PIlot Deviation

E

evapilotaz

En-Route
Joined
Feb 13, 2012
Messages
2,623
Location
Gilbert AZ. VFR All Year Baby
Display Name
Display name:
Drone airspace abuser
So I was listening in on Deer Valley Airport this morning.

Twice within hour pilots where given a number to call for Pilot Deviation.

One was Pilot was suppose to enter left traffic for touch and goes and instead keep flying straight out after take off. Tower called to tell pilot to make a left turn and gave him a number to call.

Second was Pilot turn on wrong taxi way. Pilot was given a number to call as well.

Granted Deer Valley has heavy student traffic. But I thought given a number to call for these two incidents was excessive. Tell me if I wrong here.

Also a Pilot was chewed out for entering airspace at 170kts. Tower said everyone was about 80kts and advise pilot its not a good Idea to be going so fast.

Anyway I don't fly out of deer valley but the controllers there seems to be tough.
 
You heard one side of the stories. I'd have to hear or know the ATC side too.
 
My home airport is Deer Valley...honestly never had any issues. Everyone has always been pretty friendly. There is one controller who is not particularly warm and fuzzy, but I've never made it onto his bad side yet lol
 
evapilotaz said:
Also a Pilot was chewed out for entering airspace at 170kts. Tower said everyone was about 80kts and advise pilot its not a good Idea to be going so fast.
Click to expand...
I thought the speed limit below Bravo was 200kias? Is 1.4 minutes (4nm at 170kts) not enough time to slow down?
 
Well, wait a sec. I'm assuming that tower had radar and saw a 170kt ground speed? The 91.117 speed limit is -indicated- airspeed, is it not?

I've had a ground speed over 200kts before in a mooney that does 160TAS and 140IAS. I'll point it downhill and come into a class C at 170 or so, but I slow down pretty fast. All I ever got at HSV when they said anything was "keep your speed up". lol.

It's the controller's job to manage traffic at different speeds. No way i'm slowing down to 80. That's a short final speed for me. I know it's possible to mix different speed traffic because the HSV guys do it all the time.
 
Mistake Not... said:
Well, wait a sec. I'm assuming that tower had radar and saw a 170kt ground speed? The 91.117 speed limit is -indicated- airspeed, is it not?

I've had a ground speed over 200kts before in a mooney that does 160TAS and 140IAS. I'll point it downhill and come into a class C at 170 or so, but I slow down pretty fast. All I ever got at HSV when they said anything was "keep your speed up". lol.

It's the controller's job to manage traffic at different speeds. No way i'm slowing down to 80. That's a short final speed for me. I know it's possible to mix different speed traffic because the HSV guys do it all the time.
Click to expand...
If ATC says slow to xxx, I don't see where you have a choice... unless the aircraft is unable such speed.
 
Oh, agreed. But I'm not going to slow down as if it's "not a good idea to be going so fast". Tower's role is not to chastise for legal behavior. Tower could have simply said "slow to 80, enter left downwind....".

But that's not what they did.

I'm not slowing until required to by Tower or procedure. That the controller thinks it's a bad idea to mix speeds tells me the controller isn't trained properly. He expecting bizjets to slow to 80 too? Can you?
 
mscard88 said:
You heard one side of the stories. I'd have to hear or know the ATC side too.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Having flown out of a busy Class D with lots of training operations, all three sound like they might have been quite reasonable depending on the rest of the story.
 
To be fair, a crap load of the training at DVT is by foreign student pilots and often foreign instructors and sometimes have somewhat of a language barrier.

That being my home drome, and having been a controller with lots of foreign traffic (albeit in a military environment), it can get frustrating when they're not understanding and then just start doing their own thing, screwing up your plan.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
mscard88 said:
You heard one side of the stories. I'd have to hear or know the ATC side too.
Click to expand...
:confused2: Since he was describing what he heard on the radio, I don't see how that qualifies as one side of the stories.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Agreed. Having flown out of a busy Class D with lots of training operations, all three sound like they might have been quite reasonable depending on the rest of the story.
Click to expand...
I'd like to hear the rest of the story from BOTH sides.
 
