Pilots reporting speed control

[Asda]

I've just been a bit surprised. In the space of one hour I've witnessed two instances where pilots operating under a speed restriction and having been told to report speed to London on xxx.xx failed to do so. Maybe I'm naive, one attitude might be 'well these things happen' but the problem was in both cases that the speed control applied was being used to provide separation against other a/c. In one case the receiving controller mistakenly perceived a failure to ensure separation and issued avoiding action. My problem is not actually only with these two instances but with all the other times that I've told a/c to report their speeds and they haven't done it. (Sort of explains some of the strained relations between AC and TC that sometimes occur doesn't it). Nonetheless please pilots if you are instructed to report your speed to the next frequency, it's not 'just' a legal requirement, but actually it's important as well, your separation is probably based on it. Please report everything you're asked too.

[HugMonster]

Yes, yes, yes. We've heard it all before.

For heavens' sake stop whingeing about how hard your job is and how hard pilots make your job unnecessarily. Whilst some may simply fail to report speed control through sheer laziness or lack of professionalism, such cases are, in my experience, extremely rare.

Yes, there are some pilots whose R/T is bad. There are some whose R/T is good, and whose airmanship good.

Similarly, there are competent ATCers and appalling ones everywhere.

Most of your job is based around communicating with us. Most of our job is NOT centred around communicating with you. Get used to it.

Our priotities are:-[list=1] Aviate Navigate Communicate[/list=a]So you come bottom of our list of priorities, along with talking to the other pilot, and just above talking to the cabin crew and then passengers. If you happen to catch us at a rather busy time (which descent and approach IS), then we can forget things. So you have to issue extra separation instructions. Whoopee. Better safe than sorry, certainly. And sorry for the extra workload. But it happens.

We're all working to the same aim. We're on the same team. So it doesn't do much good always to point the finger and blame others on your team. Appreciate that we have higher priorities than talking to you.

[Spuds McKenzie]

Hmmmm....

Aviate... doesn't the plane do that?
Navigate... doesn't the Autopilot do that?

However, now I understand why pilots are so well paid. They have a very stressful job, all those buttons and screens, whereas ATCOs only have one screen, a big one though.
ATCOs have many planes to deal with, waterlevel rising dangerously close to nose level, but this is nothing compared to what pilots have to put up with of course...

:D :D :D

[HugMonster]

"Aviate... doesn't the plane do that?" No
"Navigate... doesn't the Autopilot do that?" No

The rest of your post not really worth responding to, except to say "poor you". I suggest you get out a little, take a fam flight or two and find out what really goes on.

[ 15 November 2001: Message edited by: HugMonster ]

[Spuds McKenzie]

The fish are biting well today. :D

BTW, been on a couple of FAMs.
How many times have you been in a Tower or Centre?

[HugMonster]

Only a couple? Hmmmm... that will really give you a good perspective!

How often for me? At least once at every airport I've been based, many airports I've merely visited, and for some units many times.

And since you chose to miss the point I made totally, I was pointing out that we have different priorities than you. It's not wrong, it's just the way things are. I know of no pilot who would either deliberately or carelessly omit a deyail he was asked to pass on to the next unit. But these things get missed. There's no point whingeing about it.

If you're still worried, you should know that, when flying as a line training captain, I and all other line trainers I have flown with keep an ear open to the R/T procedure of the pilot undergoing check. We're not perfect. We make no claim to be perfect. Nor are you. Get used to it.

[DownIn3Green]

Spuds and other ATCr's...

My suggestion would be find out who that (hug)Monster works for and slam his a@@e into the hold at Mayfield until he cries "uncle".

Aviate, Navigate and Communicate is a private pilot acronym used in basic training.

If the monster is truly a "line training capt" he is obvivously heading in the wrong direction.

One of my favorite techniques in the "hold" would be to ask the trainee who was in front, who was behind, and as we were heading round and round ask where was the airport?

[Scott Voigt]

Hug Monster;

Nice way to work with others. Sounds rather professional too about "get used to it."

I hate to say it, but if you hold us at a rather low priority, then you don't care much for your life. Do we both have jobs to do? Yup, sure do. Part of your job is to fly your aircraft. Part of that flying is to listen and "comply" with ATC instructions. The life you save could be your own.

We in the US have been having a very hard time the last couple of years with poor R/T from the pilot side. Wish that I had the reason as to why. But we see pilots NOT listening to the radio and then no using readbacks nor even call signs. This leads to incidents and more workload on both of our parts. I say both because if I don't get a read back, a call sign OR have to call you more than one time then I am going to have to do it again, and now your sequence may not have been what it was. Not stated as any sort of threat either. It just means that in 20 to 30 seconds the traffic picture changes and now what would work, doesn't anymore.

Before you go on, I have been on MANY jumpseats, I also help with the folks who teach jet drivers and also have some of my own jet time. You see, I too have a license to do what you do... It isn't that hard. For more complex and faster aircraft there are two or sometimes three folks up there. There are also systems that help you manage the aircraft. We normally have one or two of us downstairs and no systems to help us manage things. You also go by the procedure of pilot flying and pilot not flying. The person on the radio is the pilot NOT flying at most airlines and corporate shops. So please, when someone trys to point out a problem that we have take it as a professional and see if it applies to your flight deck. If not, wonderful... If it does, take it and learn from it...

regards

[West Coast]

Scott
I have seen it from both sides, as a controller first and as an airline pilot now. I do heed what you and other controllers say, but you really don't know whats going on up there until you are doing the flying. In the JS means little. Systems management is alot of what we do, but don't think it simplifies things terribly much. I find its easier for me to kick off the autopilot and stay ahead of the plane/ATC/wx, etc. Mutual respect is what makes the system work, but lets not forget that you guys are down there because we are up here, not the other way around.

[spekesoftly]

Oh dear. Let's try and find some common ground. The overiding priority for both Pilots and ATCO's is flight safety. This can only be achieved through co-operation and mutual respect from ALL parties involved. I am saddened by some of the arrogant and provocative comments on this thread made by those from either profession.

