Pilots/controllers common cause

[Matthew]

I visited my local FAA tower this weekend and spent about an hour talking to the controllers on duty.

I'm a student and asked them questions regarding common mistakes pilots make, what to look out for, and how to avoid giving away the fact that I'm a beginner.

Their main suggestions -

Be ready before you make a request (example - don't be turned around in the run-up area and ask for take-off clearance, they can see you and know you're not ready until you are at the hold-short lines. These actions seems to strike a nerve).

And know what you want to say before you key the mike ('umms', 'ahhhs', and mike-fright don't go over very well at all).

Granted, these two are basically common sense and good practice for any communications. Any other particular courtesies pilots should extend to controllers?

What about pilot pet-peeves regarding controllers? I hope I haven't opened up too big a can of worms.

Matt

 

[Brian Austin]

What about pilot pet-peeves regarding controllers? I hope I haven't opened up too big a can of worms.

Matt

If you're having a bad day or didn't get any last night, it's highly unlikely the three planes in the pattern and four inbound had anything to do with it. Keep your emotions and stress on your side of the microphone, please.

 

[MSmith]

Peeves for controllers:

If you have to repeat yourself to more than one aircraft, you might:
1. Be eating your microphone ("Charlie Brown Teacher Syndrome")
2. Have radio/headset problems

It's not necessarily the plane's radio and/or pilot.

(I've often decided not to get flight following in the Newark NJ area due to mush-mouthed controllers.)

Pet peeves for pilots:

If you just heard the controller turn down VFR services to another plane, don't ask for yourself. You won't get them, and you just upped his workload further.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Poor planning on your part should not inspire you to ask me to break off an approach at 100 feet agl and then maneuver at very low altitude/airspeed/power to land on an intersecting runway. Oh and by the way, hold short of the original runway after landing.

 

[cherokeeflyboy]

Matt, I suggest that you read Don Brown's "say again" column at Avweb.com
.A controller in Atlanta Center. really tells it like it is.

 

[RobertGerace]

If I could write a general statement to controllers I would write:

Please be tolerant of me when I make mistakes, because God knows I make them. And I'll be tolerant of yours because God knows you do too...

 

[Matthew]

As far as being tolerant of mistakes -

The controllers I talked to seemed like 'normal' people. They realize mistakes will be made. They have to deal with 80 aircraft/hour at their peak times and seem to be willing to put up with most things, but being lazy and unprepared isn't on the list.

 

[grattonja]

If I could write a general statement to controllers I would write:

Please be tolerant of me when I make mistakes, because God knows I make them. And I'll be tolerant of yours because God knows you do too...

Well said, Bob. I have pulled some bonehead radio calls/mistakes in my time, and have been handed some ATC bonehead moves as well. But when we are both in top form, it really works well.

Definitely, there has to be a bit of "live and let live".

Jim G

 

[poadeleted20]

If you just heard the controller turn down VFR services to another plane, don't ask for yourself. You won't get them, and you just upped his workload further.

Generally, but not completely true. There are times a controller denies VFR service because the way the pilot's initial call suggests that the pilot will be an excessive burden ("Ahhhhh...This is...ahhh...Kennedy Approach, I'm over, oh yeah, this is Cessna 12345, and, uhh, I'd like radar flight following, and, uh, is there any way I can get that from you? Oh, yeah, I'm squawking 1200 at this time, and do you have me on your scope?"). If you hear such a bad call elicit that response, and make a crisp, professional request for the same thing the last guy didn't get, you may just get what you want. OTOH, if the preceeding call was a good one, and it's obvious the controller just can't handle any more, keep your finger off the XMIT button and proceed to Plan B.

Overall, my experience is that what controllers hate most is pilots who don't know how to make clean, professional calls, and don't get instructions right the first time. Just about anything else, they'll try to work with you.

 

[poadeleted20]

What about pilot pet-peeves regarding controllers?

