Originally Posted by
good egg
HC
I'm glad you've clarified that you know what service you're supposed to get (only you seemed unsure earlier).
Thanks also for adding clarity to your incident. If the situation was as simplistic as you have stated then no I don't think you received a good service.
Given your information I can't think why ATC prescribed you a specific altitude instead of "not above". That would've allowed both of you to adjust altitude as req'd to avoid each other. As for your routing did you request a threshold crossing? Was there departing traffic? Etc, etc. I.e. Did ATC give you the routing you requested? And the same with the other flight? Did you request traffic avoidance? - Simply requesting higher may not have alerted the controller to the fact that you were unhappy with the situation.
Those are just a few of the questions that popped into my head, not knowing local geography, runway alignments, etc, etc.
Did you consider calling the unit involved?
I was on a flight from France to Aberdeen so no I didn't request a specific routing, just to cross the class D. I was instructed to cross overhead the runway threshold (west end, can't remember the runway direction). There was no departing traffic. There was one IFR well above which I think was eventually going to fly an approach.
It might be easier if you dug out the Airprox report and I think I've said this before (bearing in mind it was all ~5 years ago) the other traffic had the same transit point (runway threshold) as me. But he got it wrong and was going for the other threshold. ATC noticed this and pointed out his error, which is why he ended up flying at nearly 90 degrees to the otherwise expected track. It was at this point that I became uncomfortable since I couldn't see him and clearly there was some confusion as to where he was. My earlier mental picture was shattered by discovering that he wasn't going where he was supposed to be going. No I didn't ask for further traffic info. Probably should have done - although expressing my concern and requesting an altitude change is a pretty good hint.
I phoned a mate at another ATC unit (supervisor) who explained to me what RCS meant but was generally disapproving of the controlling whilst having to point out that it was "legal".
I then phoned the unit but was fobbed off. That is when I decided to file an Airprox.
You are getting a bit bogged down in the detail, but it is the principle that I think is wrong:
With an RCS a controller can "legally" force two aircraft into a collision scenario, expect the pilots to sort it out by breaching their clearances, and if they don't, tough, not my fault mate. With the added fact that only controllers understand the full implication of an RCS, namely power without responsibility. That is wrong.