[gul dukat]

Leave Huggy alone!!! He is a pilot and therefore a member of the master race!!(yeah right)I have scarcley seen such arrogance from someone when a perfectly civilised request was made.Of course pilots are busy but so too are atco's.The oft made comment that we are here because you are there is not to appreciate that the business of moving people and freight around the sky is a TEAM game and realistically if the punters weren't there NONE of us would be required . We have a duty of care to the people who put their faith in the aircrew,engineers,atco's, support staff in fact all involved in getting them from A to B safely and expeditiously .If you are asked to report a speed it is part of that duty of care to comply .Atco's invariably know the big picture Huggys'invariably DON'T so do as you are asked and we will all be able to make the system run as it should for the benefit of the people who ultimately pay our salary!

[Numpo-Nigit]

Slightly off topic I know, but it has been mentioned in a couple of posts above. As far as I understand it, ALL fam flights were stopped in the aftermath of September 11 for obvious reasons. Does anybody know if and when such opportunities will be reopened? Sure, they don't prevent such differences of opinion as those above, but they are better than nothing!!!

[HugMonster]

spekesoftly - thanks for that. At last a rather more rational response.

As I have tried many times to point out, no pilots that I know deliberately fails to follow ATC instructions. We are (frequently painfully) aware that you guys are there to help us. As I have also said, we are not perfect, make no claim to be so, but most pilots take a pride in what they do, and make an effort continuously to improve.

Pointing out that when ATC ask for speed control, or heading, or whatever to be reported to the next sector on 1xx.xx means that we are required to do so is less than helpful.

As I said, and speke softly also says, we are all part of the same team, with the same aim - to get the aircraft to their destinations safely, legally and expeditiously. You have pressure on you which many pilots don't appreciate. We also have different ressures on us, which most ATCOs don't appreciate.

As soon as you start to think your job is getting us down, and that our job is to do what you say, teamwork is lost. That teamwork is also lost as soon as a pilot begins to think in terms of ATCOs being there only to give him the service he requires.

As Flight Safety Officer at my last company, I actively encouraged our pilots to visit ATC at our home base. I'm sorry to say I got a very poor response. I also extended an invitation to ATC to fly JS with us, and the respose was nil.

In my experience there is very little understanding generally between pilots and ATCOs of each others' jobs and pressures. Unfortunately there is not much encouragement to change that. Liaison and understanding will make the jobs of all of us a lot easier.

[j17]

HugMaster

I think you arrogance is unbelievable. I bet you would be the first person to blame ATC if you went through the localiser or you where to high on the G/S because I had to repeat a TX because somebody wasn,t listening.If you are asked to report a restriction etc to the next sector it is to keep you alive not just an ATC whim.I would guarantee that if you where told to report a direct routing to the next sector,that would be the first thing that you would say.Therefore,when you are requested to do something by ATC just do it rather than ignore it.We are all in this together.

[Asda]

Wow, what a response, and not entirely what I had expected. I really was trying to point out to ATC that pilots don't always do what we ask, despite the ramifications of all that may follow. What I don't know is how often this is occuring. Trying to see the wood for the trees, I can see possible reasons why restrictions wouldn't be passed on by a pilot, but from the seat where I'm actually being able to observe the cascading consequences of what may seem a small omission, I also really wanted to stress to a small number of pilots that there will be a reason for the instruction and it could be important. Why gamble that it isn't?

We are all a team and we really do need to have dialogue and this is probably the best method I have at the moment, so I'm sorry if I ruffled a few feathers, but I hope that someone, somewhere, ATC or pilot thinks about this for a moment. This IS teamwork, isn't it?

[HugMonster]

For heavens' sake - how many of you are capable of reading? Not many of those who have replied so far.

How many times have I said above that pilots don't ignore instructions deliberately or "on a whim"? How many times have I said "We're all on the same team"? How can you tell when a pilot is not listening? Because he doesn't respond? There are many other reasons for that other than "not listening".

j17 it really is a bit rich of you to accuse me of arrogance, then go on to say "Therefore,when you are requested to do something by ATC just do it".

No. Shan't. At least, not necessarily. There may be very good reasons for not following ATC requests or instructions that you know nothing about. If we cannot accept instructions, it is obviously necessary that we tell you why. But do not expect us to follow your orders willy-nilly when it is OUR lives at stake, not yours.

j17, your attitude smacks of the hugest arrogance out. Your assumption appears to be that we are there to do your bidding; if something gets missed then the pilot was being lazy or "not listening". Your attitude stinks. Go and modify your attitude, because if you act like that when in front of the screen, you are DANGEROUS.

As I have said many times, we are all on the same team. We make mistakes. You make mistakes. It's human nature. We try not to repeat ours. You do the same. We don't always succeed. Get used to it. And grow up.

[HugMonster]

To reiterate:-[list=1] Pilots don't ignore ATC instructions deliberately There may be very good reasons why any particular communication was missed All pilots with whom I've flown make an effort to improve their performance in all respects We're all on the same team You're not perfect and nor are we Any effort to increase the level of liaison and understanding will help the teamwork, including fam flights, visits to ATC units etc. Anyone who ignores such opportunities is ignoring part of their job[/list=a]Anyone still got a problem with any of that?

[TrafficTraffic]

I for one as an ATC apologise to the many professional aviators and aircrew that scan these forums. I think a great deal of mutual respect exists. (not necessarily btwn Centres ;))The topic of Fam Flights has been raised before but was there was no point as the typical ATC attitude..whats in it for me... (apart from maybe some interest and pride and the chance to better oneself) was evident.

I try and make an effort to visit the flight deck on any flight and have made many friends as well as learned quite alot about the capabilities of the various acft (dont mention the Concorde or you'll upset the LATCC blokes) ;)

Never ever been caught speeding or gone through a red light Hugmonster?????


