When to say.. Unable

[skidoo]

What does one say if the controller says to turn to heading xx, you repeat the instruction and turn to heading xx and then realize that was not a good choice. What do you say to go back or get out of it. "unable to continue present heading, turning back to heading xy"?

It seems with my limited experience with ATC, they do not allow much time to think about the instruction before they expect a reply.

 

[steingar]

Fortunately, I have had to only once threaten to assign myself a new transponder code starting with a seven...

 

[steingar]

Another good time to say "Unable" is when ATC asks you to manuever in a way that exceeds your or your airplanes capability. I know of two such fatal accidents.

1st was when tower asked pilot to make a 360 on final at night. Never made it around. Stalled a spun half way through the turn. He was a customer of the FBO I worked the line at.

2nd one a (different) tower asked for "one good s-turn" on final. He stalled and spun as well. I knew him as well and witnessed the crash.

First, I am very, very sorry for your losses, especially one you witnessed. I cannot imagine how very painful that must have been.

However, I am convinced that 360 degree turns and S turns are components of basic airmanship, and every pilot should be able to competently execute them, even at night.

 

[N801BH]

if you have to ask yourself, "Is this going to be OK.", then you already know the answer....."Unable"

+1.....

 

[Henning]

You're understanding why we spent a good chunk of change to put an on-board radar on the 310 earlier this year, and are adding a stormscope before long.

As I said, there is a lot of variation. Part of it will come down to the interpretation of the radar by the controller, and so two different controllers might have two different interpretations. Then you have some facilities with old, outdated radar, and others that have newer, more modern equipment.

You're best off having your own equipment. That way you can interpret it, and will likely have better equipment than what ATC has.

I agree with you completely with onboard emitting radar and consider it vital IFR in convection or low temp saturation moisture. It's another big $$$ add to the panel. Which unit and display do you have? I'd like it to either be G-500 & GTN-750 friendly at this point or on an independent full supplemental/experimental system for the right seat.

 

[Dave Theisen]

First, I am very, very sorry for your losses, especially one you witnessed. I cannot imagine how very painful that must have been.

However, I am convinced that 360 degree turns and S turns are components of basic airmanship, and every pilot should be able to competently execute them, even at night.

I agree that neither manuever should be that challenging in most cases. I have been asked for, and complied with both those instructions many times myself.

In the case of the 360 at night, I believe he was fairly low, 500-600' and the turn took him from an area of city lights to an area much darker. Certainly
very distracting. I don't recall his level of experience, but certainly a much better option would have been to reply "I'll go around, side step off the centerline and re-enter on the downwind."

In the case of the S- turn, by the time he was given the instruction he was in way to close safely perform the manuever. He was in a TBM 700 and probably going too fast to begin with.

My point is: making sure the "outcome of the manuever is never in doubt" is not just a checkride requirement, it's a life requirement.

 

[Ted]

What does one say if the controller says to turn to heading xx, you repeat the instruction and turn to heading xx and then realize that was not a good choice. What do you say to go back or get out of it. "unable to continue present heading, turning back to heading xy"?

It seems with my limited experience with ATC, they do not allow much time to think about the instruction before they expect a reply.

That would be an appropriate response, yes. Or, initiate the following conversation:

"Center, SpamCan 345 needs 20 right for weather."
"SpamCan 345, 20 right approved, proceed direct destination when able and advise."

If they come back with...

"SpamCan 345, unable."

Then you can negotiate with them.

"I could alternately do 20 left, would that work?"

If they continue to be uncooperative, you can declare an emergency, and then they have to accept whatever you ask for.

Here's an interesting story from a few years ago. Laurie and I were flying the Aztec to Cozumel, and there was a pretty nasty storm right on an airway that had active MOAs or restricted areas on either side of it (I forget which). Every airliner on that airway was asking for deviations. ATC responded:

"[airliner], unable due to active restricted airspace on both sides of the airway. But if you absolutely have to deviate, you can squawk 7700 and deviate however you wish."

He told this to probably a dozen airliners while we were talking to him, and they all chose to do it.

 

[steingar]

Might point is: making sure the "outcome of the manuever is never in doubt" is not just a checkride requirement, it's a life requirement.

