who exactly is in control?

[Jerricho]

The evil twin speaks with forked tongue....................

It TAKES talent to really stuff things up that bad!!!!!
(Just ask P7, the second best controller in the world!!!)

[roger]

MATZ, check out......... Radar Control Service.

Here endeth the reply.........

Just to reinforce 'need to know'

"why did you make us no. 2, we were on the freq. first and we're a quarter of a mile ahead?"

Please read 'need to knows'' reply

[Jerricho]

Actually, this brings up an intersting point.

Occasions occur where for us to get he optimal wake vortex order on final, a/c are sometimes taken off the stack from above the guy who got there first (eg, a F50 ahead of a 757). I have never had a snakey retort from a driver when telling them why the guy above them is coming off first.

[controller friendly]

Thought it was about time i replied to this as i felt that this thread could almost have been written for me.....

Anyway last week i'm sitting trying to do my best when a pilot informs me that he is going to mor my radar vectoring.......WHAT... I do sometimes wonder where some of these guys get off and who the hell they think they are..... Do i tell them how to fly.... do i give marks outta 10 for landings.......I do think there are certain comments made to controllers at regional airports that just would not be said in the london tma and i also think there is a hell of alot of sexism still in this industry......!!!!!
This particular aircraft was given 3 heading changes and that included the closing heading but all he was interested in was the fact that i made an aircraft behind him number 1 so he threw a strop.....did he know the radar picture,has he visited the tower, i doubt it. I really wish the CAA would hurry up and give permission for formation landings for commercial aircraft, it would certainly make my life a wee bit easier

Rant over.....

[JustaFew]

Getting the same problem with a certain 'gentleman' on the flight deck of an orange B737.I made him no.2 once to a training jet, simply because it was the blindingly obvious sequence, but to reverse the order would have delayed the training jet by ten mininutes and wouldn't have reduced the track distance the orange B737 had to fly. The comment passed by the 'professional' captain was, 'How many passengers does HE have?'. This is just one of several comments he has made to ATC.

In 3 decades of ATC I haven't heard any ATCO tell a pilot how to fly the airplane, when and by how much to lower their flaps, what power setting etc. etc. etc..

This isn't a dig at pilots; they or their company pay my wages. The attitude a tiny minority have does need leaving at home, or the supermarket check-out queue. Don't recall people comparing trolley sizes there to sort out an order...

[PPRuNe Radar]

Advise the pilot that a copy of the RT tape will be made and sent to his Director of Flight Operations ...... and then do it

[EuroATC]

Well first off, ATC is based on a first come first serve basis. All a/c whether they are training jets or B747 pay user fees so they are both entitlted to the same level of service.

Talking about pilots not following instructions... I work in Bahrain and last week had a B777 out of Dubai (guess which airline..?? .. When the aircraft enters our airspace, they fly about 55 minutes before entering Jeddah's airspace. We have to provide 10 minutes separation at the same speed. There was another aircraft in front of him flying at .81. On pilots estimates, the B777 was 9 minutes behind. On initial contact, the controller told the pilot he had to lose a minute and to fly at .81. (pilot had 55 minutes to adjust his speed to lose the minute!) It was obvious from first call he did not like this but that was the end of it..so it seemed. Then about 20 mins later, he comes on my frequency and starts asking who is in front and what speed they are flying at. I told him, he's flying at .81.. this is why you have the time restriction. He comes back and says.. he can't make that time, so I offered a radar vector to lose the 1 minute. NO answer from him. Then it became an arguement, "we are flying at minimum speed".. "do you realize this is a boeing 777".. I once again explained that these were the rules and that I had to provide 10 minutes. He did not want to make this restriction! SO what to do? I kept pushing him until he reduced his speed.. but next time I will just file a report in the hopes that someone like this gets seriously reprimanded by his company. He was not going to comply with an ATC clearance. I offered him the vector, I offered him a lower level with no restriction... he did everything short of asking the guy in front to change levels. Then to top it all off, about 5 minutes after I switched him to Jeddah, he comes back on the frequency and tells me, Jeddah cancelled our speed restriction... "I said that's great!,... I still have rules here and I still have to apply 10 min sep.. if Jeddah wants to remove it, that's his choice"...

I was appaled by his behavior, especially from this particular airline. I don't take pleasure out of reducing a/c speeds or turning airlplanes all over the sky for no reason. I do my job to the best of my abilities and I feel that it is sometimes not appreciated from the other side.