We are a team...and we do it my way ;)

[Nogbad the Bad]

Asda..........I started this same topic a few months ago, and got exactly the same response from the self-same person.

It may be prudent for people to read up the number of incidents that are caused by wrong readbacks........and yes, we in ATC get blamed for not picking them up !

And might I just add something here......ATC instructions are mandatory, as stated in the Rules of the Air and Air Traffic Control Regulations.

I think the main thing we as ATCers are trying to say is, that any instructions on speed/heading that we ask you to pass to the next frequency are done so to provide an established separation. They are, therefore, VERY important and not done just for the hell of it.

Yes, we are all a team, trying our best to get things done safely......but really, Huggy, if you read your initial post you should be able to see the vehemence in it ? No wonder some in ATC have had their cages rattled !

[ferris]

Can someone enlighten me? Are you blaming pilots for abrogating your responsibilities and doing co-ord? Because that is what it sounds like.

[HugMonster]

Nogbad, I think you are confusing me with someone else. I haven't done a search, however, so perhaps you could point me at the thread you refer to?

Readbacks:-
Once again, mistakes get made. That's why we read things back to you. You check it, and correct it if necessary. Take the second part of that away, and there's not much point in us reading it back, is there? If someone were accidentally to thumb the PTT as you are TXing your instructions to us, partially blocking out one word, and we think we heard FL310 when you said FL210, we read back FL310. You didn't hear the crossed transmission. You don't check the readback. Who is then to blame for the level bust?

Yes, ATC instructions INSIDE CONTROLLED AIRSPACE are mandatory. UNLESS there is a reason why the aircraft is unable to comply, or doesn't hear them, or safety dictates another course of action, or blah blah blah... I say again, we are not there just to do your bidding. If I have rapid decompression and need urgently to descend below FL100 and you tell me to maintain for the next 5 miles, my reply to you will be "NUTS".

I never said, or implied, that ATC instructions are given to us "for the hell of it." Such an idea is total nonsense, and treats professional pilots as if they were children. Similarly, to say "Please report everything you're asked too." That is also treating pilots like children. Can you imagine how that rattles cages? Can you now understand the vehemance of my post?

[Spuds McKenzie]

Hmmmm..., looks like someone's having a tantrum.
What was that about children...?

:D :D

[j17]

Hugmaster

Where was the word "ordered" mentioned in my post, I think a "request" is slightly different to an "order" see Oxford English Dictionary.Do you fly an AWACS? as it would appear that you know where all the 10 -20 acft on my radar screen are, as you are so confident to determine which ATC REQUEST is relevant or not.You may even query the the phrase AVOIDING ACTION as any other REQUEST was not determined relevant by you

[HugMonster]

McKenzie, that's three posts from you on this thread - none of them of any use whatsoever but to titillate your idea of how wonderful and funny you are. Rather sounds like masturbation to me. Now can you come up with anything that helps the discussion or not?

[j17]

Hugmaster

Where do you come from? If you said you had a decompression and wanted an emergency descent, the waves would be parted below you and all acft in the way, who would do as they where REQUESTED would be cleared out of your way.You would not be told to "maintain for the next 5 miles".

[HugMonster]

j17, your last post is a masterpiece of irrelevant idiocies. Where was the word "ordered" mentioned in my post, It wasn't - nor did I use it. You do, though, use "told to" and "requested to" as if they were synonyms.

As for the rest of it, you seem so confident that you know everything that is going on in the sky. I didn't say, nor would I say, that I decide which ATC requests are "relevant" or not. Nor have I ever, nor would I ever query the phrase "AVOIDING ACTION". You don't have the faintest idea about anything going on unless it is squawking or actually transmitted. And that, as people with slightly more imagination and common sense than you (which is, let's face it, not very difficult), will realise is rather a lot.

PS Okay, perhaps decompression was a bad example. How about "right twenty for weather avoidance" instead? You are probably one of the (thankfully) few who immediately assume that this is just a pilot trying to get a sneakily direct routing. You can't see the weather on your radar. We can. So if I'm about to go through the middle of a CB if I follow your instructions, I will ignore your "requests".

[ 15 November 2001: Message edited by: HugMonster ]

[Spuds McKenzie]

Ok, Mr.Monster, here you go:

I could quote your whole initial post, to show the utter arrogance in it, but I can't be bothered. Maybe you read it again yourself.
Anyway, you claim that our main focus is to communicate with pilots. Wrong! This is just the end result of a process, which involves analysing a problem or situation, finding a solution, coordinating with other sectors via intercom or telephone, modifying a flight plan, writing on strips, scanning the radar screen, shaking alternative solutions out of our sleeve, if for some reason a pilot is unable to comply with a clearance (which is fair enough, BTW), either due wx, acft performance or whatever, and then finally, we issue the clearance.
And we do this constantly, often under severe pressure (I don't mean to boast!). Therefore it is of highest importance, that instructions are being followed, not for the sake of it, and not because we think pilots should be treated like children (total bollocks!), but for the sake of safety and expeditiousness. Just remember, ATCOs have the big picture, not because they're wonderful, but because they have the overall view of what else is happening around you.

Asda's initial post was a fair request open for discussion on a reasonable level with a professional attitude. What did he get as a response? As I said, read your initial post again! A decent request deserves a decent response! :mad:

And finally, I'm fully aware that my previous posts on this thread where anything but constructive, but you see, if someone's too arrogant, I tend to take the Mickey out of them.
;)

[ 15 November 2001: Message edited by: Spuds McKenzie ]

[j17]

Hug master
you refer in your post to Mckenzie about masturbation,and we all know it makes you blind.Read the post you sent at 1939 and the word you used was "ordered". Therefore,you are really a w****r

[HugMonster]

Thanks for a much more constructive post, McKenzie.

Naturally, there is a lot more to your job than talking to us. What I was trying to point out is the difference in emphasis of your job and mine. If you have no aircraft to talk to, you don't have much to do. If we're not talking to ATC (outside CAS or out of R/T coverage, for example) we're still doing much the same as we were doing before.

