'll notify so it can be handled internally, it will be the Regional ATC office in Flight Standards with a copy to the Regional Counsel, so there's no way to keep it "in house."
 
Ron Levy said:
It won't be the ATC watch supe I'll notify so it can be handled internally, it will be the Regional ATC office in Flight Standards with a copy to the Regional Counsel, so there's no way to keep it "in house."
Click to expand...

I don't want to raise hostilities between ATC and us pilots, but this sounds like a process that we should all know how to do, and I certainly do not. This sounds like info for another "Cap'n Ron's..." sticky.
 
barney said:
Why stop there? Call your Congressman/woman and start a Congressional Inquiry. You kill me. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
If the FAA tries to write up every little pilot violation, but doesn't also do the same to controllers, you bet I'll do that. And I hope the rest of you will do the same. However, one hopes the threat of that will act as a deterrent to the controllers allowing themselves to be used as tools for the FAA Administration to accomplish some hidden agenda.
 
Ron Levy said:
If the FAA tries to write up every little pilot violation, but doesn't also do the same to controllers, you bet I'll do that. And I hope the rest of you will do the same. However, one hopes the threat of that will act as a deterrent to the controllers allowing themselves to be used as tools for the FAA Administration to accomplish some hidden agenda.
Click to expand...

Practically speaking...

If the FAA expects the controllers to be the enforcers because the FAA is minimally staffed for that sort of thing -- Who will monitor the "enforcers?"
 
barney said:
Air Traffic Controller's are not the enforcers in a pilot deviation, they are the reporters.
Click to expand...
As an analogy, then, the police are not the enforcers; they're just the ones who report crimes to the courts.


Nope. Doesn't work for me!
 
Dave Siciliano said:
Very unfortunate. I've helped controllers as many time as they've helped me when something didn't go right. This isn't supposed to be an adversarial system; this is supposed to be a system where everyone helps one another to make us all safer.

Just hate to see this attitude.

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...

I lifted out of CRP the other day and the controller thought he was having problems with one of his radios. At his request, I got on the second radio and tried to work comm with him. He was right - his radio was down. Imaging how willing I'd have been to help him if I knew he was going to write me up anytime I didn't cross a T or dot an i. NOT!
 
barney said:
You are mistaken how the system works then Grant. ATC submits a FAA form 8020-17 to the controlling FSDO through the ATQS system. Don't believe me? Look in the Order 7110 for controllers and find the procedure to "enforce" a Pilot Deviation (PD), it ain't there because they don't have the authority. The FSDO completes an investigation, files a FAA form 8020-18 and closes the PD in any number of ways from no action to certificate action with many levels of remedy and review in between.
Click to expand...
The question is whether ATC is going to write up those 8020-17's on ever single little deviation by a pilot. Right now, they don't file PD's unless the pilot causes problems -- no harm/no foul, and all that. It appears the FAA wants that changed. If so, and the controllers cooperate, the controllers better be perfect or the pilots will do the same for them, and if the FAA doesn't take equivalent action against the controllers who deviate from the book in any way, that will look very bad in the press and before Congress. In addition, the FSDO's are already grossly overworked -- they do not need a snowstorm of PD's adding to their workload.

As an equivalent situation, imagine what would happen if the local cops were told to ticket every motorist they saw who made the slightest violation of the rules -- not coming to a complete stop at stop signs, failing to signal for lane changes, 1 mph over the limit, muddied license plate, etc. It wouldn't do anyone any good, and neither will making controllers write up every pilot who makes the slightest mistake.
 
barney said:
So you think there should be "zero" tolerance and malicious enforcement of the gray parts of the 14 CFR regulations and various orders whether they govern ATC (7110) or Flight Standards (8900)?
Click to expand...
Nope -- and I don't think ATC wants that, either. And that's the point. But if they knuckle under to the FAA Administration's desire for a witch hunt, they'd better be perfect themselves or face the consequences with a blizzard of formal pilot complaints (with appropriate publicity) and disappearance of pilot cooperation when that cooperation is optional. Heck, all I have to do is file IFR into SBY and not cancel before landing regardless of the weather to slow down air carrier operations here.
 
Ron Levy said:
The question is whether ATC is going to write up those 8020-17's on ever single little deviation by a pilot. Right now, they don't file PD's unless the pilot causes problems -- no harm/no foul, and all that. It appears the FAA wants that changed. If so, and the controllers cooperate, the controllers better be perfect or the pilots will do the same for them, and if the FAA doesn't take equivalent action against the controllers who deviate from the book in any way, that will look very bad in the press and before Congress. In addition, the FSDO's are already grossly overworked -- they do not need a snowstorm of PD's adding to their workload.

As an equivalent situation, imagine what would happen if the local cops were told to ticket every motorist they saw who made the slightest violation of the rules -- not coming to a complete stop at stop signs, failing to signal for lane changes, 1 mph over the limit, muddied license plate, etc. It wouldn't do anyone any good, and neither will making controllers write up every pilot who makes the slightest mistake.
Click to expand...

:yes:
 
I see this as a follow-on to a certain congresscritter DEMANDING FAA action related to the WN and AA inspections. This is the same kind of reaction that caused the massive groundings of AA flights this spring.

Without regard to causing the system to collapse, I do hope cooler heads will prevail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top