ATC with a problem!

[C42]

We often fly into London Southend Airport (Stobart International) as that is where our club is based (although we fly from a different airfield/farm strip) and I was made aware today of some very strange goings on!
Most people are aware that Southend are about the most anal of ATCs and have a pretty bad reputation around here (apart from one controller who is a really decent bloke) by intimidating students, which they should be very wary of after what happened there a few years ago, and generally being unhelpful.
I was once accused by them of flying across their fan lines (outside the ATZ) when a jet was landing and the manager said he was going to report me to the CAA. I went to see him as I was not even flying in the area and had proof that I was not, and he said he had reported me as the eye witness had reported that it was a small white tricycle plane that he followed on radar back to my airfield and phoned them to report me (I got the call from our radio operator that I was in trouble when I was 15 miles away in the other direction!) I asked how he come to my Reg. And he said he looked at the records of planes landing there from our airfield and I had landed there a few days before! (There are 7 small white tricycle planes based at our field by the way!)
We had another guy going into an farm strip right on the edge of their ATZ and he was on a FIS with them and when he got near the farm strip he asked for weather, the Controller was quite abrupt and said no as he was not landing there!! The pilot asked him to give him the weather again as he was landing at an airfield 2.5 miles away and it would be nice to have at least an idea of wind direction and the pilot was made to feel very small on the radio! Not a good service.
There has been many more but this post is long enough!
Anyway, I found out today that the manager of the ATC has one radio tuned into our farm strip frequency so he can keep an eye on us!! (We are 40 miles away) Surely this is an abuse of his duties! He is very petty and likes reporting people, one guy had his PTT switch stuck down for a few mins on their freq. (which does happen sometimes) and I was told today that that he has been reported to the CAA (for what??)
I suppose it did not help that when the guy realised that it had stuck down he apologised to everyone about it then switched to our farm strip freq. and said to one of the others that it was a good job that the manager was not on as he is a TW*T!! (not realising that the manager tunes into our freq.!)
Has anyone else had this kind of surveillance from them and is it the “done” thing to spend your time listening in on other airfields frequencies just so they can catch them at something when they should be serving the aviators?
Rant over!

[Whirlygig]

Has anyone else had this kind of surveillance from them
And what will you do with the answers? Either your rant will be vindicated or it won't but, either way, it's not going to solve the issue of you feeling that you are getting poor service.

It might be more constructive if your club and the ATCU in question sat down together and had a chat.

Cheers

Whirls

[flybymike]

It is not illegal for you to fly across "fan lines" outside controlled airspace.

[rodan]

An ATC Mandatory Occurence Report (MOR) is submitted to the CAA when something dangerous happens, not necessarily something that is illegal. Crossing an instrument approach in Class G without speaking to the ATC unit concerned is legal, but it is also poor airmanship and potentially unsafe (in my opinion, of course).

[ShyTorque]

The ATCO is out of order. To "pursue" an individual via an MOR is not what the CAA are interested in; it's not what the system is there for. Let him report it but don't worry about it, as already stated above.

I had someone do this to myself. I was named in an MOR as the pilot causing damage to an airfield installation with rotor downwash, failing to comply with airfield procedures and causing an airprox. The CAA reply was as above.

I wasn't on duty at the time of the alleged incident, btw, but I was given a copy of the paperwork and the follow up report.

[mad_jock]

H'mm I suppose you could say it was illegal due to the telephony act. But I wouldn't think it would get very far.

I wouldn't worry about the MOR game. I wouldn't get childish and start firing them back in. Best people to have a chat with would be the SRG air traffic inspectors. Or try phoning a CAA staff examiner, they have absolutely no authority at all with all things air traffic but they know the rule book inside out. They have lots of mates they can have a chat with. And having heard a very one way discussion between a single digit Exam callsign and a SATCO about the level of service of his unit it was clinical and very scary.