Can't disagree in any way with that.

 

[wsuffa]

And one time ATC ordered me to climb 4000 feet above my filed altitude (into known icing) where upon I was immediately icing fast and hard and ATC refused to descend me back into warmer air... This required me to do more than object to an ATC direction, it required me to flat out tell her she was going to do it my way because she did not have a choice... I turned 90 degrees and moved off the airway by 4 miles and then began a rapid descent... She wound up being replaced by a supervisor who solved the situation in 3 seconds flat - "Just tell me what you need."

Chicago Approach? Heard 'em stick a guy into icing one night when I was headed to ARR. Controller apologized....

OTOH, I ended up picking up a little light rime one summer day at 17,000 over CQY and got an immediate descent from ATC. No questions asked.

One of the more memorable times I've used "unable" was climbing out of KHND and ATC asked me to maintain an 800 ft/min rate of climb on an exceedingly hot day (I was pushing the carb temp pretty close to/in the yellow at 500'/min). Unable. Got a vector, completed the climb, and all was good.

It's a tool you can use when appropriate.

 

[Henning]

My 2 cents: No Air Traffic Controller has ever died from pilot error. The reverse is not so.

True. However to get what you do get, you do what they ask and smile as cheap as you can,or buy into the greatest value for the overall dollar figuring cross platform portability.

 

[j1b3h0]

I work with them until I can't, which, to be fair, doesn't happen often. Unlike most GA pilots, I almost always fly in and out of very busy class B airline airports. And if ONE of the pilots in a steady stream of arrivals says "unable", everybody sits up and takes notice...what's he seeing that we're not seeing? Doesn't take many 'unables' before ATC comes up with another plan.

 

[SCCutler]

I work with them until I can't, which, to be fair, doesn't happen often. Unlike most GA pilots, I almost always fly in and out of very busy class B airline airports. And if ONE of the pilots in a steady stream of arrivals says "unable", everybody sits up and takes notice...what's he seeing that we're not seeing? Doesn't take many 'unables' before ATC comes up with another plan.

Funny you mention that - I have the tendency to think of myself as inexperienced and green, but on one such occasion, it is amazing how many other pilots felt liberated to advise (as opposed to request) deviations for weather - as soon as I wussed-out and did so.

 

[denverpilot]

I didn't get any pictures of the clouds that day, but here is a close example (with much less vertical height but otherwise close) taken near Wichita Falls, Texas a couple of months ago. Very ordinary and benign looking, I know. NO radar return of any kind.

So who would fly through it or even under it?

That's not convective. You can tell by all the haze underneath. That's just warm moist air shoved or trapped under cooler drier air. The Skew-T probably shows a nice well-defined inversion right there too.

Not a problem.

 

[j1b3h0]

Funny you mention that - I have the tendency to think of myself as inexperienced and green, but on one such occasion, it is amazing how many other pilots felt liberated to advise (as opposed to request) deviations for weather - as soon as I wussed-out and did so.

As funny as this is, I have been in a long line of maybe 20 or so airliners, waiting to takeoff...into what appears to be a very threatening storm. One after the other they taxi into postion and damn the torpedos, as it were. Then one steady, very old sounding voice on the radio says, when it's his turn for takeoff "if it's just the same to you, we're gonna sit here until the storm passes." First thing you know, the tower can't give a departure away. Everybody say 'no thanks'. Never be afraid to "wimp out" in the name of safety. It happens to veterans, too.

 

[MassPilot]

A few weeks ago, I was flying to Nantucket and the ATIS reported winds 24013G17. It even said runway 24 in use for departures and arrivals. I called the tower and was given runway 30, which is basically a glorified taxiway (2700x50). I've never landed on a runway that skinny before, and really didn't want to in a gusting crosswind. I know I could have done it if necessary, but the wind was blowing straight down a 6300x150 runway.

I repeated the landing instructions, thought about it, then said, "Any chance we could use 24 instead, I think the wind is better lined up with it." Fortunately he immediately cleared me for a right base for 24. If he didn't, I think my next transmission would have included the word "unable".