Palmpilot said:
:confused2: Since he was describing what he heard on the radio, I don't see how that qualifies as one side of the stories.
Click to expand...

We are hearing his interpretation of a couple things he heard on the radio. He wasn't there physically, doesn't know what the controller had for traffic and didn't witness what had occurred. Those he heard being chastised may have caused a confliction with other aircraft, we don't know.
 
Last edited:
evapilotaz said:
So I was listening in on Deer Valley Airport this morning.

Twice within hour pilots where given a number to call for Pilot Deviation.

One was Pilot was suppose to enter left traffic for touch and goes and instead keep flying straight out after take off. Tower called to tell pilot to make a left turn and gave him a number to call.

Second was Pilot turn on wrong taxi way. Pilot was given a number to call as well.

Granted Deer Valley has heavy student traffic. But I thought given a number to call for these two incidents was excessive. Tell me if I wrong here.

Also a Pilot was chewed out for entering airspace at 170kts. Tower said everyone was about 80kts and advise pilot its not a good Idea to be going so fast.

Anyway I don't fly out of deer valley but the controllers there seems to be tough.
Click to expand...
Was an actual "brasher warning" issued? "Nxxxxx possible pilot deviation advise you contact us xxx-xxxx" or did they just give the phone number and say call us on the ground? If it's the later, that is routinely used to not take up freq time to explain what they were looking for etc. If it's the first and it went exactly as you said, that would be cause for concern but as mentioned, there is another side of the story we aren't getting.

Reference the "chewed out" for 170kts, that's ridiculous. The controllers need to do their job better as I routinely enter 140-170 kts. If it was impossible to sequence different speed aircraft the system wouldn't work very well.
 
evapilotaz said:
FYI this is Delta Airspace.
Click to expand...
91.117:

(b) Unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC, no person may operate an aircraft at or below 2,500 feet above the surface within 4 nautical miles of the primary airport of a Class C or Class D airspace area at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph.). This paragraph (b) does not apply to any operations within a Class B airspace area. Such operations shall comply with paragraph (a) of this section.

(c) No person may operate an aircraft in the airspace underlying a Class B airspace area designated for an airport or in a VFR corridor designated through such a Class B airspace area, at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph).​

Both apply to DVT.

But admittedly with wind, and the conversion from true airspeed to indicated, it's unlikely that the IAS was illegal.
 
flyingron said:
91.117:

(b) Unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC, no person may operate an aircraft at or below 2,500 feet above the surface within 4 nautical miles of the primary airport of a Class C or Class D airspace area at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph.). This paragraph (b) does not apply to any operations within a Class B airspace area. Such operations shall comply with paragraph (a) of this section.

(c) No person may operate an aircraft in the airspace underlying a Class B airspace area designated for an airport or in a VFR corridor designated through such a Class B airspace area, at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph).​

Both apply to DVT.

But admittedly with wind, and the conversion from true airspeed to indicated, it's unlikely that the IAS was illegal.
Click to expand...
And ATC isn't allowed to issue you a speed of less than 150kts if you are in a recip on arrival or departure.
 
mscard88 said:
We are hearing his interpretation of a couple things he heard on the radio. He wasn't there physically, doesn't know what the controller had for traffic and didn't witness what had occurred. Those he heard being chastised may have caused a confliction with other aircraft, we don't know.
Click to expand...

Right, and people have differing opinions of what exactly constitutes "being chewed out". You don't have to break an FAR to annoy a controller. :)
 
kayoh190 said:
Right, and people have differing opinions of what exactly constitutes "being chewed out". You don't have to break an FAR to annoy a controller. :)
Click to expand...

Wasn't implying that. Just that there was another side to what the OP heard monitoring a radio.
 
mscard88 said:
Wasn't implying that. Just that there was another side to what the OP heard monitoring a radio.
Click to expand...