Mine is controllers who expect you to know local landmarks not charted on the sectional -- particularly tower controllers. "Follow the Cessna in front and report over the water tower" -- and I see four water towers in the vicinity. Or "Report over the ZyCorp plant" -- sorry, bub, they quit putting corporate names on roofs a long time ago. It's better when the point is properly flagged on the sectional, like the Port Jefferson stacks on the north shore of Long Island.

Probably the next most serious one is being vectored off course and back on to increase spacing when I'd happily just slow down and save fuel, or not being told why I'm being vectored or when to expect a return to course (or what route to expect).

Another peeve, which really isn't their fault, is the pronounciation of intersection and town names, which is getting worse as the FAA has to make up new allegedly-pronouncable 5-letter intersection names which appear to be diminutions of the names of towns in eastern Poland. Oftimes what they say doesn't seem to match anything on the chart, and what I say doesn't match anything in their experience. One that got me was in 1977 flying into Lexington KY for the first time and reporting over the town of Versailles. "Vair-sigh?" asked Lex Tower, "What's that?" "Big town about 10 west of the airport," says I. "OHHH...You mean VER-SALES. Enter left downwind for ..." OK, whatever, I thought but didn't say.

The good news is that approach and center controllers are MUCH better than 90% of pilots about using standard phraseology, which sure helps. Most times I hear controllers sound like they are not happy with a pilot is when the pilot is speaking a language (vocabulary or syntax) not contained in the AIM and P/CG.

 

[Brian Austin]

One that got me was in 1977 flying into Lexington KY for the first time and reporting over the town of Versailles. "Vair-sigh?" asked Lex Tower, "What's that?" "Big town about 10 west of the airport," says I. "OHHH...You mean VER-SALES. Enter left downwind for ..." OK, whatever, I thought but didn't say.

IIRC, that town actually pronounces it versales. Not sure why but...

 

[Jeff Oslick]

I agree with Bob's post - "can't we all just get along!?". Ron is right though, it's usually the pilots' being less than "professional". Here in the LA Basin it can get really bad, because there are A LOT of English-as-an-almost-second-language folks doing flight training. The controllers at Long Beach (LGB) have an incredible amount of patience for it, and at times I'm pretty sure their psychic, because I have absolutely no idea what the other pilot said. This is a safety problem, because if only the controller knows where that guy is, and the other pilots nearby can't understand him/her, the communication only accomplished 1/2 of its purpose.

My main pet peeve with controllers is with the rare one who seems to forget who is flying the plane. Every once in awhile, usually while doing pattern work, I've experienced (just a few) controllers who feel the need to micromanage the traffic pattern. The worst was when I was told to go-around from 50' AGL, when the only "conflicting" traffic was a helicopter that was 1) clear of the runway and 2) 2,500 feet from where I would touch down. That was the closest I've come to intentionally disobeying a controller (I did go around, and I asked the CFI to file a complaint with the tower supervisor). I know it isn't me, because the local CFIs know of these controllers' behaviors too. Fortunately, these controllers are noticeable because they are a rare exception to the great service I normally receive.

Jeff

 

[gismo]

Any other particular courtesies pilots should extend to controllers?

Don't argue with ATC over the air. I especially hate the "I know I'm right and you're wrong" diatribes.

What about pilot pet-peeves regarding controllers? I hope I haven't opened up too big a can of worms.

Don't argue with pilots over the air. I especially hate the "I know I'm right and you're wrong" diatribes.

Don't talk non-stop for five or more freakin straight minutes(Oshkosh cortrollers excepted). Remember, these are two way radios.



Matt

 

[RobertGerace]

Yep. The vast majority of controllers are some of the nicest, most helpful people I've ever dealt with. The bad ones are few-and-far-between.

I hate making mistakes in the system...I mean I really do. Controllers probably hate it when they turn you to late (or early) or give you a bum vector -- it is a matter of personal pride...just like holding altitude / heading / course is to us.

Overall I think we are one big, happy community, and I'm honored to be a part of it. I love flying in the system and being as precise as possible -- therefore, if I make a mistake, I'm already mad at myself...I don't need some jerk making it worse...or undermining my pax confidence.

