Pet Peeves
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Alloway,Ayrshire,Scotland
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok,here goes,this is going to be quite a long rambling story and before we get to the nuts and bolts,let me say that I agree that the uk atc is without doubt still one area we are world beaters,although I also admire the U.S.A. 'tin-pushers'.
It was a dark and stormy night ex-LHR and yours truly was in the LHS of a brand new Airbus A340 owned by a well known British entrepeneur also I had been promoted to line trainer with a brand new First Officer alongside me.The destination weather (the old Kai-Tak) was forecast on limits and we were at max weight.There were 4 of us on the flight deck including the two relief guys.
We got airborne on a DVR departure and climbed to 6000 ft., and we stayed there for a considerable amount of time.So my concerns were at this stage a) fuel on arrival HKG and b) the excessive turbulence and obvious discomfort of the pax.
What I did next was wrong.I said to the London controller 'any chance of climb as we have a long way to go'.The response astonished me.I then received a 30 second lecture on the logistic atc problems at the time and how he (the controller) was trying to stop aircraft hitting each other,underneath the Biggin stack etc.,and continued in this generally emotive vein.I guess the witty response to this would have been 'I guess that's a no then!',but we were all a bit shell-shocked by the perceived by us over-reaction.There were about 3 more transmissions prior to handover each with a bitchy rider,culminating in 'I need the captains' name'-again a lot of potentially witty responses to that one but none forthcoming at the time obviously and with sinking heart I gave my name,rank and number.Basically I thought I was in the dwang big-time until my bacon was saved.The next controller called up with something along the lines of 'clear direct to Koksy,climb to FL280 and by the way can I have a word with the captain?'Needless to say I thought more disapproval was winging my way but it transpired that this controller had a friend on board and 'could he sit up front for the landing in Hong Kong?!!'Seizing the moment I said 'of course but could you sort out the little problem with the previous controller?(amusing aside-a Monarch crew who heard the whole sorry episode piped up with'who's a lucky boy then?!')The 'friend' turned out to be another controller and was suitably astonished by the story.On handover to Maastricht Control I was informed that the problem with London was resolved.This precipitated a running crew joke that was side-splttingly funny the first 20 times-Bombay says 'don't worry',Bangkok says 'it's all sorted' ad nauseam.
The sad postscript to all this is that the controller concerned took it upon himself to write me a letter!Obviously along the lines of my lack of professionalism(probably true)etc.Having a life and domestic agenda I filed this letter into the nearest Queens Building gash bag also I did not wish to escalate this drama into a crisis.
That is my only pet peeve with uk atc which I acknowledge is world class.I hope you enjoyed this little Xmas tale and a very merry Xmas and happy new year to all controllers.
It was a dark and stormy night ex-LHR and yours truly was in the LHS of a brand new Airbus A340 owned by a well known British entrepeneur also I had been promoted to line trainer with a brand new First Officer alongside me.The destination weather (the old Kai-Tak) was forecast on limits and we were at max weight.There were 4 of us on the flight deck including the two relief guys.
We got airborne on a DVR departure and climbed to 6000 ft., and we stayed there for a considerable amount of time.So my concerns were at this stage a) fuel on arrival HKG and b) the excessive turbulence and obvious discomfort of the pax.
What I did next was wrong.I said to the London controller 'any chance of climb as we have a long way to go'.The response astonished me.I then received a 30 second lecture on the logistic atc problems at the time and how he (the controller) was trying to stop aircraft hitting each other,underneath the Biggin stack etc.,and continued in this generally emotive vein.I guess the witty response to this would have been 'I guess that's a no then!',but we were all a bit shell-shocked by the perceived by us over-reaction.There were about 3 more transmissions prior to handover each with a bitchy rider,culminating in 'I need the captains' name'-again a lot of potentially witty responses to that one but none forthcoming at the time obviously and with sinking heart I gave my name,rank and number.Basically I thought I was in the dwang big-time until my bacon was saved.The next controller called up with something along the lines of 'clear direct to Koksy,climb to FL280 and by the way can I have a word with the captain?'Needless to say I thought more disapproval was winging my way but it transpired that this controller had a friend on board and 'could he sit up front for the landing in Hong Kong?!!'Seizing the moment I said 'of course but could you sort out the little problem with the previous controller?(amusing aside-a Monarch crew who heard the whole sorry episode piped up with'who's a lucky boy then?!')The 'friend' turned out to be another controller and was suitably astonished by the story.On handover to Maastricht Control I was informed that the problem with London was resolved.This precipitated a running crew joke that was side-splttingly funny the first 20 times-Bombay says 'don't worry',Bangkok says 'it's all sorted' ad nauseam.
