LiveATC Discussion Forums
Air Traffic Monitoring => Listener Forum => Topic started by: dave on August 06, 2008, 08:43:07 AM
-
Picked up on AVWeb:
"If you've ever missed a turn, set the altitude bug incorrectly or
committed any of thousands of sins that air traffic controllers routinely
catch and help correct every day without much fuss, those days are
apparently over. The FAA has apparently ordered controllers to violate
pilots for any and all errors and has threatened to discipline them if they
don't file the reports..."
<http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/bizav/1181-full.html#198538>
Just what we need, more friction between the FAA, NATCA, and pilots. This is less than useful, IMO. I can see violations for major errors, but this seems to be going a little far.
-
Oh, man. Reads as if the FAA wants to actively reduce the number of certificated pilots, which in turn will reduce the number of controllers and will ultimately reduce the FAA budget. Good move :-o.
For the real GA pilots here, be sure to bookmark the NASA Aviation Safety website and remember to quickly file a NASA report after any mistakes that could now lead to this violation. The NASA site now allows electronic submission of the form (I have used it once already):
http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/report/electronic.html
Filing a timely NASA report should protect against violations, assuming the violation was not deliberate and blah, blah, blah.
Also if you belong to AOPA, consider joining their legal protection division for the extra US $25 per year. Cheap insurance specifically made just for this sort of thing.
-
Very much agree with you both, this is only going to cause more friction between all involved parties when there doesn't need to be. We should all be looking out for each other. As Peter pointed out, NASA ASRS on everything that you could get clipped for doing, even if it was for the better. As they say, it's a jungle out there.
(http://www.hpnpilot1200.org/misc/cookiemonster.jpg)
Best,
-
Oh, man. Reads as if the FAA wants to actively reduce the number of certificated pilots, which in turn will reduce the number of controllers and will ultimately reduce the FAA budget. Good move :-o.
For the real GA pilots here, be sure to bookmark the NASA Aviation Safety website and remember to quickly file a NASA report after any mistakes that could now lead to this violation. The NASA site now allows electronic submission of the form (I have used it once already):
http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/report/electronic.html
Filing a timely NASA report should protect against violations, assuming the violation was not deliberate and blah, blah, blah.
Also if you belong to AOPA, consider joining their legal protection division for the extra US $25 per year. Cheap insurance specifically made just for this sort of thing.
I'm a student pilot and have never heard of the NASA ASRS. Just curious to know, why would filing a report protect against a violation?
-
NASA ASRS (http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov) is a very useful program.
The immunity policy can be found here:
http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/overview/immunity.html
You should read it and explore the ASRS web site for great safety information, but here is the important section:
5. Prohibition Against the Use of Reports for Enforcement Purposes
* Section 91.25 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) (14 CFR 91.25) prohibits the use of any reports submitted to NASA under the ASRS (or information derived therefrom) in any disciplinary action, except information concerning criminal offenses or accidents which are covered under paragraphs 7a(1) and 7a(2).
* When violation of the FAR comes to the attention of the FAA from a source other than a report filed with NASA under the ASRS, appropriate action will be taken. See paragraph 9.
* The NASA ASRS security system is designed and operated by NASA to ensure confidentiality and anonymity of the reporter and all other parties involved in a reported occurrence or incident. The FAA will not seek, and NASA will not release or make available to the FAA, any report filed with NASA under the ASRS or any other information that might reveal the identity of any party involved in an occurrence or incident reported under the ASRS. There has been no breach of confidentiality in more than 30 years of the ASRS under NASA management.
-Dave
-
Nice picture, Jason, although these days from my vantage point I see the FAA as more of a Bert, the notoriously humorless and anal partner of Ernie and Bert fame:
(http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/8797/scrn0120on7.jpg)
-
Nice picture, Jason, although these days from my vantage point I see the FAA as more of a Bert, the notoriously humorless and anal partner of Ernie and Bert fame:
That puts a whole new perspective on my childhood...I grew up with those guys!