Sorry, wasn't specifically talking about you. Just agreeing with your post and adding a general comment regarding the folks discussing the FARs.
 
"Chewing people out" over the air is unprofessional and contrary to safety. The last time I had a controller "chew me out" was in 1994 and I made an inquiry to the facility that not only vindicated my actions but garnered an apology for the controller's behavior.

I don't harass controllers over the air and expect similar respect in return. If you do get on the receiving end of this abuse, forget the "say initials" and other subterfuge. Just call the facility during the next business day and have a chat with the supe/QA person.
 
kayoh190 said:
Sorry, wasn't specifically talking about you. Just agreeing with your post and adding a general comment regarding the folks discussing the FARs.
Click to expand...

No I understand what you're saying. But it does happen unfortunately, but they are humans too and do get out of line occasionally. Not an excuse by any means and unprofessional. Like Ron said, if you feel you've been wronged call or visit the Chief of the facility. Do it within a day or two though so it's fresh in everyone's minds.
 
Is it a good idea to enter downwind at an uncontrolled airport with a pattern full of airplanes at an airspeed of "as fast as I dam well feel like it, ain't no law agin it?" Yeah, at a controlled airport the Tower can sort things out and 'git er done.' Usually takes an extra transmission or two. Moving an airplane or two already established in the sequence. Adds unnecesarily to frequency congestion. Diverts attention, may be the difference between getting a departure squezzed out that now has to wait. More than once when I was working a "Hot Rod' would call, wing up turning downwind off the 45 into a pattern full of traffic, slats, flaps and wheels up proudley reporting Downwind. Is it legal? Yes. I didn't lecture. I simply said "depart the pattern and report downwind again at a speed compatible with the traffic pattern." Yeah, Yeah, I know that still may be a bit faster than some of the other planes.
 
Last edited:
Just because you are given a number to call ,doesn't mean any action is going to be taken ,against you. The controllers may want to give you some helpfull advise.
 
luvflyin said:
Is it a good idea to enter downwind at an uncontrolled airport with a pattern full of airplanes at an airspeed of "as fast as I dam well feel like it, ain't no law agin it?" Yeah, at a controlled airport the Tower can sort things out and 'git er done.' Usually takes an extra transmission or two. Moving an airplane or two already established in the sequence. Adds unnecesarily to frequency congestion. Diverts attention, may be the difference between getting a departure squezzed out that now has to wait. More than once when I was working a "Hot Rod' would call, wing up turning downwind off the 45 into a pattern full of traffic, slats, flaps and wheels up proudley reporting Downwind. Is it legal? Yes. I didn't lecture. I simply said "depart the pattern and report downwind again at a speed compatible with the traffic pattern." Yeah, Yeah, I know that still may be a bit faster than some of the other planes.
Click to expand...

"A speed compatible with the traffic pattern"

Again, what if a jet shows up? You have to work him in somehow. Assign a hold until the "traffic pattern" clears? lol.

I thought one of the reasons for giving the aircraft make / model in addition to the tail number ("mooney N9999") was to give ATC a clue as to the performance capabilities and requirements of our aircraft. If you're sending airplanes out of the pattern because they're "too fast", you need to pick up your game a bit.
 
frfly172 said:
Just because you are given a number to call ,doesn't mean any action is going to be taken ,against you. The controllers may want to give you some helpfull advise.
Click to expand...
Quite true. A request to call the tower doesn't always mean the beginning of an FAA investigation, even if accompanied by a Brasher warning.
 
Mistake Not... said:
"A speed compatible with the traffic pattern"

Again, what if a jet shows up? You have to work him in somehow. Assign a hold until the "traffic pattern" clears? lol.

