who exactly is in control?

[beamwidth]

so anyway, there i was in my ivory tower, with the easterly runway active, when a pilot, arriving from the east, requested a straight in for the westerly runway. this was politely denied, due traffic. after landing, the said pilot demanded to know, in quite an irate manner, when the last arrival and departure had been. after a minute doing his sums... (i could tell, his tongue was out the side of his mouth!!) he demanded to know why his requst hadn't been acceded to, as he had the global picture and it would have worked!( it wouldn't have, by the way), but, i decided that i had too much decorum to tell him to p**s off on the freq. but did give him the finger, when his back was turned ;)

it occured to me that this sort of thing keeps happening... why are we not no.1, why must we slow down, why must we stop climb/descent,we know better, etc. bit of a persecution complex thing in general
personally i do these things just to annoy air crew!..air safety coming second, ha ha!, but i still think that radar, and the overall picture is just a bit better than the view of a few (not all)grumpy bast**ds stuck in their tin pots! it only takes one to get you going

is this just an irish thing, or has it spread further?please tell me i'm not paranoid, or neurotic. has anyone else had similar experiences?

[250 kts]

If you're talking about a certain EI registered airline which goes to places no ones heard of then -YES it is happening more and more.

[Onan the Clumsy]

If it's any help, I'll occaisionally ask for a downwind runway, or to do a 180 on the runway, and the tower usually says yes. If they say they can't then It wouldn't occur to me to argue.

[flower]

It happens all the time, with everything we do now. However it isn't necessarily the crews fault its the company pushing and pushing them.

I am fed up of having to justify my actions to crews when all im trying to do is set up the safest most expeditious pattern of traffic I can.

yes they have TCAS but they dont see what i see , they dont have the info that I have on what is also planned to happen , so please let me carry on trying to do the best I can.

Ask if you must but if you are refused accept it, we have often already asked for you before you have even come on frequency we think that far ahead.

[Scott Voigt]

We see it here all the time...

Scott

[beamwidth]

thats good, thought that i'd lost the plot there for a while..
dont mean to go off on one, but we all try to facilitate as best we can; its when your professionalism and/or ability is being called into question that i take offence. all us guys and galls have pride in the service we provide; and when some driver thinks that we've given a bad vector, level, etc, they should engage the brain before bitching. theres more than you out there in the wide prairie that is air traffic.
by the way 250kts, it was the other airline based here, and , in my experience, its more prevalent in them, than the boys/girls with the harp on the tail.

[MATZ]

Glad I am Military:

Instructions to Military pilots with in the MATZ are compulsory..

Here endeth the lesson......;)

[VectorLine]

while it is moan time...........

Bloody BEE inbound LFPG via SFD M605 - I vectored to give Pris a nice gap and the pilot demanded explanation for the "big heading changes"!

Wish I had the nuts to tell him on RT to wind his neck in!

rant over

VL

[ferris]

Yesterday an inbound to Dubai was stopped off at FL280. He wanted to know where the traffic was. "5 miles in your 8 o' clock crossing left to right, a B777". Pilot shocked, "He's not painting on the TCAS!! Oh, there he is". A lot of guys seem to have an unhealthy reliance on TCAS these days. It's become a traffic manager as well, now.

Lucky I don't take any crap:p

[Timothy]

Don't get me wrong, I have enormous respect for ATCers, and know first hand that you are nearly all totally dedicated people doing your very best for safety (first) and then expedition.

HOWEVER, if you all pat yourselves and each other on the back and decide that there is no such thing as a lazy or bloody-minded ATCO, nor one who wants to be helpful but is not allowed to because of bloody-minded management, then you are doing your industry a dis-service.

I will cite two examples, both, I hope, non-contentious, but making the point that the best service is sometimes withheld. In order to make them non-contentious I have made both management led.

1) In the period after LARS was withdrawn from Luton, controllers were instructed to refuse service to anyone in the FIR on principle to "make the point" that they no longer offered ATSORA. I certainly flew there at times when for twenty minutes not one single call was made on 129.55, but I was not offered any assistance on filthy days. I don't blame the ATCO - he was only obeying orders - but he had the capacity to be helpful, and wasn't.

2) Crossing the LGW ATZ. I can't remember the details, but there are fixed regulations preventing fixed wing aircraft transitting within the LGW ATZ, meaning that crossings have to be at the OMs, making crossings very difficult, even when traffic is light. Again, service has to be refused for what are not safety or expeditiousness reasons.

Now I am not going to raise examples of individual ATCOs who would not allow activities such as that mentioned at the top of the thread because they cannot be bothered to work out if such a landing would be feasible, because it would cause rancour, and I certainly don't want to do that.

You, on this forum, are demonstrating the fact that you are sufficiently motivated by your jobs to spend extra time here discussing matters of mutual interest and helping pilots understand their worlds a bit better. I am sure that you, every one of you, would give the very, very best service whenever, wherever and to whomsoever you could.

And that's probably true of 95% of ATCOs.

But please don't think that the other 5% don't exist.

And please don't think that those 5% don't cause some pilots to question the altruism and fairness of many ATC refusals.

W

[bookworm]

Bloody BEE inbound LFPG via SFD M605 - I vectored to give Pris a nice gap and the pilot demanded explanation for the "big heading changes"!

You can't capture a tone of voice even on PPrune, so I don't know what went on that occasion. But a pilot asking for the reason behind vectors shouldn't be a cause for aggravation -- it's an operationally significant piece of information. Sometimes, for example, vectors can interact with a nasty way with the weather. There may be options that are more suitable than your first plan. If you share the plan you'll get much more buy-in from pilots.