If you have the date and time when the person was refused wx because they weren't landing at the airport I would use that as your opening card. The inspectors will not be happy with that at all, and will be more receptive to your other complaints after being given a good hard event which they can run with.

[TractorBoy]

Had my own experiences of Southend. ATC always seemed OK to me, except when I was charged for a missed approach fee for a go around due to safety.

BTW - if you need weather, you could dial up Southend ATIS on 136.050. Saves on the danger of getting shouted at, although admittedly you shouldn't really have to.....

[chevvron]

Both Southend and Manston get a bit shirty if Farnborough works traffic which they consider is in their LARS area; it's all class G airspace though so when they say they're going to MOR, I used to think 'go ahead'.

[C42]

Thanks everyone,

I have had a few PMs from people stating there experiences (which i will not repeat as they are their vews and very daming!)

it appears i am not the only one who has problems with them!

[Duchess_Driver]

Have to say never had any problems with them.....go there for the ILS quite frequently and they're more than happy to allow the student to get his mucking furds in a wuddle without shouting at them.

Wx available everytime I ask for it - though that isn't often as I do ATIS it.

DD

[jollyrog]

I did all of my IMCr approaches at Southend and ATC treated me very well.

[chrisbl]

I have to say I dont recognise the ATC you describe as Southend. I have found them to be always helpful when doing instrument practice. In fact I would go as far and say they are one of the friendliest ATC unit I have worked with.

[Jumbo Driver]

Southend ATC didn't exactly excel themselves in 2006 ...

G-BABB (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/bulletins/july_2007/cessna_f150l__g_babb.cfm)

JD
:(

[Fujiflyer]

I only used Southend once, it was a little while ago but they were great. They gave me a SRA (I had no ILS instrumentation) on a diversion from Blackpool to Rochester (where there was fog). They would not accept my offer to pay any landing fees.

[ollieboy]

I have an aircraft based at Southend and I have to say that the ATC team is first class. Kept in place by the manager they are friendly, and helpful and the best I have encountered.
I know that they are stretched with their staff numbers working long hours and minimum staffing,and are training several new controllers, all of which are progressing superbly in my opinion, so all staff should be commended with their commitment and patience.I know personally one of the team who also flys both with the GA and microlight communtity and he actively visits clubs and societies to try and put a ATC point to the flyers in his own time.This commitment is not unique amongst the team and I am disappointed in reading the negative comments about the staff at Southend. They are a friendly, dedicated and professional team and do a wonderful job in looking after us residents. I applaud the team and keep up the good work.
ps,why fly so close to a busy airfield without calling anyway?.You could find you are in close proximity to a 757!, and next weekend a Hawk or Typhoon! If you call Southend they will be able to advise you and provide the usual high quality service they always do. Keep it up chaps(and chapesses)

[matspart3]

OK, as an ex-Southend ATCer, albeit many years ago, I'll take the bait.

Southend only has primary radar and very limited vertical airspace, in which to contain it's IFR traffic and training traffic. This means that providing a LARS in a busy environment with a constant stream of City and Heathrow inbounds passing overhead or abeam can be very challenging. (Chevvron...I'm surprised EGLF are hanging onto traffic that far out without co-ordination?)

Flying through the final approach track of a published instrument approach at an Airport known to operate large jets is, of course, perfectly legal. Personally, I don't think it's the best demonstration of airmanship, maybe the ATS Manager was hoping to point this out?

There are many new faces (and voices) at Southend since I was there, but I do still know a good number of the team. They're a good bunch of people and extremely competent ATCO's, who do a difficult job with limited resources. That's why the CAA 'approve' them as an ANSP.

I flew in there about 3 weeks ago, got a Traffic Service in and out and a radar handover to Farnborough on the way out, despite a runway change and a busy VFR and IFR traffic mix. Top service.

Why not give them a call or another visit, rather than resorting to voiceing your gripes and making accusations on a public forum? Take cakes, you'll need to. It seems, from your comments that there's an 'us vs them' mentality between your farm strip and Southend ATC. This does nothing to improve flight safety for any airspace users and needs addressing.