 

[poadeleted20]

The worst was when I was told to go-around from 50' AGL, when the only "conflicting" traffic was a helicopter that was 1) clear of the runway and 2) 2,500 feet from where I would touch down.

Keep in mind that the controller has a very strict set of rules which he must follow, and if the 3000-foot separation criterion will be violated, he has no choice but to issue a go-around. And any pilot qualified for solo ought to be able to handle a go-around from any altitude down to one foot above the runway. But...

That was the closest I've come to intentionally disobeying a controller (I did go around, and I asked the CFI to file a complaint with the tower supervisor).

...the reason 91.123(b)'s emergency exception and 91.3(b) exist is just to handle situations where the controller's book-driven instruction will push you over your personal safety standards. BTDT -- 300 AGL on short final, plane ahead doesn't clear, and tower says "Make a 360." I directed my student to go-around instead, and had a discussion with the tower chief after landing, as well as making sure the student knew she should never accept a 360 at 300 AGL down and dirty.

 

[rpadula]

How about a pilot-to-pilot peeve? I can't tell you how many times I've heard "Tower, bugsmasher xxx is 10 miles west..." followed by a few mintues of "tower can't see you, where are you?" followed by the eventual admission "uh, bugsmasher is actually EAST of the field."

I noticed this game was played A LOT at Lawrenceville. It got considerably easier for the tower guys once they got their radar display

Really...How hard is it for people to keep this straight?


-Rich

 

[Jeff Oslick]

Keep in mind that the controller has a very strict set of rules which he must follow, and if the 3000-foot separation criterion will be violated, he has no choice but to issue a go-around.

Ron-

I'm rusty on this one - what are the criteria/circumstances for the 3,000' separation (we're talking everyone is VFR)? I'm pretty sure I've been in crowded, tower "controlled" patterns that things were getting packed-in about that close, if not closer.


Jeff

 

[mdreger]

I'm rusty on this one - what are the criteria/circumstances for the 3,000' separation (we're talking everyone is VFR)?

Basically it is during daylight,:
single following single or twin we need 3000 ft.
Twin following single or twin, we need 4500 ft.
Jet following anything 6000 ft.

The real rules for departures:
http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/ATC/Chp3/atc0309.html#3-9-6

The real rules for arrivals:
http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/ATC/Chp3/atc0310.html#3-10-3

OSH has a special waiver that allows them to use 1500 ft for singles, and 3000 ft for twins in certain circumstances.

Any other particular courtesies pilots should extend to controllers?

If you don't understand, ask. As many times as it takes to understand. Better to have a upset controller than end up in a ball of aluminum.

If we ask/tell you to do something you (or your aircraft) can't. Tell us. We don't where within the range between a Student on his first solo to Sean Tucker your abilities lie.

As for being sent around when you are too low/slow/whatever. Remember, you are the final authority. If you cannot go around, land. We have to send you around based on our criteria. If you feel it is safer to land, than to go around, I would say to land. Conversely, if you don't think it is safe to land, even if already cleared, go around.

I once had to send a Skymaster C337 around because the supervisor in the tower felt they were too high on final. They broke out about a quarter mile out at 1700 msl, 1100 agl and had a 6500 ft runway. I argued a bit, but ultimately had to send them around. So they had to go back up into the clouds, be vectored back to another 10 mile final or so and re-fly the approach. I have seen plenty of pilots that could have made that landing, but the supervisor didn't give me the option.

 

[bbchien]

Overall, my experience is that what controllers hate most is pilots who don't know how to make clean, professional calls, and don't get instructions right the first time. Just about anything else, they'll try to work with you.

Ron is 100% correct. Esp in Washington App. Airspace. Many they hate stragglers. But in ORD space they just ignore VFRs. Not even a "VFR calling Approach, unable". Departing FDK on the 23rd, the approach controller told me (still on ground) in half a sentence how to work his system- I was succint, short, and he was professional and quick.

 

[poadeleted20]

Basically it is during daylight,:
single following single or twin we need 3000 ft.
Twin following single or twin, we need 4500 ft.
Jet following anything 6000 ft.