Furhermore, I did not state that giving aircraft instructions is treating them like children. I said that telling them to carry out those instructions is treating them like children.

All I have tried to do throughout this thread is point out the erroneous assumption behind several posts here (and elsewhere in this Forum) that if a pilot fails to comply with ATC instructions he is lazy, or ignorant, or "not listening" or incompetent, that ATC are universally wonderful, know everything about you and what you are doing, know automatically what is in your best interests, and that if a pilot fails to carry out your "requests" he is therefore, without exception, endangering himself, other aircraft around him, has careless regard for your stress level and likelihood of a heart attack.

We make mistakes. (We try not to). We work in what is often a noisy environment, and if we miss a word or two, or an entire transmission, it is not necessarily our fault. You have the luxury of a desk in front of you. Non-sidestick drivers don't. The handling pilot may be the only one listening out at any given stage of the flight. He doesn't normally have a piece of paper in front of him to write instructions down. So sometimes things get forgotten.

My exasperation in the first post (and one or two later ones) results from being fed up to the gills with ATC demonising pilots, and not appreciating that we are as human as you guys are, and with the assumption that it's always the pilots who let the side down.

You will simply have to accept that sometimes we have our heads totally full with trying to keep all our beans in a row, and we can keep four balls successfully juggling. If a fifth gets missed, then it happens occasionally. Tough. Get used to it.

[HugMonster]

1) I did not use the word "ordered". I used the word "orders".
2) If you know any reputable doctor, ask him if masturbation makes you go blind. He will tell you that it doesn't.
3) Even if it did, there are more ways than one of going blind. Diabetes will often do that, for example. Therefore, your logic is totally non-existent. You might as well say point at my red shirt and say "Cars are red - therefore you're wearing a car."

Come back when you're capable of arguing a point rationally.

[le loup garou]

On the issue of jump seat rides. I recently did my base check/IR renewal, and had a guy from LATCC observing. I was given the impression that there is an open ended invitation for others to do the same. I can understand those of you who couldn't be bothered to do this in your spare time but it is more interesting than a two sector normal day.

I for one have a great respect for all you guys/girls as London humbles me every day. I often comment about and get agreement on the fact that we don't know how London and Heathrow ATC manage and are so bl@@dy good at their jobs. This I can only presume would be the same way most of you guys would react given such high traffic loads.

I know that I can be accused of not passing on speeds sometimes in the past and I will say sorry for that now, but I can't promise it won't happen again. The reasons have been pointed out by Huggie. However The point has been noted!

Regards le loup garou

Message edited for spelling and stupidity!

[ 15 November 2001: Message edited by: le loup garou ]

[WonkyVectors]

"Forgive me huggy, for i fail to understand"
the complete and utter vehemence in your initial,and susequent, postings.

The initial post, as i understand, was a reminder/request to pilots that there are times when atc instructions have not been complied with and maybe a little more care/concentration etc is, on occaisions, needed.
The fact that you, as a proffesional pilot, got your @rse in your hand and threw all your toys out of the cot scares me immensly. The reply i expected from pilots was along the lines of Le Loup Garou (my hat off to you Sir) ie- We as pilots understand that mistakes are being made and will endevour to correct them in future.

A pilot that throws a wobbly when errors are pointed to him is a danger to all who fly.
Having recently seen the report of the investigation of an incident i was involved in, i have sat down and accepted the conclusions and improved many aspects of my work so that similar errors do not happen again - The next life that i DON'T end may well be yours Huggy!

The concept of teamwork has been mentioned by others already and surely one of the most important factors in both our jobs is the
Knoweledge of-
Acceptance of-
Understanding of-
EVERYONES errors, and ALL of us endeavouring to eliminate these errors, albeit within the restraints of human abilities.

Now, Huggy, do i get an acceptance of these facts or are you going to kick your tonka toys again?!!

:D :D
Why is it that a Controller can handle multiple aircraft, but Pilots need TWO of them to handle ONE!!!!!!!! :D

[HugMonster]

Vectors, how many times do I have to say it?

Pilots make mistakes. We try not to. We can't guarantee that we won't make mistakes in the future.

Would you care to go back over the thread and count the number of times I've said that? Or the number of times I've said that we are supposed to be on the same team?

You're the first ATCO I've noticed on this thread admitting that ATC are capable of making mistakes.

Otherwise all I've seen is ATCOs accusing pilots of, effectively, being lazy, unco-operative, unprofessional, whatever you want to call it, and deliberately ignoring ATC "requests".

Yes, I'm a pilot. No, gul dukat, that does not make me one of the "master race", as I believe you put it. It does, however, make me the person responsible for the safe conclusion of the flight. If you make a mistake, I may die. If I make a mistake, I may die. And since my life, not yours, is on the line, I will not carry out ATC instructions without thinking about them. The occasions on which I will not follow ATC instructions will be very few indeed, and if I choose not to follow them by deliberate policy on my part, I will tell you so, and I will tell you the reasons why not.

And when I make mistakes, I will apologise for them, and try to file them away for later reference under the heading "Don't Do This Again".

You want more? Tough.

[eyeinthesky]

Well, well, well, what a response to a perfectly normal request!! What a lot of tosh being written by some people. Whilst I might be setting myself up for a barrage from Hug Monster, I rather feel that his initial response was way over the top. Relevant points are:

1) We are all a team
2) We are all busy
3) We are all trying to keep planes apart from each other.

However, as ATCOs we are not psychic, and we do not know what you are supposed to be doing unless you tell us. If a previous controller has put you on a speed control for separation purposes, then it is not something which really should get forgotten. (For the benefit of our colleague from UAE, it is considered coordination if a pilot is requested to report any restrictions to the next controller. Funnily enough, we do not always have time to phone everything through!) To 'forget' it in a busy environment is like 'forgetting' to level off at your cleared level, and has the same impact upon safety. What does worry me though, HM, is that you seem to be suggesting that pilots (of which I am also one) are incapable of remembering an instruction they were given not 30 secs ago. Also, there are TWO of you up there and only ONE of us down here.