 

[Henning]

What does one say if the controller says to turn to heading xx, you repeat the instruction and turn to heading xx and then realize that was not a good choice. What do you say to go back or get out of it. "unable to continue present heading, turning back to heading xy"?

It seems with my limited experience with ATC, they do not allow much time to think about the instruction before they expect a reply.

"That's not looking good, I'm gonna have to come right or left xx*"

 

[bobmrg]

ATC are good guys 99 and 44/100% of the time... But you are the one whose jewels are in the fire... In over a half century of flying it comes to mind that I have said unable just three times... Two of those times ATC wanted to turn me into a purple wall that went all the way to the ground (over Lake Erie at night)

And one time ATC ordered me to climb 4000 feet above my filed altitude (into known icing) where upon I was immediately icing fast and hard and ATC refused to descend me back into warmer air... This required me to do more than object to an ATC direction, it required me to flat out tell her she was going to do it my way because she did not have a choice... I turned 90 degrees and moved off the airway by 4 miles and then began a rapid descent... She wound up being replaced by a supervisor who solved the situation in 3 seconds flat - "Just tell me what you need."

The next card to play after "Unable" is "I'm declaring an emergency." That phrase can really change a controller's attitude.

Bob Gardner

 

[bobmrg]

What does one say if the controller says to turn to heading xx, you repeat the instruction and turn to heading xx and then realize that was not a good choice. What do you say to go back or get out of it. "unable to continue present heading, turning back to heading xy"?

It seems with my limited experience with ATC, they do not allow much time to think about the instruction before they expect a reply.

Be assertive. Just say "Unable," as the OP did, and let the controller come up with Plan B. Don't worry about hurting their feelings.

Bob Gardner

 

[BillTIZ]

We had a temporary tower for an open house. When I was on downwind, tower cleared me to land. When I was on base leg, tower tried to resequence me to #2 behind other traffic I did not see.

"UNABLE" was my reply, tower sent the other traffic around and recleared me to land, #1.
I was PIC from the back seat of an L-13 glider giving rides, not very much forward and down visibility.

When the tower set up shop, we had briefed them that when a glider leaves the local ridge just outside the downwind he will call the tower, "51MC, leaving the ridge", when the glider calls downwind HE OWNS THE RUNWAY, you do not know what sink he may encounter, but he will attempt to fly a normal traffic pattern.

The tower chief came over and appoligized, he had a "rookie" on the tower freq that did not understand that a "glider" meant, "no engine". We offered to put the rookie in the back seat with blinders, he declined.

 

[BillTIZ]

A few weeks ago, I was flying to Nantucket and the ATIS reported winds 24013G17. It even said runway 24 in use for departures and arrivals. I called the tower and was given runway 30, which is basically a glorified taxiway (2700x50). I've never landed on a runway that skinny before, and really didn't want to in a gusting crosswind. I know I could have done it if necessary, but the wind was blowing straight down a 6300x150 runway.

I repeated the landing instructions, thought about it, then said, "Any chance we could use 24 instead, I think the wind is better lined up with it." Fortunately he immediately cleared me for a right base for 24. If he didn't, I think my next transmission would have included the word "unable".

You made the right call, but if you can't handle 13G17 at 60degrees cross, you won't do much flying out here. I'll agree, 50 ft is narrow, but plenty wide, our runway is 60ft.

At VGT runway 25 or 12, winds are 190@20G30+, you pick the runway.

 

[iflyatiger]

I think the picture that you posted disappeared. Could you repost it I would like to see it to learn from everyone's comments about it. Good post and subject..

Thanks..

I didn't get any pictures of the clouds that day, but here is a close example (with much less vertical height but otherwise close) taken near Wichita Falls, Texas a couple of months ago. Very ordinary and benign looking, I know. NO radar return of any kind.

So who would fly through it or even under it?

 

[Everskyward]

I just want to do everything I can to make good decisions with minimum ego.

Me too, although it's easier said than done. As you say, the decision is easy when it's obvious. Not so much so when it's not.

 

[jpower]

You made the right call, but if you can't handle 13G17 at 60degrees cross, you won't do much flying out here. I'll agree, 50 ft is narrow, but plenty wide, our runway is 60ft.