Note that this is separation on the runway only -- unless both planes are on the runway, the tower is not responsible for separation (or lack thereof), and if you get within 6 feet of each other on downwind, that's the pilots' responsibility for violating 91.111, not tower's, since the controller hasn't violated the ATC rules -- yet. Keep that spacing around the pattern, and after clearing one to land, tower MUST send the other around for lack of spacing.

Bottom line: What tower must do is insure that planes don't end up less than the above-stated spacing ON THE RUNWAY. Everything else is up to the pilots.

 

[M.E.]

Most times I hear controllers sound like they are not happy with a pilot is when the pilot is speaking a language (vocabulary or syntax) not contained in the AIM and P/CG.

I was flying with a CFII. We filed and he caught me using phraseology that I thought was pretty standard....

Chicago Departure, Arrow 4321D with you at three thousand.

He told me I should be saying, Arrow 4321D Level 3000. He hated the "with you" statement.

Or instead of "out of 2 thousand for 6 thousand", I should be saying 2000, climbing 6000.

Small stuff, but he is right. I realized I picked up most of my bad habits listening to the airline company pilots. Including the pilot that says... "We'll do all that". Of course there is also Richard Collins, who refers to his plane as Forty RC. Whatever happened to Fower Zero Romeo Charlie?

Bad (or should I say incorrect) habits are easy to come by in the spirit of trying to be clear and fast. I never thought it would be a pet peeve of a controller until now.

 

[pete177]

As far as I'm concerned controllers have no business getting miffed at any pilot for any reason. If they cant maintain their professionalism and take it all in stride they need to find another line of work. They're safely on the ground and living off of my tax dollers to boot. We've got some controllers here at Minot that are just terrible. It's like talking to the soup nazi. They call you while your in the flare, can see your in the flare and demand that you respond at that instant. In the meantime there's no traffice in the area at all. We get 3 VFR aircraft in the class D and they're overwhelmed...its almost comical. They make things less safe instead of more safe. Funny thing is, I've flown all over the country as an amateur vfr pilot and this place is about the worse I've seen anywhere, and that includes chicago and NY. Maybe privatizations not such a bad thing.

 

[Everskyward]

Another peeve, which really isn't their fault, is the pronounciation of intersection and town names, which is getting worse as the FAA has to make up new allegedly-pronouncable 5-letter intersection names which appear to be diminutions of the names of towns in eastern Poland.

Gotta agree with that one. I usually have to ask them to spell it.

The other one I have is too many numbers all at once as in, "Turn left heading 240, climb and maintain 200, contact Center on 124.2." All in one breath.

Sometimes I think people get too much into the mentality of pilots vs. controllers. They aren't cops out to bust you. I have had controllers forgive some of my mistakes and I have forgiven them theirs.

Once in another life I almost became a controller.

 

[ErikU]

I should say that I usually get excellent services...

However, my pet peeve is controllers that are rude jerks on the radio. The funny thing is that after you hear a controller "explode" on frequency, thee next thing you hear is the voice of a different controller taking over. I have only experienced it a couple times,.. but it's just lame.

 

[Maverick]

In 21 years of flying I've had mostly very good experiences with controllers. Only one stands out in my memory. There was a tower controller at Appleton, WI that acted like he was in training to compete with that speed talking guy I've seen in a few TV commercials. I made several trips into Appleton during one year and he was always the one on duty and I had to make him repeat everything at least three times.

The communication process cannot happen if the communicators cannot be understood.

Jeannie

 

[grattonja]

Ron is 100% correct. Esp in Washington App. Airspace. Many they hate stragglers. But in ORD space they just ignore VFRs. Not even a "VFR calling Approach, unable". Departing FDK on the 23rd, the approach controller told me (still on ground) in half a sentence how to work his system- I was succint, short, and he was professional and quick.