-
That puts a whole new perspective on my childhood...I grew up with those guys!
Ha, so did I - about two decades earlier! :-)
-
http://themainbang.typepad.com/blog/2008/08/license-and-reg.html
That's how most controllers will approach this situation.
w0x0f
-
The FAA's annoucement of controllers becoming police of the skies will not go well at all. If that is the game that the FAA wants to play, naturally the professional pilots of the country, who will only be protecting themselves, will surely respond with the same intent. Those of us who fly through N90 on a regular basis could have a field day with violating controllers. There are a few controllers there that rarely use standard phraseology. I'm definitely not saying that they all do it. But, just as the old adage says, it only takes a few bad apples. A couple examples of such clearances would be something like "EGF290 two eight zero up to 17" or "JBU282 new york 23-9." Yes, the first clearance, as I would interpret it, would be to turn to a heading of 280 and climb to 17,000, and the second would be to contact New York Approach or Center on 123.9. But thats the problem, its an interpretation. Clearances should not be interpretations, they should be simple, clear-cut instructions.
Allow me to reiterate that it is not all controllers, at N90 or nationwide, and it is not only N90 doing this (just listen to ORD ground give 5 aircraft taxi instructions with no chance for a readback or even saying "break" between instructions) that do this. But if they are going to start to violate pilots for not doing everything by the book or, god forbid, make a small mistake, then they will of course be held to the same standard.
-
This is a great blog entry from Don Brown at "Get The Flick."
http://gettheflick.blogspot.com/2008/08/n12345-youre-busted.html
-
The FAA's annoucement of controllers becoming police of the skies will not go well at all. If that is the game that the FAA wants to play, naturally the professional pilots of the country, who will only be protecting themselves, will surely respond with the same intent. Those of us who fly through N90 on a regular basis could have a field day with violating controllers. There are a few controllers there that rarely use standard phraseology. I'm definitely not saying that they all do it. But, just as the old adage says, it only takes a few bad apples. A couple examples of such clearances would be something like "EGF290 two eight zero up to 17" or "JBU282 new york 23-9." Yes, the first clearance, as I would interpret it, would be to turn to a heading of 280 and climb to 17,000, and the second would be to contact New York Approach or Center on 123.9. But thats the problem, its an interpretation. Clearances should not be interpretations, they should be simple, clear-cut instructions.
Allow me to reiterate that it is not all controllers, at N90 or nationwide, and it is not only N90 doing this (just listen to ORD ground give 5 aircraft taxi instructions with no chance for a readback or even saying "break" between instructions) that do this. But if they are going to start to violate pilots for not doing everything by the book or, god forbid, make a small mistake, then they will of course be held to the same standard.
I don't think I'm one of those controllers of whom you speak. Let me point out that there's a world of difference between poor phraseology & not following control instructions. I had one airline(international) that routinely screwed up on approach & on departure. I let it slide until about the 10th time. BTW I've been on vacation for a bit but I don't recall getting this memo & I'm sure I'm not the only one.
-
cessna157,
there is a big difference between a certain JFK RJ airline that nearly every day, messes up a particular JFK departure SID (which has triggered dangerous situations), and a controller who says," contact the tower on 23-9."
controllers are not out to be cops, and like glencar said, we have not seen this memo.
-
jrsx and other pilots:
IF you are a pilot consider attending the Safety Program seminars and applying for the WINGS Program, there are a lot of advantages for you when you attend, i.e. applies to your biennial flight review requirements, reduces insurance costs etc.. As a student you cannot get credit for the WINGS program and the information is invaluable.
http://www.faasafety.gov/default.aspx
When we hold our "Evening with ATC" a lot of information is discussed, one of the items we cover and encourage is the NASA REPORT. Go to the Aviation Safety Reporting home page and look around, there is a lot of information there.
http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/overview/summary.html
Technically it is a "get out of jail free card" (as long a the event you were involved in was not malicious or intentional).
http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/report/electronic.html
[/quote]
I'm a student pilot and have never heard of the NASA ASRS. Just curious to know, why would filing a report protect against a violation?
