"why do you wish to deviate?"

ChrisK said:
Yes but it is ill-advised to joke with ATC about having a passenger as a student pilot.

I always thought this question was often like the "why did you execute a missed approach" question that ATC sometimes asks. "I did not have adequate visibility" is way more critical to them than "I didn't want to land there and it was just a practice approach".
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's kinda what I was getting at. Never heard of a student who flew so much to use words like "always" and "usually." Then to lie to ATC about the divert? :nono:
 
Velocity173 said:
Yeah, that's kinda what I was getting at. Never heard of a student who flew so much to use words like "always" and "usually." Then to lie to ATC about the divert? :nono:
Click to expand...

Well... It's not a lie to ATC if they cannot prove or disprove what I say.

How do they know what me real reason is? If I say a passenger has to pinch a loaf why would they question it? No they would not question it. Therefore it is not lie to ATC strictly speaking.
 
Hawka said:
Well... It's not a lie to ATC if they cannot prove or disprove what I say.

How do they know what me real reason is? If I say a passenger has to pinch a loaf why would they question it? No they would not question it. Therefore it is not lie to ATC strictly speaking.
Click to expand...
You may want to revisit the definition of "lie".
 
Tangentially.

Flying today, a ZME controller would refer to "three digit tail numbers" as "Baron November 43 Foxtrot" and "Tiger November 12 Lima"

No other aircraft were referred to with both "type" AND "November".

I couldn't help but to think that he was covering his butt so that anyone listening to the "tape" had no doubt that he was using full call signs.
 
... and when you find yourself sweating and clenching and pushing in front of an impatient FSDO inspector and realize that nothing is going to come out, then my friend you will finally understand the error of your ways.
 
FastEddieB said:
Weird how some people just lie out of habit, even when there's no obvious reason to.
Click to expand...

sociopath...many sick people in the world and they probably think we're sick for honoring truth
 
Hawka said:
Well... It's not a lie to ATC if they cannot prove or disprove what I say.
(snip_
Therefore it is not lie to ATC strictly speaking.
Click to expand...
What someone can prove has no bearing on it being what it is. If it's not true, and it's not simply a matter of opinion, by process of elimination it must be a lie since there are no other options. They cannot prove it's a lie... but it still is.
 
C182P said:
What someone can prove has no bearing on it being what it is. If it's not true, and it's not simply a matter of opinion, by process of elimination it must be a lie since there are no other options. They cannot prove it's a lie... but it still is.
Click to expand...

Nope. From ATC point of view it is impossible for them to know the REAL reason why I am diverting unless I now suddenly run out of fuel short of the diversion airport then they would probably suspect that is really why I was diverting. It is a stupid question that they have to ask and they don't care what the answer is. So give them a stupid answer. It is just a placeholder. Nobody cares.
 
Hawka said:
It is a stupid question that they have to ask and they don't care what the answer is.
Click to expand...

They might if you answered, "Deviation for transponder code 7500".

Or, "Deviating for falling oil pressure".

Anyway, I find your attitude strange for a pilot.

But takes all kinds, I guess.
 
If he were telling the truth, he would have only given the smart answer one time because he would likely get met with the response:

"Radar Services terminated. Squawk one two zero zero."
 
cowman said:
... and when you find yourself sweating and clenching and pushing in front of an impatient FSDO inspector and realize that nothing is going to come out, then my friend you will finally understand the error of your ways.
Click to expand...

I would then say "Hmmm, funny I thought I needed to go. Can you pass me the toilet paper please?"
 
Hawka said:
:eek:

Can they really do that?
Click to expand...


FF isn't a mandatory service provided to VFR aircraft. It's an additional service based on workload and equipment capabilities. If they want to terminate you, they can.
 
C182P said:
...If it's not true, and it's not simply a matter of opinion, by process of elimination it must be a lie since there are no other options...
Click to expand...

It could also be an error and/or mistaken belief.
 
I have replied "passenger request" (which it was...) and that was the end of it.
 