That doesn't mean, of course, that there is any time for argument or complaint on the RT. But questions are sometimes essential.

[ferris]

I think the last 2 posts are missing the thrust of the thread.

Maybe I'm getting old, but questioning of instructions seems to be becoming the norm. The instructions that are questioned, and the ones we are talking about, are delaying instructions. Sure, sometimes we forget someone, or something, and a reminder doesn't hurt, but this 'questioning' is not about that. It is clearly about pilots seeming to think they will be delayed less if they nag and bitch and moan.

Please don't try and tell us it's not that. We listen day in and day out. You sort of get a feel for those airlines that are worst. Previously, it just wouldn't happen. Maybe commercial pressure is just out of control.

[ZRH]

I had a Swiss A330 inbound to ZRH from the south the other day and I only had 3 aircraft on freq flying toward the holding fix to the west of the field. This tfc has to be sequenced with tfc approaching from the west and southwest which is another sector. So I have to space my tfc in with the tfc from the other sector which are not on my freq. It sounds quiet and when I see that this guy has passed the speed-limit-point and is still shunting, I politely tell him to reduce.
Comes the reply "Where is the traffic" Now if there is no tfc, then I tell the inbounds that there are no ATC speed restrictions and he can happily shunt along.
It seems that folks behave the worst when they're on their home turf.
Sure you appreciate a reminder every now and then, and sure there are ATC's that are downright useless.

It also helps to tell pilots how long they're gonna kept on hdg when they're given vectors. Then there are very few comebacks.

[almost professional]

I think that TCAS has been the main reason for the increase in pilots querying instructions, it has at times been a real bugbear with our unit-where is the NO1, what is our number in traffic etc
I get great pleasure in pointing out non transponding aircraft manouvering close to the zone boundary to make the point-also before I clear you for a visual approach number two you need to SEE the aircraft concerned not have it on TCAS!:rolleyes:

[VectorLine]

bookworm

you're absolutely right. Pilots requesting clarification is fine - encouraged even!

You are also right about being unable to convey the tone of voice on a BB.

I realise my post could have been better written. The pilot I speak of did use a rather accusational tone with me. In fact, when I later removed the speed restriction I had imposed for the streaming, he replied with words to the effect of;

'What's the point in me speeding up now and wasting more fuel than you've just cost me with your vectors'

Not his exact words, but close.

Anyway - I think it was probably because he's not used to such vectoring. Every day I use big doglegs and speed control to stream traffic (mostly RYR and EZY) for SS and GW on LOREL2Q. Not once has a pilot complained - I think because they realise that being in a nice single file from as far back as MAY means less chance of going round and round at LOREL.

Another reason to encourage pilot visits to our ATSUs!

[yaffs]

Beamwidth

you not paranoid!!

it happens all the time - not the majority of crew though - just a small select few -

and in my experience - its not limited to any particular airline - it seems to be across the board!!!

personnally i dont have a problem with crew genuinely querying my actions - after all we all make mistakes and it could save one

- but i do have a problem with the " tone" sometimes employed!!

though - i do try to be generous - and think well the guys prob'ly having a really bad day, the wifes just given him a huge credit card bill, daughters come home with her face pierced, sons crashed the car, dog has crapped in the lounge then he has to come into work............!!!! so who better to take it out on than the poor atco!! hahahhaha

yaffs

[250 kts]

On this occasion my apologies to the airline with harps on.

[055166k]

Never had any trouble with the Harps, they're very good to work with; and second only to the Shamrocks, who rate No 1 with me for professionalism....at least on the west sectors at London. In 12 flying hours one pilot may do one leg from halfway across the planet......another might do 12 one-hour flights in the dense melting pot of European airspace.....draw your own conclusion!

[need to know]

Hey beamwidth and drivers. I havent posted in a while but was awoken by this post. Why do the drivers question so many instructions. I don't question why you request descent and 20 miles later I'm still loooking at the same mode c. We all have a job to do. If I refuse you a request or reduce your speed or give you a vector I'm not doing it for a laugh. I'M DOING IT FOR A REASON. Sorry if it doesn't "suit you" but thats life. I recently had a pilot who bitched about being sent to the hold to facilitate an aircraft with a situation. Oh how I laughed to see the harp flying round in circles. I obviously invented the situation for a laugh.........


Lets help each other.

We are all on the same team.

As my old priest used to say, " if we all pull together we will all come together".

I know it's not quite the same but I know what he meant.......

[tobzalp]

Yes. With respect to querying sequencing instructions. I am yet to get challenged when I tell an aircraft "for sequencing (insert track shortening/go fast/speed restriction lifting/long runway closer to their terminal change etc)". If anything I mostly get the word thanks on the end. Now if it is "for sequencing (insert turn/slow down/hold)" there has been many an occasion where a challenge comes from the aircraft. My point being that the actual thing taking place is exactly the same ie: sequencing. I can assure you that stuffing an aircraft around on purpose is not part of the game.




Jerricho is probably the only person i know who stuffs aircraft around and that is not on purpose but due lack of talent:ok: :cool: := :E :8

[Jerricho]

The evil twin speaks with forked tongue....................

It TAKES talent to really stuff things up that bad!!!!!
(Just ask P7, the second best controller in the world!!!)

[roger]

MATZ, check out......... Radar Control Service.

Here endeth the reply.........;)

Just to reinforce 'need to know'

"why did you make us no. 2, we were on the freq. first and we're a quarter of a mile ahead?"

Please read 'need to knows'' reply

[Jerricho]

Actually, this brings up an intersting point.