Whetever, as a training captain I would hope your attitude on the flight deck towards things that bug you is better than the one you displayed in this thread. Otherwise I wonder how your poor victims (sorry, colleagues) feel about flying with you.

This thread started as a simple reminder that these separation-ensuring instructions are not given for the fun of it, and should perhaps come higher up your list of priorities than they seem to. Seems quite reasonable to me. By the way, our priorities are Separate, Order and Expedite (to paraphrase MATS). Perhaps you understand now why it is such an important issue to us.

Tin hat now going on.

[HugMonster]

eyeinthesky, in general I agree with much of your post.

I hope by now that people understand why my first reply in this thread was so vehement - largely because, as professionals who (almost universally) take a pride in the way they do their work, object to being told things like "You must follow ATC instructions". If, however, I was OTT, I apologise.

A couple of points on your post, eye.

No, forgetting something is not like forgetting to level off at cleared altitude. The vast majority of modern aircraft nowadays have flight directors which will command the level-off at the cleared altitude. This system will fail for a variety of possible reasons - e.g., the altitude was mis-set, or was mis-heard, or QNH or 1013 was not set, etc. etc. In a fairly long aviation career, quite a significant bit of it as Flight Safety Officer for a couple of organisations, I have never heard of a level bust resulting from forgetting to level off.

Next, I have never said that pilots are incapable of remembering an instruction for 30 seconds. I said that pilots (and everyone else) are capable of forgetting something told them 30 seconds ago. There is rather a big difference. And at a busy phase of flight, when you may be slowing down, configuring the aircraft, possibly rebriefing the approach, waiting for the cabin secure signal, talking to handling agents because of a late request for a wheelchair, checking the new ATIS because it's just changed, sometimes we forget things. Yes, there are two of us up there. But quite often only one is listening to you.

Yes, I appreciate that this is an important question for you. I have never said it wasn't, or that it was anything but important to any pilot who takes his job seriously and takes a pride in it.

But, occasionally, sh!t happens. And when it does, it's no good complaining about lazy pilots, or deaf pilots, or talking to them as if they were children who don't understand how hard-working, stressed, heroic ATCOs are working their butts off for a bunch of ingrates who don't appreciate them.

I know how hard you guys work. I've seen it. (I've even tried it - thanks, MAN). I don't know how you do it. But don't for one moment imagine that we sit up there all the time with our feet up waiting for the next cup of coffee saying to ourselves "ATC want what? S*d 'em. I can't be bothered."

As I've said time and again, we're all on the same team. Take the time to appreciate what goes on the other side of the ether. Do you know, I've never once had an ATCO in the jump seat?

[WonkyVectors]

Hug, i'm still at a loss to understand your somewhat venomous posts. Your various replies of "no, shan't, get used to it, tough" indicate either a failure to comprehend the problem at hand or a personal dislike of atc.

Asda's initial post ended "Please report everything you are asked to", this is not treating pilots as children (tho' you wouldn't believe how many times many of us have to!!) but a simple request. You and others have stated that we don't always know what goes on up there and you are right; we don't know what buttons/knobs you're pressing, what you're thinking or your mindset etc. and here's where a little knoweledge can be dangerous: we don't know if a pilot has simply forgotten to follow the instruction, or, thinking the controllers are adjacent to each other, feels he doesn't need to follow the instruction coz the controllers talk to each other and anyway its written on the strip isn't it? Now do you see why Asda's request/reminder was not a dig at pilots abilities (if you want to go down that road just mention slots, that'll get me started!!) but an indication that there may be the root of a dangerous problem which we can all, together, eliminate? From my personal experience the need to give pilots such instructions is growing, as is, for whatever reason, the frequency of omissions by pilots.

Your other point "don't expect us to follow your orders" is also worrying. We HAVE to assume that you will follow atc instructions otherwise no-one would get anywhere. There is a fine line between folowing atc instructions unless absolutely necessary and treating them as requests if and when you've got the time (i've got the 1261 to prove that at least one pilot has done this)- the vitriol in some of you posts tends to show that you'd prefer the latter - however hopefully i have read you wrong and offer my apologies.
Yes pilots do p1ss me on occasion with their apparent incompetence and i have no doubt there are pilots whom i've p1ssed off with mine, but surely we can use this forum to remind, help and educate each other with the aim of improving safety?

Enjoy, and be safe.

:) :) :) :)

[HugMonster]

Vectors, it worries me that your post says that you still have to treat pilots as if they were children. I am concerned about what that says about firstly, your attitude to pilots, and secondly about why you feel this need. There is ample provision through NATS and CAA SRG to reports shortfalls in performance. If increasing numbers of pilots are failing to report headings or speed restrictions or other details when requested, then this is worrying, and should be addressed through the regulatory and safety bodies.

The other aspect of treating pilots that way is that it is using a poor attitude as a weapon. If a pilot were to treat a controller that way, I bet the result would be a little rerouting and extended spell in the hold!

By the way, to whomever it was who asked whether I flew an AWACS - no, I don't, but remember that we have TCAS. We can therefore see everything around us out to twelve miles that's squawking. We can also see when we're being vectored miles out of our way so that a based aircraft can be first on the ILS.

What about slots?

I also said that when I deliberately do not follow ATC instructions, I will tell you, and tell you the reason. Anyone who doesn't do so deserves to be hung up by the toenails, or at least have a helping of tea and biccies with the Fleet Manager.

And finally, your point about apparent incompetence of pilots. Some PPLs (and some, but thankfully fewer CPL/ATPLs) are incompetent. I know of one or two incompetent controllers, as well. Can you imagine the frustration when you're away from the gate, through no fault of your own, significantly late, and are trying as hard as you can to make up the delay, you call "Approaching the hold, ready immediate", then are told "Hold position, landing traffic" and realise that the "landing traffic" is a PA28 at five miles? By no means an uncommon situation.