I agree with you both on this one, but would like to add one comment. Although it is understandable that ATC would rather deal with a crisp, professional radio call than a marginal (or worse) one, those folks are often the ones who need the help the most. How many times have you been in the pattern at a D, and heard some poor guy calling from 12 out, obviously somewhat disoriented? Those radio calls are usually anything but crisp, but this is a guy who really needs his tax dollars to work for him, right now. ATC has risen to the occasion, most of the time. But the tone of annoyance sometimes is definitely palpable.

Jim G

 

[Matthew]

Since I started this whole thread, I feel obligated to defend controllers in most situations. I fly out of a towered field, but the majority of my training has been at untowered fields. Most of my awkward moments so far have been with other pilots - announcing inbound/departure locations from/to the wrong direction, entering the pattern at odd locations/altitudes, using the intersecting runway instead of the active when there are 4 aircraft already in the pattern, personal conversations tying up the frequency, and so on. And, yes, I know I 've already made plenty of mistakes and there are more to come. I have to deal with this a few times each flight, I can't imagine having to put up with it all day and still maintain a professional attitude as well as the controllers I deal with manage to do.

As others have already posted, it comes down to professionalism and courtesy.

Matt

 

[inav8r]

As a student who's almost done with their training, through experience, I've come up with one all important rule when dealing with ATC. That rule is to KNOW exactly how to explain where I am when I call them up. I've found, that knowing where I am and relaying that to ATC properly is my biggest hurdle when dealing with ATC. It doesn't matter if I'm talking to center or approach control or a tower - if I know where I am and I can *RELAY* that clearly and consicely then getting across my request usually isn't so hard.

If I am ready to call up a controller and I don't know exactly how to EXPLAIN to them where I am (via landmarks, distances from navigation aids, etc) then I take extra time (and circle if necessary) and develop a plan.

For my XC planning I try to choose good landmarks and checkpoints that ATC will understand and use those points for my call ins. It sure has made getting services a lot easier.

I've made a TON of mistakes talking to controllers during my training. I've even been denied services because of those mistakes (sounding like an idiot who doesn't know wtf is going on). I try to learn something from each of those incidents so that the next time I won't repeat the mistake.

 

[poadeleted20]

As far as I'm concerned controllers have no business getting miffed at any pilot for any reason.

I think that's a rather egocentric attitude. Controllers really don't "control" -- they issue instructions to pilots who actually control their aircraft. Pilots who do not follow those instructions (whether for lack of skill or a bad attitude or whatever) are a danger not just to themselves, but to everyone else in the sky. Since communication is a 2-way process, pilots who do not communicate effectively (and that requires using standard phraseology, since not everyone in the sky speaks the same brand of English) degrade that process by leaving the controller unsure of what the pilot is doing or planning to do. Pilots who can't stick by the book should stay out of the system, and that includes "salty" airline pilots who think their high-and-mighty status gives them leave to make up their own phraseology.

If they cant maintain their professionalism and take it all in stride they need to find another line of work.

The same might be said of pilots. And the fact that one is not being paid to fly does not mean one should not be professional about one's flying, because "professionalism" is an approach, an attitude, a set of standards, not a pay status.

We've got some controllers here at Minot that are just terrible. It's like talking to the soup nazi. They call you while your in the flare, can see your in the flare and demand that you respond at that instant.

Have you discussed this calmly and rationally with the tower chief? Have you brought this to the attention of your local Aviation Safety Counselor? Remember, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

 

[azure]

In 21 years of flying I've had mostly very good experiences with controllers. Only one stands out in my memory. There was a tower controller at Appleton, WI that acted like he was in training to compete with that speed talking guy I've seen in a few TV commercials. I made several trips into Appleton during one year and he was always the one on duty and I had to make him repeat everything at least three times.

The communication process cannot happen if the communicators cannot be understood.

Jeannie

I wonder if that guy didn't get transferred over to Saginaw Approach... there is one controller there that I dread having to talk to because he just won't slow down to be understood. It doesn't matter whether it's a busy time or not, he talks at the same rate always, so fast he can't even pronounce his words quite right but slurs them a little. I've tried asking him to "say again" but he just ignores me. He's the only one I can think of that I have trouble with though.