Occasions occur where for us to get he optimal wake vortex order on final, a/c are sometimes taken off the stack from above the guy who got there first (eg, a F50 ahead of a 757). I have never had a snakey retort from a driver when telling them why the guy above them is coming off first.

[controller friendly]

Thought it was about time i replied to this as i felt that this thread could almost have been written for me.....;)

Anyway last week i'm sitting trying to do my best when a pilot informs me that he is going to mor my radar vectoring.......WHAT... I do sometimes wonder where some of these guys get off and who the hell they think they are..... Do i tell them how to fly.... do i give marks outta 10 for landings.......I do think there are certain comments made to controllers at regional airports that just would not be said in the london tma and i also think there is a hell of alot of sexism still in this industry......!!!!!
This particular aircraft was given 3 heading changes and that included the closing heading but all he was interested in was the fact that i made an aircraft behind him number 1 so he threw a strop.....did he know the radar picture,has he visited the tower, i doubt it. I really wish the CAA would hurry up and give permission for formation landings for commercial aircraft, it would certainly make my life a wee bit easier:p

Rant over.....:cool:

[JustaFew]

Getting the same problem with a certain 'gentleman' on the flight deck of an orange B737.I made him no.2 once to a training jet, simply because it was the blindingly obvious sequence, but to reverse the order would have delayed the training jet by ten mininutes and wouldn't have reduced the track distance the orange B737 had to fly. The comment passed by the 'professional' captain was, 'How many passengers does HE have?'. This is just one of several comments he has made to ATC.

In 3 decades of ATC I haven't heard any ATCO tell a pilot how to fly the airplane, when and by how much to lower their flaps, what power setting etc. etc. etc..

This isn't a dig at pilots; they or their company pay my wages. The attitude a tiny minority have does need leaving at home, or the supermarket check-out queue. Don't recall people comparing trolley sizes there to sort out an order...:ooh:

[PPRuNe Radar]

Advise the pilot that a copy of the RT tape will be made and sent to his Director of Flight Operations ...... and then do it :)

[EuroATC]

Well first off, ATC is based on a first come first serve basis. All a/c whether they are training jets or B747 pay user fees so they are both entitlted to the same level of service.

Talking about pilots not following instructions... I work in Bahrain and last week had a B777 out of Dubai (guess which airline..?? :).. When the aircraft enters our airspace, they fly about 55 minutes before entering Jeddah's airspace. We have to provide 10 minutes separation at the same speed. There was another aircraft in front of him flying at .81. On pilots estimates, the B777 was 9 minutes behind. On initial contact, the controller told the pilot he had to lose a minute and to fly at .81. (pilot had 55 minutes to adjust his speed to lose the minute!) It was obvious from first call he did not like this but that was the end of it..so it seemed. Then about 20 mins later, he comes on my frequency and starts asking who is in front and what speed they are flying at. I told him, he's flying at .81.. this is why you have the time restriction. He comes back and says.. he can't make that time, so I offered a radar vector to lose the 1 minute. NO answer from him. Then it became an arguement, "we are flying at minimum speed".. "do you realize this is a boeing 777".. I once again explained that these were the rules and that I had to provide 10 minutes. He did not want to make this restriction! SO what to do? I kept pushing him until he reduced his speed.. but next time I will just file a report in the hopes that someone like this gets seriously reprimanded by his company. He was not going to comply with an ATC clearance. I offered him the vector, I offered him a lower level with no restriction... he did everything short of asking the guy in front to change levels. Then to top it all off, about 5 minutes after I switched him to Jeddah, he comes back on the frequency and tells me, Jeddah cancelled our speed restriction... "I said that's great!,... I still have rules here and I still have to apply 10 min sep.. if Jeddah wants to remove it, that's his choice"...

I was appaled by his behavior, especially from this particular airline. I don't take pleasure out of reducing a/c speeds or turning airlplanes all over the sky for no reason. I do my job to the best of my abilities and I feel that it is sometimes not appreciated from the other side.

[Timothy]

May I ask a question about all this? When is it OK to "nudge" for a better routing and when isn't it.

Take the example of Biggin 21 DEP for SFD or A34. There are two routings, both pretty awful in a slow aircraft. Firstly there is a noise turn through 240deg (frustrating but understandable) then out to DET, followed by a choice of MAY, SFD or LYD, Drake. If you take DET MAY there is a 130deg turn at DET. If you go to Lyd it's a long way round.

Now the question is, as I trundle out towards DET, when, if ever, would it be acceptable to ask if direct MAY or SFD is available? Do you want me to trust you to give the direct, unprompted? Or does it help you help me if I give you a nudge? Certainly nudging often produces results, which implies that you are not always working to the limit of what's possible, but I don't want to cause offence or increase your workload unnecessarily.

W

[information_alpha]

I think that every controller has had the situation where a pilot has queried an instruction on the r/t. As far as I am concered, if the pilot feels that the instruction may affect safety - ie he might fly into bad weather, I do not have a problem. However, pilots arguing and getting shirty on the r/t because they feel they have been hard done by is not on. The best thing to do is for the pilot to telephone ATC on landing. We can then spend time explaining our actions and the reasons behind them. The pilot can also then put his point of view (they can sometimes have a point!). This is much the more professional way to play things and can be a learning experience for both controllers and pilots.

[Point Seven]

WCollins

If you're out aviating and you think a nudge could help you out and it's quiet the go for it. Us ATCers don't always go for expedition because that may not suit you. you could be on a training flight and what you're flying is just what the trainee needs.

What I think is being discussed here, is airline pilots complaining because they don't like the sequence or the heading changes, when flying into the big hubs. Here, expedition IS a premium and just cos TCAS shows one thing, our radars show a different picture.