The sad postscript to all this is that the controller concerned took it upon himself to write me a letter!Obviously along the lines of my lack of professionalism(probably true)etc.Having a life and domestic agenda I filed this letter into the nearest Queens Building gash bag also I did not wish to escalate this drama into a crisis.
That is my only pet peeve with uk atc which I acknowledge is world class.I hope you enjoyed this little Xmas tale and a very merry Xmas and happy new year to all controllers.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bit about weather avoidance - 999 times out of a thousand I'll say "OK" if someone wants to avoid weather but in a busy TMA it's sometimes a case of hit a storm or hit another plane! What always fascinates me is the totally non-standard way that crews behave in bad weather. Given two identical a/c with the same airline - let's say two BA 757s - one will be quite emphatic that he wants to turn in 5 miles whilst the other goes straight on without a word! With our typical UK weather this isn't a one-off; it happens time and time again. I'll still do my utmost to accommodate but it'll still amuse me when it happens!!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Expeditedescent
I read on this BB a pilot say that when we call the traffic they look at TCAS, then they say "We have him on TCAS". Ideally they would look at TCAS first, but to be fair take their comment as we'll keep our gobs shut until TCAS shows 5 miles clear.
What I hate is pilots who say "Clear of the traffic" when on my radar there is still 3+ miles before they cross.
I read on this BB a pilot say that when we call the traffic they look at TCAS, then they say "We have him on TCAS". Ideally they would look at TCAS first, but to be fair take their comment as we'll keep our gobs shut until TCAS shows 5 miles clear.
What I hate is pilots who say "Clear of the traffic" when on my radar there is still 3+ miles before they cross.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stan by. Your comment about pilots claiming to be clear of traffic is same as when they say "out of 130 descending" when the SSR says 136. I still can't believe that so many of these people are still alive..
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Johannesburg
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi guys,
Heathrow Director - I think you will find the reason pilots react differently to the same weather comes out of experience. I am a co-pilot, so I deal with the kind of diversity all the time - any leeway in the Company SOP's that calls for an opinion, will result in 5 opinions out of 4 Captains. Each guy will assess the threat from weather differently - thats what make it interesting.
I could also probably own up to slight dishonesty with position reports. It is not intentional - you will probably find that the guy passing FL136 is descending at 3000 ft/min = 12 seconds to FL130. I imagine on a busy frequency he is simply taking the gap - he may only get his next word in after leveling off at FL120, so he probably "pushed" it a bit in the hope of further descent.
Expeditedescent - I hear you, I know generally to keep my mouth shut in a busy environment - I am sure you know that we try work out our decent efficiently as possible, so we build very little room for change into the descent profile. Being kept high causes lots of stress(especially for the Captain). Sometimes the reason is not apparent to us(I know, I know - there is method to your madness) - then we start to wonder if we have not been forgotten. Anyway, point taken.
I can't say there's too many ATC things that peeve me. Apart from where the guys have had a bad day and lets you have it.
I think that there should be more training for pilots in the workings of the ATC system, so that we can understand how things are done - this will also allow us to plan better.
Regards
4g
<img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Heathrow Director - I think you will find the reason pilots react differently to the same weather comes out of experience. I am a co-pilot, so I deal with the kind of diversity all the time - any leeway in the Company SOP's that calls for an opinion, will result in 5 opinions out of 4 Captains. Each guy will assess the threat from weather differently - thats what make it interesting.
I could also probably own up to slight dishonesty with position reports. It is not intentional - you will probably find that the guy passing FL136 is descending at 3000 ft/min = 12 seconds to FL130. I imagine on a busy frequency he is simply taking the gap - he may only get his next word in after leveling off at FL120, so he probably "pushed" it a bit in the hope of further descent.
Expeditedescent - I hear you, I know generally to keep my mouth shut in a busy environment - I am sure you know that we try work out our decent efficiently as possible, so we build very little room for change into the descent profile. Being kept high causes lots of stress(especially for the Captain). Sometimes the reason is not apparent to us(I know, I know - there is method to your madness) - then we start to wonder if we have not been forgotten. Anyway, point taken.
I can't say there's too many ATC things that peeve me. Apart from where the guys have had a bad day and lets you have it.
I think that there should be more training for pilots in the workings of the ATC system, so that we can understand how things are done - this will also allow us to plan better.
Regards
4g
<img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Costa del Swanwick
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't worry OJ, with an attitude like that he probably has few friends and wanted you as a pen pal!!
Merry Xmas from all at LATCC. There I've said it so don't expect it on the frequency.
Merry Xmas from all at LATCC. There I've said it so don't expect it on the frequency.
Pardoned PPRuNer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: GlassGumtree
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lets see...
-NATS people posting NATS issues in the ATC forum
-Acft coordinated on parallel headings come converging (with 1 min before losing 5 miles)
-Acft that are transferred 30 miles in your airspace
....