Liz

 

[EdFred]

I wonder if that guy didn't get transferred over to Saginaw Approach... there is one controller there that I dread having to talk to because he just won't slow down to be understood. It doesn't matter whether it's a busy time or not, he talks at the same rate always, so fast he can't even pronounce his words quite right but slurs them a little. I've tried asking him to "say again" but he just ignores me. He's the only one I can think of that I have trouble with though.

Liz

I know exactly who you are talking about! I was heading over to 3CM from my field, and wasn't talking to Grand Rapids or Lansing, and was taking pitcures. I was keeping my eyes out for traffic, but I wasn't worried about my heading, or altitude so I was drifting +/- 300 feet. And my heading was probably +/-30 degrees. I was below the cruise altitudes so it wasn't like I *HAD* to hold anything. I was also messing around with trim and power settings and some slow flight. I had Saginaw approach dialed in about 40-50 miles out because I was going to be contacting them eventually. Well, that controller (unaware that I am listening) is telling other one other plane my position and altitude(s) and that "I am the worst pilot ever". I waited for just that moment to snap to a n500' altitude and make my most professional and crisp sounding initial callup with an exact position from the field. From there on in I held my altitude and heading to a +/-10 altitude and +/-2 on the heading.

Not sure if he realized that I was listening or not when he was berating me on the air to another pilot, and I didn't mention anything about it. But that is completely uncalled for. I could see him saying that if I had already called up and failed to maintain altitude or a heading, but come on, you have no idea what the guy in the plane is doing. And in my case it was a quasi-test flight testing the stability and such.

 

[Ed Guthrie]

IIRC, that town actually pronounces it versales. Not sure why but...

Ron best stay out of eastern Washington, too:

Ron: Over may-se.
ATC: I show you over mee-se.

Ron: Over too-schay.
ATC: I show you over too-schee.

 

[Matthew]

It seems like every State has a verSALES.

My personal headache is the airport right next to my home field. About 5-10yrs ago the name changed. Until I started flying recently, I never had to concern myself with the new name. Now, probably because I keep telling myself not to use the old name, I catch myself using the old name and correcting myself (with the ahhs and umms that I'm trying so hard to avoid).

I think most local old-timers know what I'm talking about, but I'm sure none of the transient traffic has a clue.

Matt

 

[EdFred]

Ron best stay out of eastern Washington, too:

Ron: Over may-se.
ATC: I show you over mee-se.

Ron: Over too-schay.
ATC: I show you over too-schee.

And here here in Michigan:
(Charlotte)
shar-LOT
not
SHAR-lit

(Saline)
suh-LEAN
not
SAY-lean

 

[Skip Miller]

Generally, but not completely true.

Agreed. Another scenario I have heard where the #2 caller did get flight following is when he used the magic words "student pilot". NY Approach had turned down about 5 ff requests in a row but accepted the student. By the way, the student had impeccable radio terminology so that helped too.

-Skip

 

[John J]

In all of my flying experience (45 years) I can' t say I have had any real bad experience. I try to keep communication simple and to the point. I speak slowly so that the controller does not have to say say again. If on VFR flights I listen to the local ATC and gather as much information as I can before getting on frequency. If unfamilier airport and unfamiler local land marks I let the controller know. If on IFR flight again short and sweet communications.

I feel it is a partnership between me and the controller, We are helping each other out in a very complex system that is changing very fast.

John J

 

[pete177]

I think that's a rather egocentric attitude. Controllers really don't "control" -- they issue instructions to pilots who actually control their aircraft. Pilots who do not follow those instructions (whether for lack of skill or a bad attitude or whatever) are a danger not just to themselves, but to everyone else in the sky. Since communication is a 2-way process, pilots who do not communicate effectively (and that requires using standard phraseology, since not everyone in the sky speaks the same brand of English) degrade that process by leaving the controller unsure of what the pilot is doing or planning to do. Pilots who can't stick by the book should stay out of the system, and that includes "salty" airline pilots who think their high-and-mighty status gives them leave to make up their own phraseology.