[Timothy]

May I ask a question about all this? When is it OK to "nudge" for a better routing and when isn't it.

Take the example of Biggin 21 DEP for SFD or A34. There are two routings, both pretty awful in a slow aircraft. Firstly there is a noise turn through 240deg (frustrating but understandable) then out to DET, followed by a choice of MAY, SFD or LYD, Drake. If you take DET MAY there is a 130deg turn at DET. If you go to Lyd it's a long way round.

Now the question is, as I trundle out towards DET, when, if ever, would it be acceptable to ask if direct MAY or SFD is available? Do you want me to trust you to give the direct, unprompted? Or does it help you help me if I give you a nudge? Certainly nudging often produces results, which implies that you are not always working to the limit of what's possible, but I don't want to cause offence or increase your workload unnecessarily.

W

[information_alpha]

I think that every controller has had the situation where a pilot has queried an instruction on the r/t. As far as I am concered, if the pilot feels that the instruction may affect safety - ie he might fly into bad weather, I do not have a problem. However, pilots arguing and getting shirty on the r/t because they feel they have been hard done by is not on. The best thing to do is for the pilot to telephone ATC on landing. We can then spend time explaining our actions and the reasons behind them. The pilot can also then put his point of view (they can sometimes have a point!). This is much the more professional way to play things and can be a learning experience for both controllers and pilots.

[Point Seven]

WCollins

If you're out aviating and you think a nudge could help you out and it's quiet the go for it. Us ATCers don't always go for expedition because that may not suit you. you could be on a training flight and what you're flying is just what the trainee needs.

What I think is being discussed here, is airline pilots complaining because they don't like the sequence or the heading changes, when flying into the big hubs. Here, expedition IS a premium and just cos TCAS shows one thing, our radars show a different picture.

P7

[av8boy]

I seem to be apologizing for this all the time but, sorry about the length...

I once again explained that these were the rules and that I had to provide 10 minutes. He did not want to make this restriction! SO what to do?

Perhaps suggest that there may come a moment in the relationship (say, 20 or 30 minutes from now), when this inability to make an arguably minor adjustment will necessitate a 360 degree turn for spacing just short of the airspace boundary? Hell, I don't know...

But my real reason for calling... a rant:

I'm in my third decade of this profession, and I've worked in some of the busiest towers and TRACONS in the US. Yes, I've witnessed the increase in this type of behavior. However, in my heart I wonder if we didn't play a small part in creating this monster.

I have seen controllers with loads of talent and controllers who, although not endowed with the any particular visionary gifts, provide safe, expeditious service at all times. The difference is not THAT important, because ATC, in general, does a pretty good job of weeding out those who simply cannot safely do the job.

So, what am I going on about? Giving a damn. Service. Doing something that you have the discretion to do (but are not required to do) when it can make life easier for the customer. Simply TRYING. That's what. After all these years it strikes me as forcefully as the first time I saw it... I am talking about a situation where:

• A controller recognizes that there is a specific thing he or she could do with this particular aircraft that would provide the pilot with better service
• The action is safe, expeditious (for the controller, the aircraft, and the rest of the ATC system), and legal
• The ability to take the action resides within the controller's skill set
• The controller is not busy at all, but
• Whether the request is being made by a pilot, a suggestion is being made by another controller, or whether the controller him/herself sees that he/she might be able to provide better service, the controller simply cannot be bothered to provide this service. Although the situation is always safe and legal, no effort beyond the bare minimum is made by the controller.

Sometimes I could just puke. I'm certainly jaded in my old age, but I find myself, from time to time, saying to another controller, "OH-COME-ON! You could have easily done xxxx or zzzz and that guy would have been able to yyyy because of it!" The answer: "I'm not required to do that." Listen, I KNOW YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO DO THAT. That's why I said it like I did. But why NOT do it? Lots of reasons... tired, taking advantage of a lull to let the old brain reset a bit, uncertain about the ability of the next sector to cope, etc. That's fine. But if this is a product of your laziness or anger, you're doing more harm to the system than you are good to yourself.

Now, has this caused the surge in the kind of problems we've been discussing here? Caused? No. I promise you it has not. However, it has not helped. Self-righteous controllers, smug controllers, angry controllers, anal-retentive controllers, holier-than-thou-controllers, controlling controllers--you are making life harder for all of us. Problem is, you don't care enough about what you do to participate in a forum like this one, so I'm preaching to the choir. Look, pilots may not be as intelligent or good looking as controllers , but they do have an uncanny ability to recognize inefficient use of the airspace from time to time, and their ex-wives and ex-husbands have sensitized them to recognizing the unspoken "bite me" buried within other phrases. Guess what? The angry or lazy controller SOUNDS like an angry or lazy controller on the frequency. Pilots are alienated. The safety partnership is gone. Pilots begin to second guess all controllers. (and yes, I've over extended this. I know).