At VGT runway 25 or 12, winds are 190@20G30+, you pick the runway.

Wow, would never have thought of 50 as narrow...though I guess when you fly light sports your view on things is smaller in general

 

[Jaybird180]

I guess my 2420 x 40 is claustrophobic

 

[TMetzinger]

In the singles I fly regularly, I do not like fly through "tall" (thousands of feet) cumuliform clouds. I'm usually able to pick my way through them visually. If I can't do that, or go under them visually, then my next choice is to go around them.

I've never had an issue with ATC. When I tell them I need to deviate they've always been helpful. Once (and only once) on my way across northern Indiana I had approach say "I'm not showing anything" and I said "well sir you're down there and I'm up here and I definitely need to turn northwest". I got "approved as requested, report on course".

Folks who fly for a living or have "missions" like Ted have different equipment and risk profiles. There's no reason in the flying I do to punch through a tall cloud. Been there, done that (twice), learned the lesson.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

I returned from Orlando Sunday with that large system from eastern Louisiana to the Florida panhandle. Got some of the best assistance ever and worked my way around it. Center/approach is doing the best they can in light of the NEXRAD or real time maybe for approach. For center, that data is a bit dated and it's composite. With on-board RADAR, I tilt up or down and get real times data with better top of moisture information. I try not to use the term unable, but do try to say things like that will not turn me right into large cells: I need 15 degrees left or right, or whatever and I've never had a problem. Much better to treat the controller like a fellow trying to solve traffic weather problems with you than an adversary. If you can't do something, much better to stay why and what you can do if possible. I've taken off hot and heavy and been asked for an expedited climb; just called back and said sorry sir, this is all I can do today, would a turn right or left help? Same thing with a fella than wanted an expedited descent: I saw it coming because he waited very late to bring me down: I just said that was all I could give him without exceeding plane limitation (passenger limits or whatever). Most of these folks aren't pilots; and if they are, may not know your plane or skill level. Always best to explain and offer an alternative if possible as in any situation where it may be challenging and you're working together to find a solution. Best, Dave

 

[MassPilot]

You made the right call, but if you can't handle 13G17 at 60degrees cross, you won't do much flying out here. I'll agree, 50 ft is narrow, but plenty wide, our runway is 60ft.

At VGT runway 25 or 12, winds are 190@20G30+, you pick the runway.

I know I could have done it, but didn't see the point when there was a much better option available. We generally don't get a lot of wind up here. I think my record for a x-wind landing is 15 knots, and that was with a CFI.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

There were reports of Saint Louis Approach requiring airline pilots to use their emergency powers to avoid weather. The airline captain would ask for a deviation and be denied. In that case, the captain would say where they were going and the controller would ask if he was invoking emergency powers to deviate. That's just not a good solution and I understand it has been addressed.

Best,

Dave

 

[Ted]

Folks who fly for a living or have "missions" like Ted have different equipment and risk profiles. There's no reason in the flying I do to punch through a tall cloud. Been there, done that (twice), learned the lesson.

Actually, when I have passengers (canine or human) I try to avoid going through bumpies as much as possible. I don't want anybody puking, and I like repeat business.

When I'm solo, more often I'll just blast through it for the practice if the equipment is showing it as benign.

 

[TMetzinger]

Actually, when I have passengers (canine or human) I try to avoid going through bumpies as much as possible. I don't want anybody puking, and I like repeat business.

I understand, but you'd go through them rather than abort the flight, if those were the options? We're talking about "normal" bumpies, rather than dangerous ones.

 

[Ted]

I understand, but you'd go through them rather than abort the flight, if those were the options? We're talking about "normal" bumpies, rather than dangerous ones.

Oh, of course. If they're "normal" bumpies that can be traversed safely, then I'll go through them if that's the only practical way to get where we're going. Tomorrow I'll be flying a passenger who is about guaranteed to make use of the sick bags - she hugged me the one time (out of about 10) I flew her without her feeling sick. Poor woman just has bad airsickness.

If they're dangerous, I find a way around them or divert. Usually isn't that hard with proper equipment.

