This happened - is it a big deal as far as ATC are concerned?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Jupiter
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This happened - is it a big deal as far as ATC are concerned?
I won't identify airports, ATSUs, people or aircraft. Suffice to say I was in the aircraft and the control was full ATC (i.e. not information).
We have just turned final.
My Aircraft: "[My Callsign] final runway [XY] to land"
ATSU: "[My Callsign] Roger, continue approach"
My Aircraft: "Continue approach, [My Callsign]"
ATSU: "[Other A/C on ground] line up and wait runway [XY]"
Other A/C on ground: "Line up and wait runway [XY], [Callsign]"
Other A/C on ground lines up, looks like we're to land over his head. Previous landing aircraft at far end of runway has not quite vacated yet but looks likely to turn any moment.
ATSU: "[My Callsign] cleared to land, wind is blah blah blah"
My Aircraft: "Cleared to land, [My Callsign]"
Aircraft at far end of runway vacates. Approach continues until approx 100 feet showing on the QFE, at which point:
ATSU: "[Other A/C on ground] cleared take-off, wind is blah blah blah"
Other A/C on ground: "Cleared take off, [Callsign]"
My Aircraft: "[My Callsign] going around"
?????
Big deal or not?
We have just turned final.
My Aircraft: "[My Callsign] final runway [XY] to land"
ATSU: "[My Callsign] Roger, continue approach"
My Aircraft: "Continue approach, [My Callsign]"
ATSU: "[Other A/C on ground] line up and wait runway [XY]"
Other A/C on ground: "Line up and wait runway [XY], [Callsign]"
Other A/C on ground lines up, looks like we're to land over his head. Previous landing aircraft at far end of runway has not quite vacated yet but looks likely to turn any moment.
ATSU: "[My Callsign] cleared to land, wind is blah blah blah"
My Aircraft: "Cleared to land, [My Callsign]"
Aircraft at far end of runway vacates. Approach continues until approx 100 feet showing on the QFE, at which point:
ATSU: "[Other A/C on ground] cleared take-off, wind is blah blah blah"
Other A/C on ground: "Cleared take off, [Callsign]"
My Aircraft: "[My Callsign] going around"
?????
Big deal or not?
Last edited by niceday2700classic; 4th Aug 2011 at 12:16. Reason: Clarity
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends which country you are in. In the UK its a huge deal.
And a piggy back go around with departing traffic under you is not a very pleasant situation to be in.
As a pilot don't let the situation develop if its starts getting hairy like that again go around early.
And a piggy back go around with departing traffic under you is not a very pleasant situation to be in.
As a pilot don't let the situation develop if its starts getting hairy like that again go around early.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have to MOR it then.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP382.PDF
And here is your form
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/SRG1601active.pdf
Print it off and fax it or print to a pdf and email it in.
By rights you should have refused the landing clearance if you could see that the runway was unsafe.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP382.PDF
And here is your form
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/SRG1601active.pdf
Print it off and fax it or print to a pdf and email it in.
By rights you should have refused the landing clearance if you could see that the runway was unsafe.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can do but the PIC ain't going to be happy. Even if your a student you a memeber of flight crew and as such can file one.
You can use this instead.
CHIRP
It will have the same effect.
I presume you were on a training flight.
They do a report for GA matters here which is worth reading.
http://www.chirp.co.uk/Downloads/GAFB/GAFB48.pdf
You can use this instead.
CHIRP
It will have the same effect.
I presume you were on a training flight.
They do a report for GA matters here which is worth reading.
http://www.chirp.co.uk/Downloads/GAFB/GAFB48.pdf
I tend to agree with HD; even if the start of TOR was a long way displaced from the threshold it was outright dangerous; you should have gone around when you had no landing clearance by 2 miles.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Jupiter
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clearance by 2 miles??!!! If I went around when a clearance wasn't given before 2 miles then I'd never land.....
Let's just clarify that this was a little bird rather than a big bird.
The displacement (i.e. position of lined up aircraft) was about 100-150m short of the threshold.