Don't misunderstand me. ATC ranks are not swelling with angry and lazy controllers. But again, that is part of my point... the few who act this way make it tougher on the rest of us. END of rant.

Closer to the point I was supposed to be sticking to: sometimes (usually after a pint or two) it occurs to me that dealing with aircrews demands a pure heart as much as it demands ATC talent. When I know that I've done what was expected of me, and then added even a little more value to that, I find that I don't get angry when I'm questioned by a pilot about my control instructions (However, during those "ident to acknowledge" constantly keyed periods the last thing I want to hear when I stop to take a breath is "why?", so don't assume I'm a Pollyanna. I said I don't get angry--I DIDN'T say I thought it was acceptable...). To the extent I can, I try to provide more than the minimal (required) information along with the instruction in the first place (..."fly heading 230 for sequence to the airport. Looks like it'll be about 8 miles or so before I can turn you back...". If there's a question and I have time, I answer it. If it goes farther than that, I've got a mantra: "Sir, if you want to discuss this further there is a supervisor available here 24 hours per day. My initials are 'xx.' Make a note of the time so they can pull the tapes, and let me know when you're ready to copy the phone number."

What's more, I think a threat from an aircrew to file a report is anything BUT a threat to me personally. I mean, what's the down side? I try hard to provide excellent/additional service. To the extent I cannot, the level of service does not drop below that which is required. If I've done something unsafe or illegal and I recognize it, the system encourages me to report it myself and rewards me for recognizing the problem and facing it, so I will do just that. Because I myself have reported the problem, I don't fear the additional aircrew report. But if I've done something unsafe or illegal and I do NOT recognize it, somebody else damned well better say something so I can avoid doing it again. So, have at it. I've got to sit through "tape talks" in the interest of quality control anyway. This just presents an opportunity for me to listen to an event which somebody else saw differently than I did. That's not a bad thing.

There are undoubtedly lots of reasons behind this new tendency to argue over common control instructions. All I'm saying is that it doesn't hurt any of us to be a little more introspective from time to time. It might even make your life easier.

Finally, let me reiterate one thing: I am taking not taking a poke at ANYBODY on this forum, nor am I saying that any more than a tiny minority of the controllers I've seen over the years have been problematic. But, those that ARE out there are a burden.

Am I wrong? Help me out here.

Dave

[EuroATC]

EXCELLENT POST DAVE!

Could not have said it better myself, I sometimes go crazy watching the way others "won't go the extra mile" to provide a better service. When I work, I am constantly trying to shorten up the routings, avoid level off and accomodating any request that comes my way. Unfortunately no everyone works like this and you are right, it is the few who don't who give ATC a bad name!

About my previous posting, I could have easily given the vector to lose the minute, my problem is the back and forth on the frequency as this crew would not comply with an ATC instruction. Next time it's simple, I say "confirm you will not cross xxx at time xxx... " I get a acknoledgement, then I have the tapes pulled and file a report which goes to the company and let them deal with it.

PM me sometime, i would be interested to know where you have worked,

Best Regards!

[Jerricho]

Dave, your post is one of the best seen on this Forum.

Infact, I can think of one or two people who could benefit from reading this. But, as you say, the major percentage of people who contribute here would agree with what you have said.

I'll admit, I have only been in the game a very short while, but (and you keep out of this P7) would like to think I give a damn about my work. As do just about all of the guys and gals I work with.

But, as was pointed out the other day by someone with far more experience than me, the thing that boils their p*ss more than anything is junior controllers talking to pilots in blatently condescending and downright rude manner, and that they would love to give them a good slap. Here is a person who has been controlling 5 minutes being disrespectful to a driver who very well had his licence well before the before-mentioned realised he or she was alive.

It is a team game, and when we all play nice it is an absolute pleasure.

[glider insider]

as someone currently training to be a controller this has been interesting to read. Everyday it gets drummed in:

Rule 1: Safety
Rule 2: Expedition
Rule 3: Get Rid!