P7

[av8boy]

I seem to be apologizing for this all the time but, sorry about the length... :)

I once again explained that these were the rules and that I had to provide 10 minutes. He did not want to make this restriction! SO what to do?
Perhaps suggest that there may come a moment in the relationship (say, 20 or 30 minutes from now), when this inability to make an arguably minor adjustment will necessitate a 360 degree turn for spacing just short of the airspace boundary? Hell, I don't know...

But my real reason for calling... a rant:

I'm in my third decade of this profession, and I've worked in some of the busiest towers and TRACONS in the US. Yes, I've witnessed the increase in this type of behavior. However, in my heart I wonder if we didn't play a small part in creating this monster.

I have seen controllers with loads of talent and controllers who, although not endowed with the any particular visionary gifts, provide safe, expeditious service at all times. The difference is not THAT important, because ATC, in general, does a pretty good job of weeding out those who simply cannot safely do the job.

So, what am I going on about? Giving a damn. Service. Doing something that you have the discretion to do (but are not required to do) when it can make life easier for the customer. Simply TRYING. That's what. After all these years it strikes me as forcefully as the first time I saw it... I am talking about a situation where:


A controller recognizes that there is a specific thing he or she could do with this particular aircraft that would provide the pilot with better service
The action is safe, expeditious (for the controller, the aircraft, and the rest of the ATC system), and legal
The ability to take the action resides within the controller's skill set
The controller is not busy at all, but
Whether the request is being made by a pilot, a suggestion is being made by another controller, or whether the controller him/herself sees that he/she might be able to provide better service, the controller simply cannot be bothered to provide this service. Although the situation is always safe and legal, no effort beyond the bare minimum is made by the controller.


Sometimes I could just puke. I'm certainly jaded in my old age, but I find myself, from time to time, saying to another controller, "OH-COME-ON! You could have easily done xxxx or zzzz and that guy would have been able to yyyy because of it!" The answer: "I'm not required to do that." Listen, I KNOW YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO DO THAT. That's why I said it like I did. But why NOT do it? Lots of reasons... tired, taking advantage of a lull to let the old brain reset a bit, uncertain about the ability of the next sector to cope, etc. That's fine. But if this is a product of your laziness or anger, you're doing more harm to the system than you are good to yourself.

Now, has this caused the surge in the kind of problems we've been discussing here? Caused? No. I promise you it has not. However, it has not helped. Self-righteous controllers, smug controllers, angry controllers, anal-retentive controllers, holier-than-thou-controllers, controlling controllers--you are making life harder for all of us. Problem is, you don't care enough about what you do to participate in a forum like this one, so I'm preaching to the choir. Look, pilots may not be as intelligent or good looking as controllers :O , but they do have an uncanny ability to recognize inefficient use of the airspace from time to time, and their ex-wives and ex-husbands have sensitized them to recognizing the unspoken "bite me" buried within other phrases. Guess what? The angry or lazy controller SOUNDS like an angry or lazy controller on the frequency. Pilots are alienated. The safety partnership is gone. Pilots begin to second guess all controllers. (and yes, I've over extended this. I know).

Don't misunderstand me. ATC ranks are not swelling with angry and lazy controllers. But again, that is part of my point... the few who act this way make it tougher on the rest of us. END of rant.

Closer to the point I was supposed to be sticking to: sometimes (usually after a pint or two) it occurs to me that dealing with aircrews demands a pure heart as much as it demands ATC talent. When I know that I've done what was expected of me, and then added even a little more value to that, I find that I don't get angry when I'm questioned by a pilot about my control instructions (However, during those "ident to acknowledge" constantly keyed periods the last thing I want to hear when I stop to take a breath is "why?", so don't assume I'm a Pollyanna. I said I don't get angry--I DIDN'T say I thought it was acceptable...). To the extent I can, I try to provide more than the minimal (required) information along with the instruction in the first place (..."fly heading 230 for sequence to the airport. Looks like it'll be about 8 miles or so before I can turn you back...". If there's a question and I have time, I answer it. If it goes farther than that, I've got a mantra: "Sir, if you want to discuss this further there is a supervisor available here 24 hours per day. My initials are 'xx.' Make a note of the time so they can pull the tapes, and let me know when you're ready to copy the phone number."

What's more, I think a threat from an aircrew to file a report is anything BUT a threat to me personally. I mean, what's the down side? I try hard to provide excellent/additional service. To the extent I cannot, the level of service does not drop below that which is required. If I've done something unsafe or illegal and I recognize it, the system encourages me to report it myself and rewards me for recognizing the problem and facing it, so I will do just that. Because I myself have reported the problem, I don't fear the additional aircrew report. But if I've done something unsafe or illegal and I do NOT recognize it, somebody else damned well better say something so I can avoid doing it again. So, have at it. I've got to sit through "tape talks" in the interest of quality control anyway. This just presents an opportunity for me to listen to an event which somebody else saw differently than I did. That's not a bad thing.

There are undoubtedly lots of reasons behind this new tendency to argue over common control instructions. All I'm saying is that it doesn't hurt any of us to be a little more introspective from time to time. It might even make your life easier.

Finally, let me reiterate one thing: I am taking not taking a poke at ANYBODY on this forum, nor am I saying that any more than a tiny minority of the controllers I've seen over the years have been problematic. But, those that ARE out there are a burden.

Am I wrong? Help me out here.

Dave

[EuroATC]

EXCELLENT POST DAVE!

Could not have said it better myself, I sometimes go crazy watching the way others "won't go the extra mile" to provide a better service. When I work, I am constantly trying to shorten up the routings, avoid level off and accomodating any request that comes my way. Unfortunately no everyone works like this and you are right, it is the few who don't who give ATC a bad name!