I thought one of the reasons for giving the aircraft make / model in addition to the tail number ("mooney N9999") was to give ATC a clue as to the performance capabilities and requirements of our aircraft. If you're sending airplanes out of the pattern because they're "too fast", you need to pick up your game a bit.
Click to expand...
Don't forget turbine aircraft generally fly a 1500' pattern, not 1000'.
 
Reminds me of the time I was doing like 200 knots over the ground in an SR22 entering the pattern in FRG. They didn’t like that.
 
mscard88 said:
We are hearing his interpretation of a couple things he heard on the radio. He wasn't there physically, doesn't know what the controller had for traffic and didn't witness what had occurred. Those he heard being chastised may have caused a confliction with other aircraft, we don't know.
Click to expand...
I'm just pointing out that the sides of the story from ATC and the pilots involved are BOTH missing from the account.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Of course. I never suggested anything different. But you comment to @mscard88,

seems to indicate only one side is necessary.
Click to expand...
That's the opposite of what I was trying to convey. The point I was trying to make is that if we heard ATC's side of what happened, we still wouldn't have the whole story. We would also need to hear from the pilots who got reprimanded on frequency.
 
Palmpilot said:
I'm just pointing out that the sides of the story from ATC and the pilots involved are BOTH missing from the account.
Click to expand...

I did write 'stories', so yeah, of course we would need both.
 
Mistake Not... said:
"A speed compatible with the traffic pattern"

Again, what if a jet shows up? You have to work him in somehow. Assign a hold until the "traffic pattern" clears? lol.

I thought one of the reasons for giving the aircraft make / model in addition to the tail number ("mooney N9999") was to give ATC a clue as to the performance capabilities and requirements of our aircraft. If you're sending airplanes out of the pattern because they're "too fast", you need to pick up your game a bit.
Click to expand...
Of course you gotta work jets and fast airplanes. Ya fit em in and get it done. However, entering the traffic pattern at an excessive and unnecessary speed, resulting in unnecessary delay for other airplanes and a degradation of orderliness to accomodate a 'flat hatter' is another story. Sure, there are fast airplanes. And they all have a pretty big range of speeds they are capable of flying at comfortably. And there is a range of abilities and attitudes amongst the pilots who fly them. Some stay farther ahead of the airplane than others. Some seem to think they are the only airplane in the sky. You can try to convince me that showing up downwind into a busy traffic pattern at cruise speed or 200 knots which ever is slower is just fine, but it aint gonna happen. As far as your last comment goes I have worked at some very busy places and I was one of the guys called upon to work when it got busy. Thats because my 'game' was on and I 'ran' the pattern instead of letting the pattern 'run me.' Damn, swore I'd never get into any thing like this here, but ya got me...
 
Palmpilot said:
That's the opposite of what I was trying to convey. The point I was trying to make is that if we heard ATC's side of what happened, we still wouldn't have the whole story. We would also need to hear from the pilots who got reprimanded on frequency.
Click to expand...
Sorry. I didn't get that. You are, of course, correct. The more information, the better the understanding of what occurred. We'd probably get a good enough picture though, with just the OP and the controller since the reasonability of a person's actions are primarily measured by what he or she perceived happening.
 
Radar Contact said:
And ATC isn't allowed to issue you a speed of less than 150kts if you are in a recip on arrival or departure.
Click to expand...
I've never heard of that. I've had many a speed restriction on arrival. Slowest I can recall was probably 90 kts in a Bonanza. Doable but not very comfortable.
 
Mistake Not... said:
Well, wait a sec. I'm assuming that tower had radar and saw a 170kt ground speed? The 91.117 speed limit is -indicated- airspeed, is it not?
Click to expand...
Did something change? Last I flew into DVT, tower didn't even have actual radar. All they had was a feed from PHX which didn't cover the actual traffic pattern.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Did something change? Last I flew into DVT, tower didn't even have actual radar. All they had was a feed from PHX which didn't cover the actual traffic pattern.
Click to expand...

Brite radar we had was just a repeater, and I'm pretty sure we didn't have GS readout on it. Maybe the newer versions do though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top