Every extra track mile that we achieve between aircraft being sequenced is an extra a/c we are working making our lives more difficult. It is not in our interest to keep people hanging about and making them do an extra 20 / 40 / 60 miles just to piss off a pilot who we dislike.....

the time for finger poking is in the bar at the end of the day... not on frequency.

I am being taught that if you are issuing a control instruction that seems strange ( i.e long way round turns etc etc) than try and give an explination, it heads off the inevitable "why" and also shows to the a/c that there is a valid reason and hopefully builds a level of trust in the service being provided..


but anyway, I'm still in training, lets see what happens in the "real world"

[av8boy]

Thanks for the kind words of support you guys. Always a little nerve-wracking to put your heart out on your sleeve for the maws to peck at. I appreciate the feedback.

Thanks again,

Dave

[garp]

Good post Dave,

Perhaps one of the reasons that more and more 'I do my job but please don't bother me with asking for that extra service' attitudes are being observed is that ATC has just become another job. It used to be so that people with lots of interest in aviation would come knocking at the door of the TWR, lots of people I know would have sold an arm and a leg in order to stay in an aviation related job. Times have changed I don't really believe in the vocation of becoming an ATCO but if I look at who they are throwing into the Ops Room nowadays I sometimes wonder if it shouldn't be a vocation. You still get the enthusiasts but they've become a minority. I'm not saying that people who got into this job by chance instead of by determination will be worse controllers but I'm convinced that the extra input, the gut feeling, is often lacking.
Jerricho,
By all means tell them. Don't let a rookie get away with it because they'll do it again. There has to be some kind of social control, remember that a pilot who has been flying several sectors on a day, receiving excellent service throughout will only remember the punk who was badmouthing him. Next day he will come on your frequency and he will think 'Go to hell' when you ask him to give an extra RoC. On top of that realise that arrogance on the frequency is an external sign of a great feeling of internal discomfort and insecurity. They're just compensating the fact that they cannot really handle their job. Puts them in a different light, doesn't it?

[fourthreethree]

Yes av8boy, agree completely with your post, I would like to think I am "one of the good guys" but I do on occasion get fed up with pilots questoining my clearances. This reached new heights last week when my favourite airline (frequently to be found in EHAM) had an inbound rush on while I was giving coaching.
Admittedly my trainee left it a tad late to start the descent of a particular inbound, but, spotting the opposite at F270 gave him 2500fpm+ until passing F260, cleared level was F210. So he reads back 2000fpm which was missed by all. But his rate never got above 1700fpm. So trainee increases to 3000fpm+, to aghast sounds from the cockpit. For a minute or so the rate is 4000, then at F275 the pilot decides hes had enough and reduces to 1000, no word to atc. So I took the r/t and asked why, after reading back 3000fpm, he was currently doing only 1000, and told him to increase, opposite traffic etc.

His response is now the subject of a report I am writing.

"It is not my fault if your planning is not good enough."

Now theres questioning a clearance and theres blatant disregard of atc clearances. If a pilot questions a restriction I have given him, I will answer, for there is always a good reason. In response to the thread title, I am in control and pilots will respect that. Its not a power thing, I will explain the situation if time allows on the r/t, its just a fact. Air Traffic Control . Simple.

[055166k]

Pilot or Controller?

There must be a fine dividing line between being a controller and trying to tell the pilot how to fly his aircraft, I am very wary of imposing a rate of climb/descent, and my understanding is that a high rate of descent coming into the much thicker air of the mid 20's will start to cause a rapid IAS increase...with some types this is not what the pilot wants. There are alternative methods of getting a plane to the right place at the right level.

[250 kts]

True,but there's also a requirement for the pilot to advise when he can't comply with the clearance issued. As for his reaction then i would be reporting him to the chief pilot of the airline-and then requesting that the pilot concerned be cOMPELLED to visit your unit and have a go on the sim.

[av8boy]

garp...

There has to be some kind of social control, remember that a pilot who has been flying several sectors on a day, receiving excellent service throughout will only remember the punk who was badmouthing him.

I wish I'd said that. I think you've hit the nail on the head with "social control." ATC remains largely an apprenticeship, and the control room/tower tends to retain a master/journeyman/apprentice/trainee pecking order. If you're not using your years of experience and the respect which your hard-won skills have earned you to influence the less-experienced controllers and make the system better, then what the hell are you doing? When you're working with a trainee it can be easy to see his or her certification as the goal. But look at yourself--you're still learning after all this time, right? Keep reaching out. Keep influencing.

lots of people I know would have sold an arm and a leg in order to stay in an aviation related job.