On the same theme, I appreciate also the frustration a controller experiences when trying to clear a backlog, has negotiated with RDR a gap to squeeze two away and the one in front that said he was "ready immediate" then sits on the threshold for three minutes while he looks for his sunglasses....

But we're none of us perfect. As I've said time and again.

Have any controllers who, like Asda and Vectors, seen an increase in failure to report details as requested, taken it up through normal channels? Yes, this forum is useful, but official it ain't.

[fionan]

I have just read ASDA's initial post again.

It read ( unintentionally I'm sure ) slightly of arrogance and certainly of poor understanding of busy cockpit.I am not saying we are always busy because we are not but for example it is amazing how often CCMs manage to interrupt a radio transmission. We should ask for a repeat but sometimes fail to.

Despite this I think Hmonster is a tad OTT. I don't think it was the slight on our profession his responses suggest. This forum, indeed thread is about greater understanding and this clearly has mutual benefits. We should all be big enough to admit we don't know it all and don't always get it right ( never in my case ).

I don't think this 'us and them' attitude helps anyone and ATC are as guilty as pilots in that area.

P.S. Keep up the good work or my life assurance company will come looking for you!! ;) ;) ;)

[ 17 November 2001: Message edited by: westman ]

[Flick the switch]

Another one for your list Hugmonster
8. when receiving a radar control service, do as you are told.
These instructions are mandatory not optional, and if this upsets you or hurts your ego either...
A)find another job, (perhaps you're not suited to the present one, so much anger in one so young) or
B)get used to it.

[eyeinthesky]

HM: Thanks for your reasoned reply. To go into it further would only be discussing semantics.

Very interesting that you say you've never had an ATCO on the jumpseat. Aside from the smirk at the double entendre, I would suggest that this might have something to do with the difficulty I at least have encountered in getting on board on a fam flight: First I have to get past Jobsworth No.1 at Check-In who insists I, with my stand-by ticket, can't go through until all firm passengers have checked in and there is a seat for me, despite assurances that I will be using the seat behind the newly armoured door. Having negotiated that, I then have to persuade Jobsworth No.2 at the gate to talk to Jobsworth No.3 (Despatcher) to go and talk to the Purser to talk to the Captain to see whether I can come aboard. The Captain knows nothing about me and is quite likely to refuse, or maybe say check again when we're in the cruise. The majority of the value in terms of seeing the preflight briefings and preparation are lost, and it is in danger of becoming no more than a jolly to sunny climes with a good view out of the window. (Nothing wrong with that in itself, but hardly what is intended). If you come to LATCC, you will be met at the gate, escorted round, probably given lunch, and maybe chance to plug in on a sector or even a go in the sim before returning to check whether your car has been torched in the neighbouring housing estate.

But I digress.

I appreciate much of what you say, HM, but having just sat through a morning at LATCC I lost count of the number of times traffic which was coordinated by a neighbouring ACC as on a heading due to slower traffic ahead at or above its present level failed to report the fact on first contact. R/T time was wasted in checking that they were indeed on a heading:"Oh sorry, yes we are" came the reply. It's not a luxury, it is what guarantees your separation and keeps our heart rate down, as we have already agreed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I would suggest that passing FL200+ some 15 mins after departure is not the busiest of flight phases.

And another thing: If you are not RVSM compliant and you are at or above FL290 in UK UIR, PLEASE report it on first contact with EACH new sector while you are at or are cleared to levels above FL280. It is another separation issue.

For the EMB135/145 drivers: You can request above FL280 if you are not compliant and we will try and fit you in if we can. Just let us know ASAP so we can do the necessary coordination. Non-compliance does not necessarily restrict you to FL280 and below, traffic does.

Hope this helps.

[ 17 November 2001: Message edited by: eyeinthesky ]

[Recover]

I have, admittedly, skimmed through this quite long thread, so forgive me if I repeat anything someone else has already said.

To the original point: if pilots are instructed to do something while under radar control then they should comply unless doing so would endanger the aircraft. I can't, for a moment understand any pilot deliberately not flying a speed as instructed, but I know that wasn't the original point. That was telling the next sector your speed.

I think this is not a deliberate ploy and I realise the original post was a 'gentle' reminder. I've often thought we have to tell the next person too much and I wonder how much of that they hear. Could it be the controller didn't hear it?

Although it's not necessarily absolutley correct, due to the niceties etc a typical call could be: "Morning Director, Speedpig 533, flight level 105 descending flight level 80, radar heading 280, speed 280, Airbus 320, information Golf."

This is quite a common mouthful to have to spit out and I'm sure it's obvious why some things might get left out. Equally the over-worked director might only hear the bits he really needs to hear (who and where they're going) so the speed might get 'missed'.

You guys and girls do a great job and we certainly don't try to make it harder. Most of us are pretty normal humans and screw things up, such as radio calls, like the best of them but I still reckon the Brits are the best in the World...both sides of the 'scope ;)

That should get the Shermans going...... :)

And.....

Recover

PS: what's the name of the really nice LGW Director who sounds like the 'Suit you' blokes off the Fast Show? "Good day, Sir....oohhh"....makes me laugh every time

[Warped Factor]

Recover,

Not really adding to the debate, but it might interest you to know that when you say...

Although it's not necessarily absolutley correct, due to the niceties etc a typical call could be: "Morning Director, Speedpig 533, flight level 105 descending flight level 80, radar heading 280, speed 280, Airbus 320, information Golf."

The approach director does the following....

1) locates your flight strip
2) scores out levels 120 and 110 as having been passed,
3) circles reported cleared level,
4) writes down reported heading,
5) writes down reported speed, or maybe uses a "+" to indicate a high speed,
6) ticks aircraft type, or changes it if different,
7)notes atis information received on strip and informs if a more up to date one available.