[Whirlygig]

Well Jumbo Driver, if you didn't appreciate Goatface's comment, why don't you explain the point of your original post? Because I missed it as well.

Cheers

Whirls

[Fujiflyer]

Whirly, I was about to ask the same question (of Jumbo). I thought his / her comment was unfair without further justification...

[Jumbo Driver]

Fujiflyer, Whirls, I didn't mean my post to be unfair.

The thread topic is about the quality of ATC at Southend. I have no direct experience and therefore will not join in with any criticism but the report of the tragic accident in 2006 was to some degree critical of the service provided by Southend ATC and resulted in several safety recommendations for procedural changes. That is why I posted the link.

My objection to goatface's comments were simply because of the manner of his response. I believe discussion on these fora should try to be on-topic and not be gratuitously offensive or personal.

I still think my post was pertinent but I am sorry if I ruffled feathers.


JD
:)

[bookworm]

but the report of the tragic accident in 2006 was to some degree critical of the service provided by Southend ATC and resulted in several safety recommendations for procedural changes

Reading the report, which you are good enough to provide a link to, I wouldn't really agree that the report was critical of Southend ATC. 4 safety recommendations are made, 3 of them to the CAA about revision of general ATC procedures. The fourth was to Southend, but was directed at better information in their MATS Pt 2, not a procedural change as such. I think most observers concluded that the accident could have happened in the same way at almost any controlled airport.

[md 600 driver]

rodan

Crossing an instrument approach in Class G without speaking to the ATC unit concerned is legal, but it is also poor airmanship and potentially unsafe (in my opinion, of course).

which CAA map are these fanlines on and how do you know they are there if you are a non instrument piot or even a non instrument helicopter pilot ?

[Barnaby the Bear]

How about the 1:250,000 and the 1:500,000 UK VFR charts?
If you look on the map you can clearly see the fan lines which extend from any applicable runways. But only on aerodromes outside CAS.

[julian_storey]

I took an ILS into Southend on New Years Day on my way back from Guernsey because I couldn't get back into the place I'd taken off from.

Although I felt that the landing / overnight parking fees were a bit on the steep side, one of the controllers very kindly offered to drive me to the railway station during his break!

I'd suggest that IF there are issues with SOME of the controllers there, it is most certainly not all of them. The fellow that took me to the station was an all round nice chap :D

[flybymike]

MD600 driver raises a fair point in that a VFR pilot would not necessarily be familiar with any particular instrument approach procedure (nor indeed an instrument pilot for that matter) and therefore a degree of common sense is required when crossing the feathers. Whilst theoretically crossing them at 3000 feet ten miles out or at 600 feet two miles out might pose the same risky strategy, crossing ten miles out at 600 feet poses no IAP risk at all.

[matspart3]

flybymike
I was a little surprised that any pilot of any experience wouldn't know what the fan lines meant (or where to find out - there's all sorts of interesting stuff on the legend of the quarter and half mil charts!!)

The point you make about crossing at 10 miles at 600ft is valid, but because Southend is primary only, they would have no way of knowing your level, unless you were talking to them. Under these circumstances and certain types of service, the ATCO would be duty bound to 'avoid' the unknown contact and possibly having to break off the ILS approach.

I struggle to see the logic of intentionally not using the services of a nearby ATC unit, particularly in a busy bit of sky, bounded to the east by a Danger Area, to the west and vertically by CAS. What's more, that service is free of charge!!

[mad_jock]

I struggle to see the logic of intentionally not using the services of a nearby ATC unit

Well most folk probably would if there wasn't any hassles. But the unit has dug themselves a hole where by the GA traffic can't see the point of talking to them. If your likely to get no service or a rude unhelpful one your not going to speak to them. And you can scream airmanship all you like a couple of bad experiences with a unit will put off most pilots talking to a unit if they don't have to. Maybe the reason why traffic is wanting to stay with Farnborough. It should be good airmanship for the unit to promote good relationships with all the pain in the arse traffic.