I've always found, "There's a Vera Bradley outlet” to be a satisfactory response. It often gets me expedited handling. :rolleyes:
 
How about "I just remembered that I need to pick up ammunition"? :devil:
 
Velocity173 said:
FF isn't a mandatory service provided to VFR aircraft. It's an additional service based on workload and equipment capabilities. If they want to terminate you, they can.
Click to expand...

Flight following is an additional service that must be provided to the extent permitted by higher priority duties and "other circumstances". I'm confident providing a smart answer would not fall under "other circumstances".
 
Hawka said:
No matter what? Isn't that a lie?

:yikes:

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I must have anti-social personality disorder aka Charles Manson as I didn't loose any sleep over it.

I also told my wife that her new recipe "tasted wonderful" and I must admit it was less than the truth.

Happy Skies
 
roncachamp said:
Flight following is an additional service that must be provided to the extent permitted by higher priority duties and "other circumstances". I'm confident providing a smart answer would not fall under "other circumstances".
Click to expand...

You're confident of a lot of things but that doesn't make it a universal opinion. Controller could easily come up with an excuse for termination and you know it.
 
B350ATP said:
I must have anti-social personality disorder aka Charles Manson as I didn't loose any sleep over it.

I also told my wife that her new recipe "tasted wonderful" and I must admit it was less than the truth.

Happy Skies
Click to expand...

I hear you.

"Honey, does this red dress make me look fat?"
"No not at all! But how about that other sexy black one?"

;)

sometimes a little lie is okay.
 
Velocity173 said:
You're confident of a lot of things but that doesn't make it a universal opinion.
Click to expand...

It's not an opinion at all, from Order JO 7110.65V Air Traffic Control:


2−1−1. ATC SERVICE

The primary purpose of the ATC system is to prevent
a collision between aircraft operating in the system
and to organize and expedite the flow of traffic, and
to provide support for National Security and
Homeland Defense. In addition to its primary
function, the ATC system has the capability to
provide (with certain limitations) additional services.
The ability to provide additional services is limited by
many factors, such as the volume of traffic, frequency
congestion, quality of radar, controller workload,
higher priority duties, and the pure physical inability
to scan and detect those situations that fall in this
category. It is recognized that these services cannot be
provided in cases in which the provision of services
is precluded by the above factors. Consistent with the
aforementioned conditions, controllers must provide
additional service procedures to the extent permitted
by higher priority duties and other circumstances.
The provision of additional services is not optional on
the part of the controller, but rather is required when
the work situation permits. Provide air traffic control
service in accordance with the procedures and
minima in this order except when:

a. A deviation is necessary to conform with ICAO
Documents, National Rules of the Air, or special
agreements where the U.S. provides air traffic control
service in airspace outside the U.S. and its
possessions or:

NOTE−
Pilots are required to abide by CFRs or other applicable
regulations regardless of the application of any procedure
or minima in this order.

b. Other procedures/minima are prescribed in a
letter of agreement, FAA directive, or a military
document, or:

NOTE−
These procedures may include altitude reservations, air refueling, fighter interceptor operations, law enforcement, etc.

REFERENCE−
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 1−1−9Procedural Letters of Agreement.

c. A deviation is necessary to assist an aircraft
when an emergency has been declared.

REFERENCE−
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 2−1−6 Safety Alert.
FAAO JO 7110.65, Chapter 10 Emergencies.
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 5−1−8 Merging Target Procedures.


Controller could easily come up with an excuse for termination and you know it.
Click to expand...

Sure, for example, the controller could say the traffic volume was beyond his ability and be judged a weak stick by his fellow controllers.
 
Hawka said:
Nope. From ATC point of view it is impossible for them to know the REAL reason why I am diverting unless I now suddenly run out of fuel short of the diversion airport then they would probably suspect that is really why I was diverting. It is a stupid question that they have to ask and they don't care what the answer is. So give them a stupid answer. It is just a placeholder. Nobody cares.
Click to expand...
Those points are unrelated. You previously stated that something is not a lie if it cannot be proven (or is not already known) to be one. If you intentionally provide false information, it is a lie, even if nobody else knows it and even if nobody else cares.

I'm not saying you deserve particular judgement in any particular case. I'm saying that if you believe as you've stated that through justification a lie is not a lie, then you are mistaken. If you know the information you provide is incorrect at the time you provide it, there might be justifications for it but it's still a lie.
 