All the information is relevant, though some parts arguably more than others, and should all be copied onto the flight strip as you're speaking.

But if you had failed to mention cleared level, aircraft type and information received we'd have to ask.

And, relevant to this debate, if you were on a heading from the previous sector but not mentioned it, well ideally we do really like to know.

It's just unfortunate that not all transfers between the far apart area sectors can be as short and straightforward as those between the cosily sat together approach directors like myself.....

"report your callsign only to..."

Maybe one day though, when we're up and running with Mode S and datalinks.

WF.

[HugMonster]

"Speedpig"??? Love it! When I start my own outfit I'm gonna ask for that as a callsign! :)

[brockenspectre]

As a non-ATC non commercial pilot may I just say one thing. In the past whether flying for business or pleasure it was my habit to ask to visit the flightdeck. It has been my privilege to do so on many occasions with many scheduled carriers and, as I have mentioned elsewhere before, been invited to come back/stay for landings almost everywhere I have flown. There was, however, one incident that bothered me. Not on a Brit carrier. I was returning with my mother from a vacation in Cyprus a few years ago. I had asked and been invited to the flightdeck and asked back for the landing. The aircraft had made initial contact with UK ATC and was given a heading and height to be at by. The captain was an older man, very profession, the co-pilot a younger "demi-god" wearing a gold chain (truly!!). The "demi-god" was responsible for the sector. He set the heading incorrectly, and set the height incorrectly. The captain was reading the airport layout manual to check runways as it was a while since he had flown into UK. The aircraft flew on...and then, having hesitated to interfere I asked "Captain, so how much discretion does an aircraft have to set its own heading/height - is it a matter of degrees either side?". The Captain exclaimed "of course not", looked at the instruments, spoke very intensely in his own language to the co-pilot who made the appropriate adjustments....no-one spoke to ATC and the flight continued.

Having learned to fly in SE England and living in I am extremely aware of how busy this airspace is ... the thought that an airliner could have continued on its merry way on an incorrect course/height was quite enlightening!

I suppose my question/comment is. Everyone is human but...if I hadn't made my (possibly smart-ass) comment, if the Captain hadn't noted the correct data, at what point would ATC have noticed the course deviation? also, at the point the Captain realised the aircraft was on an incorrect heading, should he/co-pilot have contacted ATC to advise of error?

:cool:

[Big Nose1]

:confused: Hug Monster, please,please tell us all which airline you are a training captain for.

Then we can all avoid flying with you. A more ignorant and unprofessional attitude from an alleged pilot i have never seen on PPrune.

[bookworm]

Maybe one day though, when we're up and running with Mode S and datalinks.


Come on, Warped Factor. You don't need datalinks and Mode S to get information from controller to controller. To transfer information between sector controller, often in the same room, you currently seem to rely on verbal transmission over a VHF comms link using the already overloaded customer as an agent. It shouldn't be beyond the scope of an A-level IT project to arrange the necessary networking and software to keep a few dozen controllers on the same page.

At the same time you are expecting each of your customers to spend tens of thousands of pounds equipping with Mode S. Perhaps NATS could save a bit on Cat 5 cabling by using up some Mode S extended squitter bandwidth and bouncing your email off your customers' equipment too? :)

[le loup garou]

brockenspectre,

As far as your first question, I cannot answer this as I am not an ATCO.

The second I can hopefully. If I ever find out that we are on an incorrect heading/course than that given I will always advise ATC of the cock up. Aswell as this I find it incredible that the Captain of this aircraft you were on didn't look up and confirm the change in altitude. I can only speak for myself and my airline but the SOPS ensure that there is always audible confirmation of altitude changes even if someone has been away talking to handling/getting weather etc.

Regards le loup garou

[HugMonster]

loup, agreed.

Once I noticed that the FO with whom I was flying was not actually looking up at the FMCU when I (handling pilot) selected an altitude and called it. He was simply responding "Seen" without checking it.

On the next change (cleared in the descent FL100) I deliberately mis-set FL110 and called "FL100 set". He responded "Seen". He didn't even notice when, a few seconds later, I reset it to the correct figure.

This concerned me so much I had a word with a couple of senior pilots. One of the main reasons there are two of us up there is so that there is ample cross-checking of each others' actions. If one pilot is not going to do that, then the situation becomes dangerous. I rely on my FO to sort me out when I make a cock-up. Similarly, I'll look after him.

Mistakes do get made - and often. Read any decent book on Human Factors to find out the many reasons why. You can't stop them, but trapping those mistakes is, frequently, a very complex science. But one of the best starting points is each member of the team being conscientious in maintaining an understanding of what all the other team members is supposed to be doing.

On eother reason why I was rather vehement in my initial response to this thread is the element in Asda's post of asking people not to make mistakes. If I could stop making mistakes, believe me, I would!

[WonkyVectors]

Hug, I do believe that neither pilots nor controllers make mistakes on purpose, and that with us all being human they will happen. I also believe that without complete knoweledge of what each other is doing then neither of us know why such "mistakes" occur, and that, I hope, was the basis for this current thread.
Please don't think that there is always a them and us attitude when it comes to problems such as these. I and many of my colleagues have great respect for those of you who sit up front. Now, before this has any chance of turning into a love-in, got any more subjects we can have a good row about??!!! :D :D :D :p

[eyeinthesky]

Brokenspectre: We would notice it as soon as the track did not do what we expected based upon the instructions we have given. If it is a heading then it might not be critical, but a wrongly set altitude/flight level might only become apparent as a level bust or a level off higher or lower than expected. Only this morning I sent an A319 direct to a point which should have taken him left and he turned right by some 25 degrees. Not a problem in itself, except that 6 miles behind him was another A319 of his own company who I had sent off to another point to the right and derestricted the speed control once he was on track. When they closed to within 5 miles (still with vertical separation) I queried where the first one was going. A slight pause and "Err,.. the point you sent us to was not on our route so we weren't sure" Well why did you allow the aircraft to come off the radar heading direct to some other point? As has been said many times: if you're not sure, ASK AT THE TIME!