About my previous posting, I could have easily given the vector to lose the minute, my problem is the back and forth on the frequency as this crew would not comply with an ATC instruction. Next time it's simple, I say "confirm you will not cross xxx at time xxx... " I get a acknoledgement, then I have the tapes pulled and file a report which goes to the company and let them deal with it.

PM me sometime, i would be interested to know where you have worked,

Best Regards!

[Jerricho]

Dave, your post is one of the best seen on this Forum.

Infact, I can think of one or two people who could benefit from reading this. But, as you say, the major percentage of people who contribute here would agree with what you have said.

I'll admit, I have only been in the game a very short while, but (and you keep out of this P7) would like to think I give a damn about my work. As do just about all of the guys and gals I work with.

But, as was pointed out the other day by someone with far more experience than me, the thing that boils their p*ss more than anything is junior controllers talking to pilots in blatently condescending and downright rude manner, and that they would love to give them a good slap. Here is a person who has been controlling 5 minutes being disrespectful to a driver who very well had his licence well before the before-mentioned realised he or she was alive.

It is a team game, and when we all play nice it is an absolute pleasure.

[glider insider]

as someone currently training to be a controller this has been interesting to read. Everyday it gets drummed in:

Rule 1: Safety
Rule 2: Expedition
Rule 3: Get Rid!

Every extra track mile that we achieve between aircraft being sequenced is an extra a/c we are working making our lives more difficult. It is not in our interest to keep people hanging about and making them do an extra 20 / 40 / 60 miles just to piss off a pilot who we dislike.....

the time for finger poking is in the bar at the end of the day... not on frequency.

I am being taught that if you are issuing a control instruction that seems strange ( i.e long way round turns etc etc) than try and give an explination, it heads off the inevitable "why" and also shows to the a/c that there is a valid reason and hopefully builds a level of trust in the service being provided..


but anyway, I'm still in training, lets see what happens in the "real world"

[av8boy]

Thanks for the kind words of support you guys. Always a little nerve-wracking to put your heart out on your sleeve for the maws to peck at. I appreciate the feedback.

Thanks again,

Dave

[garp]

Good post Dave,

Perhaps one of the reasons that more and more 'I do my job but please don't bother me with asking for that extra service' attitudes are being observed is that ATC has just become another job. It used to be so that people with lots of interest in aviation would come knocking at the door of the TWR, lots of people I know would have sold an arm and a leg in order to stay in an aviation related job. Times have changed I don't really believe in the vocation of becoming an ATCO but if I look at who they are throwing into the Ops Room nowadays I sometimes wonder if it shouldn't be a vocation. You still get the enthusiasts but they've become a minority. I'm not saying that people who got into this job by chance instead of by determination will be worse controllers but I'm convinced that the extra input, the gut feeling, is often lacking.
Jerricho,
By all means tell them. Don't let a rookie get away with it because they'll do it again. There has to be some kind of social control, remember that a pilot who has been flying several sectors on a day, receiving excellent service throughout will only remember the punk who was badmouthing him. Next day he will come on your frequency and he will think 'Go to hell' when you ask him to give an extra RoC. On top of that realise that arrogance on the frequency is an external sign of a great feeling of internal discomfort and insecurity. They're just compensating the fact that they cannot really handle their job. Puts them in a different light, doesn't it?

[fourthreethree]

Yes av8boy, agree completely with your post, I would like to think I am "one of the good guys" but I do on occasion get fed up with pilots questoining my clearances. This reached new heights last week when my favourite airline (frequently to be found in EHAM) had an inbound rush on while I was giving coaching.
Admittedly my trainee left it a tad late to start the descent of a particular inbound, but, spotting the opposite at F270 gave him 2500fpm+ until passing F260, cleared level was F210. So he reads back 2000fpm which was missed by all. But his rate never got above 1700fpm. So trainee increases to 3000fpm+, to aghast sounds from the cockpit. For a minute or so the rate is 4000, then at F275 the pilot decides hes had enough and reduces to 1000, no word to atc. So I took the r/t and asked why, after reading back 3000fpm, he was currently doing only 1000, and told him to increase, opposite traffic etc.

His response is now the subject of a report I am writing.

"It is not my fault if your planning is not good enough."

Now theres questioning a clearance and theres blatant disregard of atc clearances. If a pilot questions a restriction I have given him, I will answer, for there is always a good reason. In response to the thread title, I am in control and pilots will respect that. Its not a power thing, I will explain the situation if time allows on the r/t, its just a fact. Air Traffic Control . Simple.

[055166k]

There must be a fine dividing line between being a controller and trying to tell the pilot how to fly his aircraft, I am very wary of imposing a rate of climb/descent, and my understanding is that a high rate of descent coming into the much thicker air of the mid 20's will start to cause a rapid IAS increase...with some types this is not what the pilot wants. There are alternative methods of getting a plane to the right place at the right level.

[250 kts]

True,but there's also a requirement for the pilot to advise when he can't comply with the clearance issued. As for his reaction then i would be reporting him to the chief pilot of the airline-and then requesting that the pilot concerned be cOMPELLED to visit your unit and have a go on the sim.

[av8boy]

garp...

There has to be some kind of social control, remember that a pilot who has been flying several sectors on a day, receiving excellent service throughout will only remember the punk who was badmouthing him.