-Pilots wishing Merry Christmas before the 25th (Bah Humbug)
-NATS people posting NATS issues in the ATC forum
-Acft coordinated on parallel headings come converging (with 1 min before losing 5 miles)
-Acft that are transferred 30 miles in your airspace
....
-Pilots wishing Merry Christmas before the 25th (Bah Humbug)
ojay, we always wondered what that "sorted" message from London was all about. We can now file that one away . To the "four captains and five opinions" comment, it's the same with controllers. For instance, ExpediteDescent doesn't like the "approaching level" prompts. I know many that do. It gives them an opportunity to re-assess (i.e. hit the brain's refresh button) and provide continuous climb/descent. The same goes with headings. There have been the odd occasions when it was forgotten that an a/c was still locked on a heading with not a peep from the trusting cockpit as they flew excessively off track. Perhaps our pet peeve is a/c asking for short cuts. Be assured that at Maastricht if one is available you will get it. No need to ask.
. To the "four captains and five opinions" comment, it's the same with controllers. For instance, ExpediteDescent doesn't like the "approaching level" prompts. I know many that do. It gives them an opportunity to re-assess (i.e. hit the brain's refresh button) and provide continuous climb/descent. The same goes with headings. There have been the odd occasions when it was forgotten that an a/c was still locked on a heading with not a peep from the trusting cockpit as they flew excessively off track. Perhaps our pet peeve is a/c asking for short cuts. Be assured that at Maastricht if one is available you will get it. No need to ask.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Costa del CYYZ
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Avman,
Please re-read my comments, I do not have a problem with approaching level reports, except when the RT is exceptionally busy and when you are getting them on every thousand feet you drop or climb the aircraft.
The situation I am talking about is this sort of thing:
"c/s FL200 request lower"
"Descend FL190"
"c/s, approaching FL190 looking for lower"
"Descend FL180"
"c/s approaching FL180 request further"
"Descend FL170"
"c/s FL170 request further descent"
etc, etc. Where the pilot is oblivious to the controllers incredibly high workload at the time.......it's not hard to recognise a saturated frequency.
Approaching level reports when quiet or not saturated RT are perfectly fine, and often useful for remembering that aircraft I forgot <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Please re-read my comments, I do not have a problem with approaching level reports, except when the RT is exceptionally busy and when you are getting them on every thousand feet you drop or climb the aircraft.
The situation I am talking about is this sort of thing:
"c/s FL200 request lower"
"Descend FL190"
"c/s, approaching FL190 looking for lower"
"Descend FL180"
"c/s approaching FL180 request further"
"Descend FL170"
"c/s FL170 request further descent"
etc, etc. Where the pilot is oblivious to the controllers incredibly high workload at the time.......it's not hard to recognise a saturated frequency.
Approaching level reports when quiet or not saturated RT are perfectly fine, and often useful for remembering that aircraft I forgot <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a member of the A/B brigade a little explanation for ATC on why pilots call approaching (yes I know we shouldn’t) When a Flight management computer is approaching its assigned level there is a mode change from the climb Mode to Alt Capture, a speed is captured and the autothrottle starts reducing engine power. Inevitably once we call level, ATC give us further climb, the power goes on and we climb away again. By giving ATC a prompt it enables us to maintain climb power keep the climb going and so, I’ve heard reduces engine wear. The reduction in engine power on an aircraft climbing at 3,000fpm is considerable.
Possibly the answer is for ATC to insert the phrase "Climb and Maintain" when further climb in not expected or alternatively for ATC to give further climb as early as possible rather that wait untilwe call level.
PS I love you all; really I do
Possibly the answer is for ATC to insert the phrase "Climb and Maintain" when further climb in not expected or alternatively for ATC to give further climb as early as possible rather that wait untilwe call level.
PS I love you all; really I do
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sky;
We say climb and maintain in the US all the time. It doesn't help <G>. We are always hearing approaching XXX or looking for higher... We generally think to ourselves, when YEAH! Your flight planned for FL410. We KNOW that you want higher <G>... But then we know with a lot of Capt's it's all about them <G>...
regards
We say climb and maintain in the US all the time. It doesn't help <G>. We are always hearing approaching XXX or looking for higher... We generally think to ourselves, when YEAH! Your flight planned for FL410. We KNOW that you want higher <G>... But then we know with a lot of Capt's it's all about them <G>...
regards
I for one am guilty of asking for higher. I am cognizent of frequency congestion, TCAS traffic and controller workload when I ask. I am also cognizent of the thin profit margin we maintain at the best of times along with the excessive fuel burn down low. As often as not when I ask for higher I am granted it, I am a creature of habit, when it takes me having to ask for a measurable percentage of climbs, a habit pattern is set. Even if denied, controllers here are good about letting us know when to expect higher. This allows us to plan, and most importantly, be kept in the loop. Nothing is worse than a controller who operates in a vacuum. While the controller has to maintain the larger picture, that sometimes requires me to
be the one that keeps my needs at the fore front.
