Send Clowns - You seem concerned that I don't realise the meaning of IFR. I assure you that I most certainly do. I'm afraid it simply means that te flight is complying with certain rules and procedures (namely Rules 28 to 32 of the Rules of the Air Regulations 1996). It does not absolve the flight from compliance with other rules that might apply (and, in particular, Rule 17). Nor does it absolve the pilot from exercising good airmanship. These points have been well covered, especially by TC_LTN so I won't bother going over the ground again in detail.
In my earlier post I suggested that
if some of the scenario was at night, there might be some justification for the controller's response. One of the earlier posts mentioned that the controller said ‘Good night’ – so I felt it might have some relevance. I didn't say it
did happen at night.
Maybe I did sound patronising. The original post from Crash and Burn was incorrect - VFR pilots, just like IFR pilots, are responsible for avoiding collisions irrespective of whether ATC 'give traffic information in good time'. The post appears to describe someone who thinks that because they can (or they think they can) quote the book of rules they are 'safe' and perhaps in some way better than other professionals. The rules that aviation operate under are not perfect - there are plenty of opportunities to debate the foibles in the legislation and procedures. There’s a time and a place and on the R/T is neither.
You ask why I think the people in the tower have more expertise than he does. Probably because they will have done several years of training before possibly getting many years of practical experience. Controllers are paid to apply the rules so they’re likely to know them fairly well – of course there will be some people who are not professional controllers who know the rules just as well, but they won’t have the practical experience. So I think the odds are stacked in favour of the tower if you want expertise about ATC and separation. If I want to know something about how an aircraft is operated, I ask a pilot – he’s done the training and put in the years of experience for that skill and I recognise that’s where the expertise on operating an aircraft is.
He in fact seems to have saved a controller from some paperwork that would have meant a rocket up his arse. Can you imagine the airport authorities who pay the controller being happy about losing the landing fees for a set of circuits and annoying a flight school that is a paying customer and provides more paying customers?
Your comments show that you have as much appreciation of the inter-relationship and responsibilities of airports and ATC as you do of ATC operations.
Oops, there I go, sounding patronising again. Maybe this time I meant it. I guess I’ll leave this here until I’m asked to take it down. Or, then again, if you’re not prepared to take the odd firm rebuke from people who may know more about a subject than you do, perhaps you shouldn’t play.