I wish I'd said that. I think you've hit the nail on the head with "social control." ATC remains largely an apprenticeship, and the control room/tower tends to retain a master/journeyman/apprentice/trainee pecking order. If you're not using your years of experience and the respect which your hard-won skills have earned you to influence the less-experienced controllers and make the system better, then what the hell are you doing? When you're working with a trainee it can be easy to see his or her certification as the goal. But look at yourself--you're still learning after all this time, right? Keep reaching out. Keep influencing.

lots of people I know would have sold an arm and a leg in order to stay in an aviation related job.

Agreed, so long as we remember that an aviation background does not always protect against these kinds of problems. I know this isn't central to the points you make (which are, in fact, excellent). Your posting just brought this to mind...

Over the years I've worked with furloughed/former pilots who've transitioned to ATC for various reasons. Like all controllers, they come in all kinds of temperaments and bring varied skill sets with them. However, I WOULD point out that, in my experience, no one is harder on the drivers than those controllers with aircrew experience. Stand around a tower, TRACON, or Center and listen to the complaints made off-frequency about pilots. Again, this is just my personal experience, but it appears to me that in most cases, a controller who is going on about how the airframe in question is perfectly capable of making a particular restriction/immediate takeoff/etc but is impaired by its less-than-capable crew, probably piloted that or a similar type of aircraft in a prior life. I've learned (and continue to learn) a TREMENDOUS amount from these folks, and my ability to make the best use of the airspace has benefited. However, there ARE times when it just gets in the way. In short, if I issue an instruction that I believe is doable by the airframe and the response from the flight deck is "unable," the last thing I'm going to do is tie up brain cells fuming over what a waste this pilot is (like I'm qualified to make that call anyway, sitting miles away/below...). It has always been important to me to remember that, while ATC and piloting are inextricably linked, they remain two separate jobs that are separated for a reason. Where they come together it is (here's the big segue!) a partnership.

"It is not my fault if your planning is not good enough."
fourthreethree

To that pilot I say (but not on frequency), “True. It is not YOUR fault that MY planning was bad. However, MY chair is currently in a spot that runs very little chance of it getting t-boned by crossing traffic, whereas YOUR chair is currently in grave danger.” Personally, I never saw the attraction in being "dead right.

OK, so let's assume that actual metal-to-metal contact is not a threat here. What just happened? Around my house we'd look here (among other places):

14 CFR 91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.

(a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory... [snip] When a pilot is uncertain of an ATC clearance, that pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC.
(b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised. ([snip] etc...)

So looking only at what was agreed-to by the aircrew and the aircrew's subsequent behavior (as recounted in the post) in light of the above, it sure looks like the aircrew was wrong. But that doesn't address the issue, does it?

You say, "Now theres questioning a clearance and theres blatant disregard of atc clearances." Agreed. What's more, from the looks of it, this one is pretty much in the latter category. But here's where I think we need to put more thought into it. This chap in the aircraft essentially told you "YOU work it out. I'm not going to be part of your solution." Once you worked it out, it was over for him or her (except for that lingering anger/report being filed, etc). But it is NOT over for you because you know darned well that you're going to see this kind of thing again. You've just got to be certain you don't act in exactly the same way that this pilot did. In other words, you (we... all of us) cannot continue to go through this kind of thing and say, "we're right, those pilots are wrong, and it isn't my problem to fix. I'll just file a report, get my pound of flesh, and someone will show that driver the error of his ways." See, the pilot told you that your poor planning wasn't his problem, and you're going to tell him that his violation isn't YOUR problem. But this doesn't make things better. Ask yourself, “did that pilot know that what he/she did was wrong/a violation?” Of course. So, why? Why would he or she endanger a hard-won career when the aviation employment market is so volatile? Why would he or she potentially compromise safety just to take a shot at a controller? Yes, there is a bottom line: outright refusal to comply with a control instruction cannot be tolerated. The system cannot survive even a little of this. But SOMEBODY has to go beyond this point. Perhaps if I was a pilot I’d be advocating for fellow pilots to take the lead and work through this. However, I’m not, so I’m trying to flesh this out with you. It’s kinda like marriage… both of you can be obstinate because you’re right or angry or otherwise justified in your position. But you gotta ask yourself, “do I want this marriage to continue?” If the answer is “yes,” then somebody is going to have to try to find the root of the problem. Loggerheads will not work. Same thing here with our safety partnership. If we want it to work, someone is going to have to figure out what’s going on and constructively address it. Don’t let anger/irritation/frustration get in the way of that.

So, I've rambled again, and for that I apologize. But I think that it is important to keep our eyes on what has always been our goal: safety. Dealing with outright refusal to comply with a control instruction is what this thread is about. Such behavior is simply unacceptable, as is disregarding a control instruction without advising. So what are we going to do about it? Absolutely write them up and turn them in. However, as I said in an earlier post, I still think it is on us to be a little introspective here. If we can see where this is going south, perhaps we can help stop it.

If I’m getting this wrong, PLEASE tell me.

Dave

[West Coast]

Not joking
Take some relief knowing that he is not representitive of professional pilots as a whole. I think as a general rule the only time we as pilots get our feathers ruffled by ATC is when you try to fly the aircraft for us, and I recognize that is not representitive of most controllers.

[I'm not joking sir]

WC. Yes, sorry should have said I know he's in the minority, (just like aggro atcos).

[fourthreethree]

No, you're absolutely not getting it wrong, you are spot on with what you are saying, and no, of course I should not let anger etc get in the way. I am a relatively inexperienced controller, I've had my licence around 5-6 years, maybe thats why I still have a hunger for the job, and a will to give a service to those I consider to be my customers.