And to be honest its not really the problem of the pilot if the unit is too tight to provide a secondary radar feed.

And how the hell is a pilot meant to know what type of sodding radar the unit he is talking to is using? especially a VFR spam can or plastic pig. VFR pilots won't have a clue about the decent profiles on various approaches or for that matter what it actually means. For all I know the 600ft AGL at 10 miles could still be inside the theoretical "danger area" of a none precision approach. Again the pilot wouldn't know which procedures are being used unless they speak to the unit.

This all sounds quite unsafe to me especially if there are lots of microlights kicking around with dodgy primary returns.

I had in the past a similar problem with a Mil radar unit and more by luck than judgement I was chatting to a SRG controller inspector type person who had thought that the GA service in the area was fine and working well (as he had been told by that unit). When he found out what was really going on it was sorted pretty quick. Neither side got what they really wanted but it was a hellava lot safer for all concerned afterwards.

I would get a group of you and contact the SRG and arrange a meeting. You will have to give something's away maybe standard joining routes etc but if its as bad as you say you can't let it continue until god forbid there is a fatality or fatality's (you choose the number, whats the largest CAT going in there?).

The unit manager will be fuming anyway as he will be reading this, so if there was bad feeling before it sure as hell won't be any better after publicly broadcasting his units dirty washing.

[belowradar]

And to be honest its not really the problem of the pilot if the unit is too tight to provide a secondary radar feed

Mad Jock and others raise a good point regarding secondary radar and safety. I fly to Southend a lot and my own opinion is that most of them are very obliging and do a good job with the tools that they have.

They don't have any information about aircraft heights though which is not conducive to situational awareness or flight safety. As they are working traffic on instrument approaches outside of controlled airspace this is an accident waiting to happen.

Many times traffic is called for example "crossing left to right 1 mile no height information" - "further traffic 12 o'clock no height - slow moving"

They would like to setup some software on their PC for a total cost of £50 - £100 which would show mode c aircraft in the area but as this is "NOT OFFICIALLY APPROVED" they must keep their (and our) blindfolds on. Farnboro do have secondary radar so if you can talk to them the service is safer.

Good job Southend ATC - Hope you get some software soon !

[mad_jock]

For a secondary radar your talking a major infrastructure capital purchase or if they go for a feed an equipment upgrade and continuing payment every month for the feed ( tens of thousands per month).

The computer option apart from not being approved requires every aircraft to have a mode S transponder fitted. The problem traffic I suspect are not required or can't fit one.

I can actually see the problem from Southends point of view. They have a heap of traffic which they have to work or would like to work to get there revenue paying flights in. If the traffic doesn't speak to them it can make it almost impossible to get an IFR flight in with the required separation. They probably work there nuts off with GA traffic for no revenue gain.

If it does all come to a head and the CAA decides they need a secondary radar they will have to find a whole heap of cash for again no revenue increase in a time of decreasing traffic into regional airports. But you can guarantee that if they do have to get a secondary radar service the application for controlled airspace will be getting fired in.

I presume the controllers at Southend are like most airports in class G with CAT operating they pray for the days with the cloud base of 600ft and a viz of 900 meters.

They have now got to the point where there is a stand off between GA pilots not wanting to talk to them and not talking to them. And the need of the unit to speak to them to be able to function properly.

The MOR game is never going to work, SATCO's have tried it in the past, to much amusement of the pilots. After the initial shock of getting filed upon, after the first few which nothing ever happens about they just ignore them. Then daft competitions start with who has had the most filed on them. And god forbid the pilots start MOR's back, with a concerted effort you can shut the airport down through lack of controllers and have the SATCO knee deep in report writing and sick fed up of going to the tape library to pull tapes.
THIS IS DEFINITELY NOT THE WAY TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM BY EITHER PARTY.

[jollyrog]

Isn't Southend the usual alternate for London City?