Agreed, so long as we remember that an aviation background does not always protect against these kinds of problems. I know this isn't central to the points you make (which are, in fact, excellent). Your posting just brought this to mind...

Over the years I've worked with furloughed/former pilots who've transitioned to ATC for various reasons. Like all controllers, they come in all kinds of temperaments and bring varied skill sets with them. However, I WOULD point out that, in my experience, no one is harder on the drivers than those controllers with aircrew experience. Stand around a tower, TRACON, or Center and listen to the complaints made off-frequency about pilots. Again, this is just my personal experience, but it appears to me that in most cases, a controller who is going on about how the airframe in question is perfectly capable of making a particular restriction/immediate takeoff/etc but is impaired by its less-than-capable crew, probably piloted that or a similar type of aircraft in a prior life. I've learned (and continue to learn) a TREMENDOUS amount from these folks, and my ability to make the best use of the airspace has benefited. However, there ARE times when it just gets in the way. In short, if I issue an instruction that I believe is doable by the airframe and the response from the flight deck is "unable," the last thing I'm going to do is tie up brain cells fuming over what a waste this pilot is (like I'm qualified to make that call anyway, sitting miles away/below...). It has always been important to me to remember that, while ATC and piloting are inextricably linked, they remain two separate jobs that are separated for a reason. Where they come together it is (here's the big segue!) a partnership.

"It is not my fault if your planning is not good enough."

fourthreethree

To that pilot I say (but not on frequency), “True. It is not YOUR fault that MY planning was bad. However, MY chair is currently in a spot that runs very little chance of it getting t-boned by crossing traffic, whereas YOUR chair is currently in grave danger.” Personally, I never saw the attraction in being "dead right.

OK, so let's assume that actual metal-to-metal contact is not a threat here. What just happened? Around my house we'd look here (among other places):

14 CFR 91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.

(a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory... [snip] When a pilot is uncertain of an ATC clearance, that pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC.
(b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised. ([snip] etc...)

So looking only at what was agreed-to by the aircrew and the aircrew's subsequent behavior (as recounted in the post) in light of the above, it sure looks like the aircrew was wrong. But that doesn't address the issue, does it?

You say, "Now theres questioning a clearance and theres blatant disregard of atc clearances." Agreed. What's more, from the looks of it, this one is pretty much in the latter category. But here's where I think we need to put more thought into it. This chap in the aircraft essentially told you "YOU work it out. I'm not going to be part of your solution." Once you worked it out, it was over for him or her (except for that lingering anger/report being filed, etc). But it is NOT over for you because you know darned well that you're going to see this kind of thing again. You've just got to be certain you don't act in exactly the same way that this pilot did. In other words, you (we... all of us) cannot continue to go through this kind of thing and say, "we're right, those pilots are wrong, and it isn't my problem to fix. I'll just file a report, get my pound of flesh, and someone will show that driver the error of his ways." See, the pilot told you that your poor planning wasn't his problem, and you're going to tell him that his violation isn't YOUR problem. But this doesn't make things better. Ask yourself, “did that pilot know that what he/she did was wrong/a violation?” Of course. So, why? Why would he or she endanger a hard-won career when the aviation employment market is so volatile? Why would he or she potentially compromise safety just to take a shot at a controller? Yes, there is a bottom line: outright refusal to comply with a control instruction cannot be tolerated. The system cannot survive even a little of this. But SOMEBODY has to go beyond this point. Perhaps if I was a pilot I’d be advocating for fellow pilots to take the lead and work through this. However, I’m not, so I’m trying to flesh this out with you. It’s kinda like marriage… both of you can be obstinate because you’re right or angry or otherwise justified in your position. But you gotta ask yourself, “do I want this marriage to continue?” If the answer is “yes,” then somebody is going to have to try to find the root of the problem. Loggerheads will not work. Same thing here with our safety partnership. If we want it to work, someone is going to have to figure out what’s going on and constructively address it. Don’t let anger/irritation/frustration get in the way of that.

So, I've rambled again, and for that I apologize. But I think that it is important to keep our eyes on what has always been our goal: safety. Dealing with outright refusal to comply with a control instruction is what this thread is about. Such behavior is simply unacceptable, as is disregarding a control instruction without advising. So what are we going to do about it? Absolutely write them up and turn them in. However, as I said in an earlier post, I still think it is on us to be a little introspective here. If we can see where this is going south, perhaps we can help stop it.

If I’m getting this wrong, PLEASE tell me.

Dave