But I don't see any solutions coming. Of course I have to write the report, its a straightforward safety issue. I know, 100%, that the restriction given was not excessive. The a/c concerned flies every day into EHAM, its a B733 and 3000fpm is the minimum that guy will do if given a "descend when ready" instruction. In fact the norm would be more like 4000. They like to leave their descent late. It was bloody-mindedness on the part of the pilot, dangerous bloody-mindedness at that, and that is why the report is being filed.

Next time I hear the pilot's voice, which I will recognise, he will continue to get the best service that I can offer, but I simply can't let it go.

Yes there are all sorts of things which I could have said to the pilot, clever, witty, assertive, whatever, but it was during peak traffic, and I had more pressing things to cope with.

Dave, I appreciate your comments, its great to know that there are people who have balanced viewpoints. Keep it coming.

[ferris]

Dave:

I've taken a few days to think about what you have said, and agree that we have a part to play in what I see as a very serious trend beginning to undermine our profession.
However, the trend (as I see it) is about commercial pressure. The questioning I am getting is of an economic nature. Sometimes crews want to know about conflicts for situational awareness reasons, but I'm talking about guys blatantly telling you they don't want to do something because "it will burn more fuel". Safety and commerce are frequently at loggerheads, as perceptions about what is safe will continually ebb and flow. But is this "commercial pressure" or "economic questioning" having any effect? I certainly know it is affecting me, because it feels like a challenge to my competence. I sit there thinking "I always try and smooth things along- why would I stop guys off (taking them off their 'golden profile'/vectoring for spacing/etc) for the sake of it?" Sometimes I let it wash over me as the cockpit does traffic-management-by-TCAS, but the more it happens, the more it sounds like "he doesn't know what he's doing (and it's costing us money)".
It might be time for a concerted effort to stop this behaviour, wherever it is found.

[Gonzo]

I'm not joking sir,

Sounds like your friend could do with a visit to his base's control tower!

[mancman]

Unless an aircraft has a problem the controller is in command of a particular piece of airspace. FACT. A driver cannot have a grasp on the bigger picture when there are 20 or so others on the same freq, thats the sole reason why ATC instructions are orders not requests. Sure if a driver has a question by all means ask and you should recieve a reasonable reply, but if the are no valid reasons why an order cannot be complied with investigations must take place. I've worked in the Brussels sectors of Eurocontrol more years than i care to remember and have tried to provide a service to the best of my abilities ( after all their companies have paid me a very nice salary since 1977) but i will never understand the need for the question " do we have to descend now?" and the worst guys for that have to be MPH, TRA and KLM ( notice a common link?). I for one am not in the habit of giving descent clearances to amuse myself, if it's not for traffic then it's to meet a requirement from the adjacent unit, and i've tried to instill in my students that if a clearance is at pilots discretion then say so. As for giving a "nudge" for direct routings the fast majority of controllers are already giving the best they can. Have a look at your watch if it's midday(or similar) on a weekday then you can have a pretty good guess that the military are active and if you haven't recieved a direct take a wild guess why. A few years back we had a KLM ( i believe, memory is not so good now) who was given a very nice direct. A short time later a military zone became active and the driver was given the bad news and a heading back to the airway. Six days later a letter of complaint was recieved by Eurocontrol along with the bill for the fuel used to fly the standard route compared to the direct( true story!!) If a driver can explain the logic of this i'll be impressed.
This is a team game, pilots jobs are to get passengers to their destination safley and as on time as possible, what most drivers don't realise is thet's exactly our job too.
Rant over, deep breath taken.

[Hoover Pilot]

Well, I've come to this topic late and just read thorugh 4 pages of postings. The posting by 433 (on the 4th) got my real attention when he said that the offending a/c is usually found in EHAM because I thought it might be our lot.

The later post provided some relief that it wasn't because we fly f100/f50 and I'm on the latter (mainly AMS-LCY).

As a pilot my response to that incident is to report it - no questions. As previously stated if an a/c cannot follow an instruction then say so but to disregard one is unforgiveable. The "C" in ATC stands for CONTROL. When a controller issues me an instruction, I follow it. He/she is in control and I don't know the full picture (and even if I did) he/she is still in control.

I am appalled by the fact that some of my flying colleagues do not understand that fact and it embarasses me to have read some of the comments on pprune from some (albeit a minority) pilots over the years.

Postings by Av8boy (Dave) - well said.

Honestly, we are in the same business. Getting flights from A to B safely and efficiently. We are all supposed to be professionals and anything other than profesional behaviour and attitude should not be shown on in the air and on the airwaves.

Rant over. Keep up the good work ATC - it's still a pleasure speaking to you each day.

[Point Seven]

The way to address the lack of appreciation (which is becoming increasingly prevalent) is to encourage people at the early stages of their training (ATC and pilots) that this isn't just a job that pays well and interests your friends at parties. It seems to me that there is a growing element, certainly in ATC, to whom this is all our job is. Whilst this may not be a dangerous element in itself, it is the assorted attitudes that it entails that mean we are growing apart in our understanding of what the other is trying to acheive.

For instance, there are a lot of controllers who believe that now they are valid they have reached the pinnacle of their profession and can stop learning. They seem to think that their word is final, mistakes should not be questioned and that their plan cannot be changed by pilots looking for something better. Aren't we ALL doing that in life. Tell em why you're saying no and they say fine - easy isn't it.

However, we have all got to keep delving into the others jobs and piecing together the jigsaw if we are truly give the best service we can. The chap who believes that TCAS can seperate planes is sorely mistaken. One day it might do but not now and this is my point. He has blind faith in what he has been told in his training and isn't seeking the subsidiary info that would make him a better, more informed pilot on the one hand, and wouldn't make him look such a pompous ass on the other.