With regard to your second question, I would hope that the Captain/PNF would query any misunderstanding like that. How could the Captain be certain that he and not the FO was correct?

Bookworm: What do you think close on £1bn has been spent on down at Swanwick? Why, electronic coordination to reduce the amount of verbal communication that has to go on. Take a read through the pages of this Bulletin Board to see how successful that has been!! Come to think of it, an A level IT student might have made a better job of it than our 'experts' have done! :rolleyes:

[ 18 November 2001: Message edited by: eyeinthesky ]

[Scott Voigt]

Huggy;

If you think that TCAS shows you everyting out there, please think again. TCAS is programed to NOT show you everything that it deems is not a threat due to overloading. It also has problems in seeing all targets out there due to antenna location...

regards

[le loup garou]

S Voigt NATCA safety,

Be fair on Huggie I think you will find that he didn't say we could see everything out there. He did say that out to twelve miles whatever is squaking he will see, Which is not too unreasonable thing to presume as the surveillance volume of the TCAS system scans range of approximately 40 nm and 9000 feet above and below the aircraft.

As far as the overloading issue, with which I agree by the way. TCAS 2 can track as many as 45 aircraft, display up to 30 of them and can coordinate a resolution advisory for up to 3 intruders at once. Which gives me a pretty good view of the situation that I am in.

Regards le loup garou

[ 18 November 2001: Message edited by: le loup garou ]

[HugMonster]

Eye - with regard to PNF querying any setting, clearance, etc. - My last company had what I reckoned was an excellent policy which dictated that, when either pilot was unsure ("Was that heading 220 or 200?") the PNF immediately queried it with ATC. Too often a junior FO will not feel able to do so with a Captain of the crusty variety ("I darned well TOLD you it was 220, you young whippersnapper, but you didn't believe me") so such a policy takes the possible argument out of the equation.

And Vectors:-
Your very nice Guild Chairman invited me to speak at the last conference. He had hoped that I would upset as many people as I did at the NCL ShAirSpace Forum. Unfortunately I failed to live up to his expectations. ;) Sorry Richard! :(

I have no particular problem with the concept of upsetting people if it gets topics out and aired, and a "free and frank" exchange of views going! :D

[le loup garou]

Huggie,

May I suggest that if an FO of any variety whether junior or not, felt like he could not question a Captain(whether crusty or not) he/she should not be in the seat.

Safety should come over the thought of hurting someones feelings, as I know that you are aware.

Regards le loup garou

[HugMonster]

That is an argument that has some merit. However, over-timid FOs to exist. Even if he is not afraid to ask the question, an overbearing captain is quite capable of making life hell if he feels his authority is being questioned. So, such a policy eliminates the possibility. Another possibility is a strong FO, who has had enough. ("OK, you stupid old Bu88er - you steer that course - I'll sit back and watch while you get into trouble and learn your lesson").

Flight Safety is a question largely of plugging the holes in a series of slices of Swiss cheese - if you've heard of that metaphor before. This plugs one hole, even where a corresponding adjacent hole should not be allowed to exist.

[fionan]

To those crews relying on TCAS be aware it is completely unreliable in azimuth!! It may give a return from an a/c you hear over the r/t but it will not display its position accurately.

Incidently HG if you deliberately mis-set an altitude/heading on me to check whether I was cross-checking you and I didn't...who would cross-check you to check you had correctly reset. You would be guilty of the failure you claim to be checking for. ;) ;) ;)

[divingduck]

Gentlemen,
nice to see that the vitriol has now died down, and some thoughtful responses are now being offered.
I agree with both sides of the arguement, neither one of us is perfect and we both need the other to do our job properly. Teamwork...
I can't remember who mentioned earlier about not having heard of an incident being due to someone busting a level?
My immediate thought was northern India about 3 years ago...Saudi and a Russian. The Russian busted his level and collided with the Saudi.
TCAS could have saved the day...but if I remember correctly, the other aircraft wasn't squawking, so the Saudi had no warning of it. I may be mistaken, but I think you get the idea.
In this part of the world, it seems very regular that some airlines(?) refuse to turn their transponder on until required to do so.
Sad but true I'm afraid.
I had an aircraft rightly screaming at me about a 100m near miss that he had over the Indian Ocean, not in my airspace I hasten to add...that one didn't have his transponder on either! The first he noticed was a very big blue and white Russian in his window!
BTW, I'm not sure of the system that you guys have in the UK, but here we can "tag" a primary return with a label...the only thing it doesn't give out is a height readout, so for the pilots out there, you may not see it on the TCAS as it doesn't have a transponder, but it could well be out there.

[le loup garou]

westman,

I don't think that I made my last post very clear. I don't believe that crews do use TCAS as their sole reference to the aircraft around them, but it is a useful tool to aid in situational awareness. The others of which I know that you are aware obviously come from our friends in ATC, other aircraft transmissions, continual reference to MSA'S etc.

After reading back my post I can see how you may have presumed this of me.

Regards le loup garou ;)

[5milesbaby]

Following an exchange on the RTf just recently, I wouldn't rely at all on TCAS to show you the picture. Some versions don't display non-threatening aircraft, which can be as little as 1000ft above, MINIMUM separation!!! The a/c in question is commonly used on commuter routes in England/Europe, and the pilot actually asked for the level/type of the opposite direction flight to check his TCAS, and then said it could be faulty as it wasn't displayed. Another pilot on freq. then jumped in to say theirs was the same (diff type a/c) and explained the limiting extent of TCAS, much to my own personal shock. :eek: :eek:

[West Coast]

TCAS may have its problems, but I never want to fly without it, especially going into Southern California with all its VFR traffic.
I know as a prior controller that the primary job is to seperate IFR aircraft and that VFR traffic is called on a traffic permitting basis. This uncalled traffic is where I find TCAS to be worth its weight in gold.