 

[wsuffa]

There were reports of Saint Louis Approach requiring airline pilots to use their emergency powers to avoid weather. The airline captain would ask for a deviation and be denied. In that case, the captain would say where they were going and the controller would ask if he was invoking emergency powers to deviate. That's just not a good solution and I understand it has been addressed.

Best,

Dave

St. L. tried to give me a 100 mile detour (I was IFR at 16,000 on a perfectly crisp VFR day) - I resolved the issue with "cancel IFR, I will proceed VFR over the Class B", which netted a response of "standby on the cancellation, we can work something out" - and a direct over the airport.

OTOH, ABQ approach was exceedingly helpful to both airline pilots and GA (including me) in avoiding the cumulonimbus and the cumulogranite one day. Vectors offered, deviations easy, and a great flow of information to pilots. I wish they all could be like that.

 

[Ted]

There were reports of Saint Louis Approach requiring airline pilots to use their emergency powers to avoid weather. The airline captain would ask for a deviation and be denied. In that case, the captain would say where they were going and the controller would ask if he was invoking emergency powers to deviate. That's just not a good solution and I understand it has been addressed.

Best,

Dave

Similar happened to a friend of mine when he had an engine failure in the 310 and they were trying to route him over Lake Erie. He kept on refusing, wanting an over land route. They asked if he was declaring an emergency, to which he responded "Listen asshat, we can do this my way or your way. Either way, I'm going where I want to go, one just involves more paperwork for you. So which would you prefer?"

"Cleared as requested."

 

[Jaybird180]

Similar happened to a friend of mine when he had an engine failure in the 310 and they were trying to route him over Lake Erie. He kept on refusing, wanting an over land route. They asked if he was declaring an emergency, to which he responded "Listen asshat, we can do this my way or your way. Either way, I'm going where I want to go, one just involves more paperwork for you. So which would you prefer?"

"Cleared as requested."

In what situation does the controller get a mountain of paperwork?

 

[Ted]

In what situation does the controller get a mountain of paperwork?

I'm not certain if the controller would have had to do much paperwork, if any. I do know that this pilot was angry at the controller, and also is someone who will not mince words. So, take it as a funny story.

 

[Alexb2000]

I think the picture that you posted disappeared. Could you repost it I would like to see it to learn from everyone's comments about it. Good post and subject..

Thanks..

Sure, here it is if it's useful. I'm no weather expert (or photographer), all I know comes mostly just from experience. The point of the picture is a very benign cloud that any of us would fly in and around any day of the week. The ONLY difference was that this cloud was full of lightning, which prior to seeing the strikes I would have said wasn't possible from that kind of cloud. Anyway, I flew under it as I said and regretted it, but learned something.

The experts have already said it's no biggie, so consider that I might be just another poser with time on my hands.

The point is not the picture though. Rather, I made a decision to fly into something that I hadn't seen before that made me a little nervous and it wasn't good. It made me wonder if perhaps the Pilatus pilot flew into something that looked benign or even questionable, but was far worse, and if my personality and willingness to do some questionable calls might get me into trouble. If that's the case I'd like to nip that in the bud as I hope any of us would.

 

[denverpilot]

We all still have more to learn about weather. And even then we will have more.

 

[BillTIZ]

Wow, would never have thought of 50 as narrow...though I guess when you fly light sports your view on things is smaller in general

Everyone is used to 75', 100', or 150' wide runways. So 50' may seem small.
Ever land on a SAC runway? 300' wide plus paved shoulders.

 

[BillTIZ]

I know I could have done it, but didn't see the point when there was a much better option available. We generally don't get a lot of wind up here. I think my record for a x-wind landing is 15 knots, and that was with a CFI.

Welcome to POA. Where in Mass do you base?
I learned to fly at ASH of so so many many years ago.

 

[BillTIZ]

In what situation does the controller get a mountain of paperwork?

The pilot would have declared an emergency to get what he needed. Which may or may not require the pilot to file paperwork, only if asked. The lack of cooperation from the controller would be in the pilots report and the controller would have been challenged by management to justify his actions.

Of course, with one shut down on a twin, I'd have already declared the emergency.