[/quote]
-
There is a great podcast over at Gold Seal Live (http://www.goldseallive.com/) on this:
Controllers as Police Discussion (http://www.goldseallive.com/ShowInfo10.aspx?id=10)
-
This forum is great :) I went into my safety class and, thanks to this forum, knew what they were talking about already when we started discussing ASRS.
Very neat!
I'm listening to the 25 Zulu show regarding this... but I haven't read/heard anything else. Are controllers still being asked to report pilots?
-
So can we write up controller errors?
I had a controller vector me for a ILS 22 approach to LEX. Not hearing for my next turn, I blew through the ILS. So I ask the controller ' Approach, 34Y... so what's next?"
She (the controller) was not amused and ordered me back out behind the OM and to the furthest IAF. I was low enough on fuel where I gave her a bingo notice. The pissed mist could be detected all the way out to my plane but she did put me right back on the ILS within a minute.
Now my question is: Did she write herself up?
-
So can we write up controller errors?
Why don't you try it and see how it works out for you...
-
Posted by: T210 Driver Posted on: September 26, 2008, 10:15:43 PM
Insert Quote
So can we write up controller errors?
It may be a bit lofty of you to feel it's your place to 'write up controllers'. In the 20+ years I've been controlling, I've NEVER met a controller who went out of his way or searched for a reason to write a pilot up. There was once a phrase used of 'Air Cop', but most of us feel it's more like we bring 'control and order ' to chaos than sit there with badges (we don't have no stinkin' badges) and whip out our ticket pad and start writing pilots up.
Honestly, if that were the case, writer's cramp would become the most used on-the-job injury on the CA-1 forms! Especially if you're talking about petty things like: didn't turn when he should have, didn't use the aircraft's standard rate of climb/descent, read back the wrong freq. read back the wrong altitude, put in the wrong code, didn't check the Oscar November button on the transponder, etc.
Yes, controllers, including myself, make mistakes. Remember though, when the driver who logs 30K miles a year and has an accident or gets a ticket, is compared to the driver who drives 3K miles a year and has a clean record, who is the better driver? Who has a greater chance of getting into an accident or getting a ticket? :?
Time for a little soap box rant: the FAA knows that pilots and controllers work together on a daily basis, and they usually do it very well, but times are changing. The controller workforce is being driven out in order to bring in fresh faces, happy to have a job, and willing to do that job for way less then what is being paid right now. Remember, we are REQUIRED to report pilot errors. If we don't, it becomes ammo that can be used in our termination process, 'Insubordination'. If you or anyone else wants our input, we think it is one of the stupidest things that the FAA has come out with. The majority of us, if there is no one "watching", will blow off 99% of the goofy errors made by pilots. We cut you as much slack as possible, to the extent of even sending an air carrier around when you taxi your nose past the hold short lines, and never making note of it. Part of the problem is that the FAA is sending out SO MANY STUPID THINGS, it's hard for us to focus on just one!
Feel free, however, to go ahead and write us up as often as you feel it necessary and appropriate. I'm sure that it will bring you mounds of joy and we have special spots in far away places on airports and in the air to park you so you will be able to revel in the moment and truly bask in the warmth! :lol:
-
I have to be honest--at N90 I have NOT been asked or ordered to turn in pilot errors. I have not been briefed on it either. There was a clipboard to turn in pilot read back errors only--nothing more. Read back error reporting ceased after three days as it created too much extra work for all of us due to the great number read back errors.
I have always felt the blame for anything bad that occurred from a read back error NOT caught by a controller is placed all on the controller. Is that right? Maybe. Lately it seems a lot of pilots just don't listen carefully to instructions anymore and they read back anything they want--even incorrect call signs (I'm talking regional and airliner pilots mostly.) Or maybe pilots just read back what they want to hear or what they think they are going to hear.
It's getting to the point where combining transmissions with two control instructions is too much for 7 out 10 pilots.