P1 was asked to call controller on landing and did so. I wasn't privy to the coversation, but understand controller apologised profusely.
Let's just clarify that this was a little bird rather than a big bird.
The displacement (i.e. position of lined up aircraft) was about 100-150m short of the threshold.
P1 was asked to call controller on landing and did so. I wasn't privy to the coversation, but understand controller apologised profusely.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't matter that he aplogised it needs MOR'd
The P1 should get a his
squeezed as well for allowing the situation to develope to such a dangerous stage and also for not reporting it.
We have had enough people die inside the ATZ this year you could have very nearly been an addition.
Its all very well sweeping stuff under the carpet with a phone call and for some situations which haven't put lives at risk its acceptable.
And as for the 2 miles thats not going to work, but it is accpetable to continue and wait for a clearance if you can see things are working out. But to be cleared to land while the active has something on it would have instantly had me going around as the controller had obviously lost his situation awareness.
There may be issues with the unit which are nothing to do with the controller eg under staffing etc which the authorities could make them deal with.
The P1 should get a his
squeezed as well for allowing the situation to develope to such a dangerous stage and also for not reporting it.We have had enough people die inside the ATZ this year you could have very nearly been an addition.
Its all very well sweeping stuff under the carpet with a phone call and for some situations which haven't put lives at risk its acceptable.
And as for the 2 miles thats not going to work, but it is accpetable to continue and wait for a clearance if you can see things are working out. But to be cleared to land while the active has something on it would have instantly had me going around as the controller had obviously lost his situation awareness.
There may be issues with the unit which are nothing to do with the controller eg under staffing etc which the authorities could make them deal with.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Jupiter
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He didn't apologise, she did.
Also, I'd be very surprised if P1 had to squeeze.
"enough people die inside the ATZ this year".... you sound like you know where this happened?
Can you clear something else up for me, related to the same trip. At a controlled airfield if the controller instructs you to "report downwind", do you need to respond "will report downwind" or does "wilco" suffice?
Also, I'd be very surprised if P1 had
to squeeze."enough people die inside the ATZ this year".... you sound like you know where this happened?
Can you clear something else up for me, related to the same trip. At a controlled airfield if the controller instructs you to "report downwind", do you need to respond "will report downwind" or does "wilco" suffice?
Ever since the Trident vs Comet incident at Bedford (about 1970?) landovers in the UK have not been allowed for 'normal' ATC operations. I know it used to happen at Elstree years ago before taxiway B was built; you'd need to backtrack from the present taxiway A and an aircraft could hold on the turning circle with others 'landing over' but as the turning circle was well below the threshold, it wasn't too dangerous!!
Can you clear something else up for me, related to the same trip. At a controlled airfield if the controller instructs you to "report downwind", do you need to respond "will report downwind" or does "wilco" suffice?
2 s
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
niceday2700classic.
From your first post...
You were told to continue...
A/C was lined up and told to wait.
So far all is safe and legal.
You were told to land, with the aircraft lined up.
Now unsafe. No ifs or buts, there is no argument. You cannot land over an aircraft. It is not legal.
The only safe way to get out of the situation now (from ATCO action) is to tell you to go around. No clearance for take off should be given to the other aircraft.
The PF or P1 should have questioned the landing clearance when it was given.
Although the ATCO was responsible, as aircraft comander the P1 is ultimately responsible for safety of that aircraft.
The only phone call that should have been made was by the P1 to the tower to inform them that you would be filing an MOR.
The situation was despicable enough... it is almost as despicable to not report it. Next time someone could be killed by that ATCO.
Speak to the P1 and get them to MOR it. If not, report it on CHIRP yourself.
If you or they don't then flying is the wrong vocation for you both. Sorry to sound harsh but it is not a game.
From your first post...
You were told to continue...
A/C was lined up and told to wait.
So far all is safe and legal.
You were told to land, with the aircraft lined up.
Now unsafe. No ifs or buts, there is no argument. You cannot land over an aircraft. It is not legal.
The only safe way to get out of the situation now (from ATCO action) is to tell you to go around. No clearance for take off should be given to the other aircraft.