Mutual appreciation has to be sought and the generation coming through now have increasing numbers not seeking. The New Un-Seekers if you will. I'm not saying this applies to everyone - not by a long chalk - but as someone very rightly said, "It's the awkward ones that we all remember."

As a final point, just take a moment to think - how many times has a controller/pilot got you out of a spot. We all make mistakes, we're human (even you J). That's why making like you don't is p*ssing so many people on here off.

P7

[redsnail]

I know our Sheds aren't the paciest aircraft around and we sort of get in the way at Stansted and Manchester. We do our best to go as fast as possible...
I must praise the controller at Stansted who had informed us of our place in the sequence spied a gap and moved us up one. We did every thing we could to make it work too. Thanks a million. :)

[Timothy]

As for giving a "nudge" for direct routings the fast majority of controllers are already giving the best they can. If this is so, why is it that such nudges are so often successful?

W

[fourthreethree]

WCollins

Good question. The fact is that the airspace make up is continuously changing, Military status, danger/restricted areas closing or opening, etc, not just in the controllers own sector but also neighbouring sectors. Different people work differently, but personally I will always offer the most direct route availabe according to the airspace make up that I know of ie within my own sector. It may be that a direct could turn you towards conflicting traffic so I leave standard, or give a lesser direct, assessing the effect of a turn is not always easy, so I look for the simple solution, the safe solution. A "nudge" might make me re-assess the situation more closely if time and traffic allow and the result might be a direct shortly followed by a heading. Alternatively, a request for a direct outside my airspace might prompt my planner to call the next sector to see if it is available. Without your nudge this call would not be made unless it helped solve a conflict situation. In addition it is possible, highly unlikely I might add, but nevertheless possible, that I have forgotten to give direct, maybe my attention had been taken by something going on elsewhere on the radar with one of the other 25 aircraft on my frequency.

Basically, direct routings are not a priority in my world, but they are in yours. I understand that and I try to give the best service I can, but it is low down the priority list, and if I am busy it gets even lower. While your "nudge" may get you the direct, it is rarely appreciated, in particular if the sector is busy.

Hope this answers your question.:ok:


HooverPilot

Yes the incident has been reported. It has also emerged that the pilot had used his FMS (in my opinion) incorrectly, in that he had achieved an average ROD equivalent to the descent rate given, but not the continuous rate I had told him to do. This is a known failing of this flag carrier airline, it has been reported before, and we have had letters of apology before, but nothing changes. The fact still remains that the guy's attitude stinks.

[mancman]

W.
I can't of course speak for other ATC sectors but in mine "nudges" rarely work. Have a look at your charts for Belgium/Luxembourg and check how much of what is already a reletively small country is taken up by military zones. Maybe what you're describing as a nudge is asking for a point a couple of miles past the point you're already going to. If this is the case and it makes you happy then who am i to deny you.

[ferris]

WCOLLINS.

I wish I had a dollar for every time that just as I was about to do something (assign further descent, track shorten, etc.), the pilot asked for it. What I am to do? Give it, making it sound like you prompted it, or be petulent and let you level off/whatever?

433 makes a very valid point- one that I think is at the heart of this thread. Pilots and controllers are often (seemingly) at cross purposes. Looked at from a pilots perspective, ATC= hurdles, delays, another thing 'to deal with' (if you will). A controller has a totally different set of priorities to a pilot. Safety is a gimme, so I'll skip over that. Orderly and expeditious to us, can mean a different thing to you. I could go on for ages trying to explain, but it would be much easier if you are sitting with an ATC. Which is why we encourage pilots to visit, yet get so few.

[Timothy]

Firstly let me say that I have spent quite a bit of time sitting next to ATCOs, in LATCC (as it was then) LHR radar, and many towers and approach rooms, so I, personally, understand the environment reasonably well. I have an enormous amount of respect for what ATCOs do, which I know would be way beyond my personal capability. (I was discussing with a friend, who is on this forum, over dinner the other evening whether being the Director at LHR, or in the VCR at Biggin Hill was more taxing....as far as I am concerned you have to be a demi-god to do either :) )

I am also not shy of asking ATCOs to explain things I don't understand (as several of my ATCO friends on this forum know ;) )

And it is from this latter position that all my questions are posed on this forum, and they usually get very straightforward answers, just as I have had from 433, mancman and ferris on this occasion.

I would be mortified if I thought that any of my questions was taken as a criticism, or point-scoring. They are invariably aimed at better understanding.

Having said all that, I reiterate the point I made earlier. Just as there are less-competent and less altruistic pilots, there are less good ATCers. I could (I am not going to, but I could) name a number of airfields and Area Controls where they would be best advised to sack the entire staff and start again. Indeed there is one Area Control that has tried to kill me three times (once by steering me at a mountain, once by giving me the QNH wrong by 10Hp and a third time that is too identifiable to mention.)

I believe that this forum is, by its nature, populated by the "good guys". Why should an ATCO who doesn't like his (her) job and just sits there and does the minimum possible to keep his job want to spend spare time discussing ATCOing?

I know from private conversations with ATCOs that you all know that you have some colleagues who, like yourselves, give the very best service, and other colleagues who don't, sometimes on principle.

Maybe it is these latter that increase the friction on occasion?

W

[garp]

Wise words WC and one of the reasons that I don't mind that pilots ask for direct routings during dead periods. I know that not all of my colleagues will pick up the phone and co-ordinate with three different partners in order to get a direct. However this all remains the extra service which will be done when possible. Please don't forget that when it is actually quiet on the freq we might be struggling with difficult co-ordinations, breakdowns of datalinks, flights without details, coffee machines that break down etc. I'm sure you know all of this but it's a good thing that other colleagues of yours read this aswell.
Cheers