If a controller had a pilot who is making false statements or won't acknowledge the reason for a deviation, I'd say that would be a strong case for a 91.123 violation. How are you going to provide service if the pilot isn't being truthful?

Furthermore, if the pilot is acting suspicious whether it be VFR / IFR, then the controller has an obligation to report it. It's not just about a question of a deviation but anything; "report field / traffic in sight." If the pilot is uncooperative, it's kind of hard to provide the additional services of FF. I'd go with "other circumstances" on that one.
 
Last edited:
Amazing. It ain't that hard to just answer the question.
 
C182P said:
Those points are unrelated. You previously stated that something is not a lie if it cannot be proven (or is not already known) to be one. If you intentionally provide false information, it is a lie, even if nobody else knows it and even if nobody else cares.

I'm not saying you deserve particular judgement in any particular case. I'm saying that if you believe as you've stated that through justification a lie is not a lie, then you are mistaken. If you know the information you provide is incorrect at the time you provide it, there might be justifications for it but it's still a lie.
Click to expand...

The words: never wrestle with a pig... come to mind here
 
Velocity173 said:
FF isn't a mandatory service provided to VFR aircraft. It's an additional service based on workload and equipment capabilities. If they want to terminate you, they can.
Click to expand...
What I always find interesting is when controllers get confused about this relationship.

We have been approaching our destination, announced our intention to terminate Flight Following, and not been given the magic "Services terminated, squawk 1200, frequency change approved" response.

Sometimes the controller will say something helpful, like "Stay with me a little longer, I've got traffic ahead", but occasionally they will just answer with something non-committal. Sometimes their unresponsiveness seems to be workload related, but other times they just don't seem to understand that this is NOT a request.

Usually I don't care, but on several occasions this has put us too near an uncontrolled airport while still talking to ATC instead of on Unicom -- a recipe for trouble, in my experience. At that point, if the controller still hasn't figured it out, I simply announce my intentions to cut him loose.

They get it, then.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Usually I don't care, but on several occasions this has put us too near an uncontrolled airport while still talking to ATC instead of on Unicom -- a recipe for trouble, in my experience. At that point, if the controller still hasn't figured it out, I simply announce my intentions to cut him loose.
Click to expand...

Why do you let it go that far? If you're in airspace that does not require communications with ATC you're in airspace where ATC cannot require you to remain on frequency. Just say bye-bye and go.
 
Jay Honeck said:
What I always find interesting is when controllers get confused about this relationship.

We have been approaching our destination, announced our intention to terminate Flight Following, and not been given the magic "Services terminated, squawk 1200, frequency change approved" response.

Sometimes the controller will say something helpful, like "Stay with me a little longer, I've got traffic ahead", but occasionally they will just answer with something non-committal. Sometimes their unresponsiveness seems to be workload related, but other times they just don't seem to understand that this is NOT a request.

Usually I don't care, but on several occasions this has put us too near an uncontrolled airport while still talking to ATC instead of on Unicom -- a recipe for trouble, in my experience. At that point, if the controller still hasn't figured it out, I simply announce my intentions to cut him loose.

They get it, then.
Click to expand...

A lot of times I'll just tell them I'm terminating. Some controllers will work you right up to the pattern when you really need to be on CTAF. If you have a second radio it's not a big deal but single radio you really need to be switched over 10 miles out.

Sometimes I've been worked by approach and they'll take me all they way out to the limits of their airspace. That's when I'll ask to terminate because I know I'm getting ready to either lose comms or drop off radar. Other controllers, even on light traffic days, will terminate me as soon as I clear the Class C. It varies.

In 8 yrs of doing ATC I never told an aircraft that I couldn't provide FF. Might have told them to call back in a few minutes because I was busy, but never denied the service. Unfortunately, on one occasion I had an aircraft who called asking for FF but I couldn't hear him. He ended up crashing. :(
 
"Nor Cal, Cessna 10H, I'm deviating northwest for a bit, not landing."
"Say reason for deviation."
"I'm having too much fun up here and if I land, it's go home and do yardwork."
"Best reason I ever heard. "
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top