The PF or P1 should have questioned the landing clearance when it was given.
Although the ATCO was responsible, as aircraft comander the P1 is ultimately responsible for safety of that aircraft.
The only phone call that should have been made was by the P1 to the tower to inform them that you would be filing an MOR.
The situation was despicable enough... it is almost as despicable to not report it. Next time someone could be killed by that ATCO.
Speak to the P1 and get them to MOR it. If not, report it on CHIRP yourself.
If you or they don't then flying is the wrong vocation for you both. Sorry to sound harsh but it is not a game.
Anotherthing
While I agree with the general thrust of your post, it's a little OTT to start using terms such as "despicable" and casting doubts on the ATCO's future actions when we know nothing of the incident from the ATC point of view and only have one account from one person out of at least four involved. Even if the bottom line were to be that the ATCO made a mistake, the question still remains, "why?". We all make mistakes, and sometimes, unfortunately, they might be serious.
2 s
While I agree with the general thrust of your post, it's a little OTT to start using terms such as "despicable" and casting doubts on the ATCO's future actions when we know nothing of the incident from the ATC point of view and only have one account from one person out of at least four involved. Even if the bottom line were to be that the ATCO made a mistake, the question still remains, "why?". We all make mistakes, and sometimes, unfortunately, they might be serious.
2 s
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The purpose of both MORs and CHIRP is so that we can all learn from the unfortunate experiences of others.
It appears that some very poor if not dangerous, controlling techniques were applied in this instance, equally P1 should have queried the clearance. It may also be that there is a more systemic trend within the ATC unit, i.e the people in charge of standards are not doing their job properly.
You have a legal authority to file an MOR and moral responsibility to file that and a CHIRP report.
The end result will almost certainly be that the ATCO concerned undergoes re training, not her dismissal and possibly a review of training procedures and management techniques within the ATC Unit may be enforced, everyone will benefit from that.
Don't worry yourself with the opinions of P1, the CFI, the clubhouse cat or anyone else, just do the right thing.
It appears that some very poor if not dangerous, controlling techniques were applied in this instance, equally P1 should have queried the clearance. It may also be that there is a more systemic trend within the ATC unit, i.e the people in charge of standards are not doing their job properly.
You have a legal authority to file an MOR and moral responsibility to file that and a CHIRP report.
The end result will almost certainly be that the ATCO concerned undergoes re training, not her dismissal and possibly a review of training procedures and management techniques within the ATC Unit may be enforced, everyone will benefit from that.
Don't worry yourself with the opinions of P1, the CFI, the clubhouse cat or anyone else, just do the right thing.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: France
Age: 55
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did the controller say anything when you went around with the other traffic taking off below ?
This kind of situation can build up (as anytime in ATC, .hit happens), but the controller should have, at least, anticipated it and warned you.
The fact that your P1 was an instructor (was he really ?) might have made the controller think he could push the limits, but the controller's plan B should have been emmitted on the frequency.
I mean (once more, at least) a message during your final, when he lined up the departing traffic.
Something sounding like :
"[your CS], continue short final, a traffic lining up. In case of a go around in short final, [his intentions to provide safe(ish) separation between the departing and you]"
Eg : right/left turn to join downwind, or anything for you to clear the runway centerline.
Once warned, if you didn't approve this plan B, you would have had a chance to go around earlier, take off canceled, day saved for sure...
This kind of situation can build up (as anytime in ATC, .hit happens), but the controller should have, at least, anticipated it and warned you.
The fact that your P1 was an instructor (was he really ?) might have made the controller think he could push the limits, but the controller's plan B should have been emmitted on the frequency.
I mean (once more, at least) a message during your final, when he lined up the departing traffic.
Something sounding like :
"[your CS], continue short final, a traffic lining up. In case of a go around in short final, [his intentions to provide safe(ish) separation between the departing and you]"
Eg : right/left turn to join downwind, or anything for you to clear the runway centerline.
Once warned, if you didn't approve this plan B, you would have had a chance to go around earlier, take off canceled, day saved for sure...