Another BIG problem is pilots taking transmissions meant for other aircraft. I can enunciate call signs and companies and numerics all I want--it doesn't matter. I can see pilots confusing similar call signs but should I have to say, "XXX2152 use caution ZZZ6789 is on the freq--similar call signs"??? Because that's what it's coming to...
In any case this is not a pilot bashing post--pilots that are willing to help me out (airport and traffic in sight, we're cro-bar equipped today, we can do any speed you want) have traditionally been greater in numbers than the stiffs who don't know the capabilities of their vehicles.
-
...we're cro-bar equipped today...
hehe :)
-
...we're cro-bar equipped today...
I'm a little slow. I don't get it? I've never heard that one before.
On a related note, I've had controllers leave us up high, then give us a late crossing restriction, or a crossing that is outside of the norm, and my reply always is "Nah, we can make it. This thing glides like a Kenmore."
-
I definitely agree that lately we've had more readback errors or omissions by aircarrier/taxi pilots than g/a's.
Let me give you an example, from last night!
(call signs have been changed to protect the guilty)
AAY8848H checks on, and is given 'heading 340 vectors ILS6 descend at pilot's discretion maintain 3000.
AAY8848H: roger 340 down to three.
ME: AAY1120, fly heading 160 vector ILS6, descend and maintain 4000.
AAY1120 roger, 160 down to four.
ME: AAY1120 turn left heading 090 join the localizer.
AAY8848H: roger turn leftheading 090, hey wait that heading wont work!
ME: AAY1120, turn left heading 090 join the loc.
AAY8848H: Ah that heading's no good for us, what's your plan!?
ME: AAY8848H that's not for you, AAY1120, turn left heading 090 join the loc.
AAY8848H: O.K. you want me to turn all the around to the left and join the localizer?
ME: No AAY8848H, I want you to realize that all those transmissions were for AAY1120, your call sign is AAY8848H, his is AAY1120, these are not similar sounding callsigns! You sir need to turn right heading 040 for the intercept!
Both of these a/c were on the same freq. after I switched the heavy to tower, I apologized to the second a/c. His response was "Oh, no problem, I apologize for him!"
-
...we're cro-bar equipped today...
I'm a little slow. I don't get it? I've never heard that one before.
I assume drFinal was making a reference to the same "crow bar" style of flying that the controller uses in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHvr6a2DHOU (at about 1:45)
-
Heh heh, that was pretty good. I thought I've seen/heard all of the funny ATC quotes, but that's a new one to me. I guess thats similiar to the races that I've heard with jump planes (caravan, in particular) racing the jumpers back down to the ground.
-
...we're cro-bar equipped today...
I'm a little slow. I don't get it? I've never heard that one before.
I assume drFinal was making a reference to the same "crow bar" style of flying that the controller uses in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHvr6a2DHOU (at about 1:45)
YES YES!!! Cro-bar, slam dunk, shoe horn--it's all the same!!! Mostly for Lendy arrivals they come down good and we keep them within 10 miles of JFK!! The guy on the youtube is retired now--never thought I'd hear that voice again!! I remember him discussing that with the pilot--I was working next to him.
-
Steep approaches can be fun, but only when we know they're coming. JFK can get the slam dump sometimes from overhead down to the 4s or GPS13s, from my experiences. If you ever have trouble with someone descending, just tell them how long their final is going to be and they'll hurry on down.
CVG and AUS stand out for giving steep approaches consistently. We always laugh when flying into ATL and approach advises "expect short approach." For us, short approach would be just that, very short, maybe within 5 miles. But a "short approach" at ATL is usually a 12 mile final instead of 20. I guess its all relative.
-
If you ever have trouble with someone descending, just tell them how long their final is going to be and they'll hurry on down.
Oh I always butter you guys up--
Whenever anyone asks their sequence I don't care where they are I always say--"Number 1 with a good rate down."
4 out of 5 pilots give it to me. The 5th pilot ends up at the end of the line (but only if I'm not going to screw myself putting him there.) Sometimes a lesson ain't worth the world of hurt it's going to cost.