be the one that keeps my needs at the fore front.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is another pet peeve; just as you are about to open the mike to issue an instruction, the pilot requests it. You then have a dilemma. Do you go ahead and issue, making the pilot believe he got it because he requested it, or then pause for a minute out of petulence? Happens a lot.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And re the further climb thing. We are FULLY COGNIZANT of the fact that it is better to have smooth climb and descent, and any decent controller will issue further, in time, if available.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One that gets me is on Seaford sector at Latcc. The biggest problem is jumbling around the traffic to make the phenominal amount of level capping restrictions imposed by the French agencies. How many times have I been asked 'could you please pass on we're looking for FL330 today' for a/c restricted AND flowed at FL270. a) normally haven't got the time; b) this means telling a different agency ie Brest who won't even have skeleton details on your flight so won't care anyway; c) its much easier if you ask Paris, at least when they speak to Brest they can do it in the same language!
Similar to this is the 'heavies' climbing out of London going to Africa et al, who cannot make FL290+ by Etrat/Bames. These are passed at FL270 max to Paris, so at least when they transit the airspace, Paris can see them and then attempt separation from the CDG inbounds. Telling us that FL330 is the final level is pointless, you still going to Paris.
Well done to the Jersey/British Euro boys though who have us sussed. Asking for FL290 and also informing us you can be level is totally spot on. It saves us a transmission and you then going 'errrr....I'll just check, standby'!!!! <img src="wink.gif" border="0">
Merry Christmas everybody and , as I was reminded yesterday, have a HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!!!!
Similar to this is the 'heavies' climbing out of London going to Africa et al, who cannot make FL290+ by Etrat/Bames. These are passed at FL270 max to Paris, so at least when they transit the airspace, Paris can see them and then attempt separation from the CDG inbounds. Telling us that FL330 is the final level is pointless, you still going to Paris.
Well done to the Jersey/British Euro boys though who have us sussed. Asking for FL290 and also informing us you can be level is totally spot on. It saves us a transmission and you then going 'errrr....I'll just check, standby'!!!! <img src="wink.gif" border="0">
Merry Christmas everybody and , as I was reminded yesterday, have a HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!!!!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: far far away
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Found this AIC the other day, and thought you all might be interested.You need ACROBAT READER to view the file.
<a href="http://www.ais.org.uk/Uk_aip/pdf/aic/4Y058.pdf" target="_blank">UK AIC 73/2001 YELLOW. RTF DISCIPLINE</a>
For those without Acrobat or can't be arsed going to the web page here's a summary:
This yellow concerns RTF Discipline and initial calls on frequency. A survey of Scottish TMA departures found that on first contact;
a) 79% gave the SID
b) 89% reported passing level
c) 63% reported cleared altitude
d) 52% gave all required items
e) 4% GAVE NO INFORMATION AT ALL
In my opinion, a) to d) should read 100%
and e) should most definitely read 0%
This next bit is interesting. I quote,
"..almost a tenth of all pilots did not pass their current altitude. In a majority of these instances, the ScACC controller did not ..query this and thus Mode C had not been verified.....the use of Mode C to provide vertical separation was, strictly speaking, not permissable..."
There is also a couple of paragraphs on the tendency to abbreviate company callsigns.
Maybe both pilots and controllers should have a go at getting these averages up. <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">
[ 28 December 2001: Message edited by: Goldfish Watcher ]</p>
<a href="http://www.ais.org.uk/Uk_aip/pdf/aic/4Y058.pdf" target="_blank">UK AIC 73/2001 YELLOW. RTF DISCIPLINE</a>
For those without Acrobat or can't be arsed going to the web page here's a summary:
This yellow concerns RTF Discipline and initial calls on frequency. A survey of Scottish TMA departures found that on first contact;
a) 79% gave the SID
b) 89% reported passing level
c) 63% reported cleared altitude
d) 52% gave all required items
e) 4% GAVE NO INFORMATION AT ALL
In my opinion, a) to d) should read 100%
and e) should most definitely read 0%
This next bit is interesting. I quote,
"..almost a tenth of all pilots did not pass their current altitude. In a majority of these instances, the ScACC controller did not ..query this and thus Mode C had not been verified.....the use of Mode C to provide vertical separation was, strictly speaking, not permissable..."
There is also a couple of paragraphs on the tendency to abbreviate company callsigns.
Maybe both pilots and controllers should have a go at getting these averages up. <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">
[ 28 December 2001: Message edited by: Goldfish Watcher ]</p>