The same might be said of pilots. And the fact that one is not being paid to fly does not mean one should not be professional about one's flying, because "professionalism" is an approach, an attitude, a set of standards, not a pay status.


Have you discussed this calmly and rationally with the tower chief? Have you brought this to the attention of your local Aviation Safety Counselor? Remember, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

Certainly I've discussed it with the chief controller. I have, the fbo owner has, my cfi (at the time) had, actually quite often. Didnt change a thing. Professionalism is very much a function of pay status. If I got paid to fly I'd fly much more and would have all the time in the world to maintain my proficiency and radio etiquette. If I am paying the atc rep, I expect them to be more profficient, more professional than I would expect an amatuer pilot to be solely based on the amount of time one spends doing it. If I'm paying for them to gain experience in their chosen profession, I expect to be the benificiary of that. Like many of us, I've had several different careers/jobs in my life and quite frankly, if I acted towards a customer like some of the controllers I've heard, I would have been fired so fast I wouldnt know what day of the week it was. Stock brokers maintain their proffessionalism with clients in crashing markets while losing fortunes, young men and woman, teenagers, really, maintain their professionalism under fire, fireman maintain when the buildings coming down around them, nurses and docters maintain when there's blood shooting everywhere, so I really cant empathize with the "I'm really stressed about having to deal with someone who speaks to slowly on the radio" crap. If you cant deal with it find another profession. There never seems to be enough librarians. Let me ask you, how many times have you denegraded a student because he asked you the same stupid question that all the students ask just because you were in a bad mood or overstressed and you felt like taking it out on someone? I'm willing to bet never. If I worked for you how many times would you let me get away with it before asking me to move on? I'm figuring once. I'm figuring on the second one I'd be gettin' a box to pack my desk up with. Why is an atc controller permitted? Another poster mentioned that the guy that sounds tumbleweed is the guy that really needs your help. If it's too stressful for you then you need to move on. Thats my philosophy. Like I've said, most of my experience with atc has been really outstanding, this is the only place I've been where it was just absolutely p*ss poor almost every time I flew.

 

[PoAdeleted5]

Agreed. Another scenario I have heard where the #2 caller did get flight following is when he used the magic words "student pilot". NY Approach had turned down about 5 ff requests in a row but accepted the student. By the way, the student had impeccable radio terminology so that helped too.

-Skip

I know a retired airline captain who ALWAYS claims to be a student pilot on the phone with FSS briefers or when talking to ATC.

 

[poadeleted20]

Well, Pete, you certainly seem to have a major beak on about those controllers, and it also appears that you feel strongly that both this is an isolated case and you've attempted to resolve it locally. The next step is to take it to the regional ATC office. I figure you're in the Fargo FSDO, but regardless, you're in Great Lakes Region, and region is the lowest level where there's an ATC office. I suggest contacting the GLR Technical Programs Branch Manager Frank Maly at (847) 294-7289 and asking which of his staff is the right person to handle the problem.

 

[pete177]

While I genuinly appreciate the advise there are several reasons why I wouldnt do that. The first being that I'm not going to be flying here again....yay Second, if I were to remain here I would imagine that not long after that complaint an faa rep would be showing up for a ramp inspection on my airplane; not to mention the fact that the controllers would then attempt to violate me at every opportunity if for no other reason than to discredit the complaint. No..I think I'll just move on and throw a party when BRAC closes the air base and those two North West flights a day start going to Bismark. BTW, of the 4 or 5 that were here, only two were really obnoxious and unsafe.

Well, Pete, you certainly seem to have a major beak on about those controllers, and it also appears that you feel strongly that both this is an isolated case and you've attempted to resolve it locally. The next step is to take it to the regional ATC office. I figure you're in the Fargo FSDO, but regardless, you're in Great Lakes Region, and region is the lowest level where there's an ATC office. I suggest contacting the GLR Technical Programs Branch Manager Frank Maly at (847) 294-7289 and asking which of his staff is the right person to handle the problem.