BRISTOL JOBSWORTHS
 

I am a 30 years serving military Pilot.

I am out and about in the UK most days. In 30 years I have had nothing but professional help and service from all ATC units up and down the country. Thank you guys/gals, my job is difficult and there's nothing like the reasssuring voice of somebody at the other end of the airwaves when you need it, especially on a dark horrible night. Thankyou for 30 years of dealing with me.

I was shocked recently to get the brush-off from Bristol on a poor weather day when i was transiting down the channel and could have done with a quick climb and transit to the east. I put it down to 'one of those days'.*

But I hear from my colleagues that my experience is now standard and Bristol are behaving like proper jobsworths. Not interested in anything outside of controlled airspace. All you get is "remain clear of controlled airspace and **** OFF"

I find this attitude appalling, especially when there's nobody else out there.

whats going on?? Why behave in such a shoddy manner?

*Im not stupid, he was waiting for me to bell-up. He just couldn't wait to be a obstructionist c##t. I was the only f##ker airborne in southern lockdown UK. What a ****.

Wow. Arrogant much

Marly Lite
Why do you not consult NATS, the ANSP at Bristol? You might just find that they have a policy of only providing service within CAS. Your thoroughly offensive remarks do not impress.
2 s

It could be they are, as a unit, trying to not provide services outside CAS due to workload, staff shortages, or something. Were you requesting a transit or just a service outside? Regardless, there's no excuse for being rude

Don’t be harsh
 

Obviously the blanked words were ‘cart’ and ‘fokker.

You would have to be a right pompous C*** and utter t**t to post otherwise.

Looking at your previous posts, you seem a contented chap/chapess

Maybe this is no longer the job for you.

I assume that you haven’t become a civilian pilot because you are considered risky. You may want to read this..... the first line of para 1 could be of interest to you and your colleagues. (Kinda hope that you don’t have to manage a crew)

CAA Guidance on Pilot Care

The initial part of your post was reasonably valid if a little terse. To add that last line utterly wipes out any credibility and guarantees that this thread becomes a discussion about you rather than your "point".

Move along - nothing to see here.

But the OP does shine a light on a problem that we have in the UK; the availability of surveillance based FIS in class G.

Marly,

wowzers buddy! No need for such strong language.

I’m a military pilot too. Did you phone ATC after landing? Any time I’ve ever had an issue with ATC, that’s what I’ve done, albeit I’ve rarely had an issue. Every time we’ve had a friendly chat, and there's always been more to the situation than meets the eye.

Just purely out of interest, outside of controlled airspace, was there a problem speaking to Cardiff, as Cardiff is the LARS provider for that area?

Also, a thank you from me to all the controllers out there too.

What time on a 'dark and horrible night'?
NOTAM C0526 says airport (and presumably ATC) closed 2359 to 0600 from 15 until 25 Jan at 0559.
Or maybe their primary radar was 'off' for some reason; most airfields can only operate 'SSR only' to clear arrivals ie no transits then that's it.

Quite possible since they stopped providing LARS.
OK I've been retired for a number of years now and I know some units tend to 'jump' on controllers who 'bend' the rules on safety grounds but a bloke calling up for radar service in sh1tty weather outside my 'official' area of responsibility would never stop me invoking a certain sentence in MATS Part 1 and helping if I could.

I tend to agree with Marly Lite. Bristol ATC can be difficult. Most "based" pilots are aware of those who are less than helpful and the service varies depending who is on duty. However ATC provide a champagne service in comparison to the yokels who provide ground security. I will quite happily never operate out of Bristol again. Provincial.

I'd tend to agree with him as well that the NATS service from Bristol is not what I'd like it to be. I understand that their priority is to those within their CAS but working more effectively with those outside but near to it would be of benefit to all.

But to close his post with that expletive laden rant is simply unhelpful and smacks of someone who is far to fond of their own voice and entirely uninterested in any perspective other than their own.

Jobsworth: someone who is unlikely to step past some petty rule because “it’s more than my job’s worth”.

In these times it’s hardly surprising that someone in an industry haemorrhaging money wants to keep their job more than they want to provide a service (presumably) outside of the rules. Get the rule changed rather than attacking the player.

The 'rule change' is already permitted:-(and has been for over 50 years)
MATS Part 1 (CAP 493) Section 1 Chapter 1 para 1.2 second sentence beginning 'However nothing in this manual prevents controllers from using their own discretion and initiative .....'
My favourite bit; I used it many times when providing LARS and was never 'pulled' for doing it like controllers are nowadays.

That quote is incomplete - "...in response to unusual circumstances, which may not be covered by the procedures herein." That favoured quote is not permission to break rules which are covered within Mats Part 1, or indeed Part 2 - I've seen people come very unstuck misunderstanding that.

And 'unusual circumstances' doesn't include an aircraft being stuck at low level in cr@p weather at night asking a radar unit for an IFR climb then?

Not that unusual, no: & may well be covered in the Bristol Mats Pt 2 for all I know. I could ask any of the people I know who work there, but I wouldn't want to waste their time.

Folks,

Firstly, let me apologise for being so err..., vociferous! (I really am turning into my old man!!)

secondly, thanks for your replies.

I guess what I am really saying is, how is it that the likes of, say, Leeds respond with: good evening C/S XX, here's your squawk here's your airspace crossing you asked for in exchange for a heading or level modification and have a nice night" (or I might help you if I am able...)

and Bristol....literally not even allowed to get a request in. (Don't ask, I'm not going to help).

Is this a shift in attitude; a shift in regulatory framework; or a shift in what is expected of the modern controller?

I could understand it if it was a London-based agency. Never had this before, always got a pleasant reply even if it was: sorry mate too busy today.

:) comes to us all in time. I can't add much detail, but with Leeds & Bristol, you're dealing with different ATC providers: how they operate, within the regulatory framework that everyone operates within, will be set by the airport. The difference could be as simple as the time of day - it might be the person manning the radio in the quiet periods is not licenced to provide the service you're after: that might be because the airport isn't expecting any of their own traffic. My understanding is that Bristol, in particular, has changed it's hours of operation in light of the current situation. It may also be that the unit that seems the most appropriate to the area you're in, may not be the one delegated to deal with traffic in that area. For instance, Farnborough deals with most of the class G traffic in the Luton/Stansted area, not necessarily Luton, Stansted or Essex - so not intuitively who you'd think. Best advice is to give Bristol a ring, normal office hours, then you're more likely to get someone who can help.

Never managed to transit Bristol even before lock down, when the published freq, seems quiet. Always plan to avoid or route Cardiff.

Many ATC instructors have been training students to say "Remain outside controlled airspace" as the first response to an airspace crossing request, instead of a dynamic assessment of the traffic conditions at the time and an appropriate response. You could almost issue a clearance in the time it takes to say it.
It's a school of defensive parrot style brain dead ATC which is more about arse covering than safety. Safety can be equally achieved without having to say NO to every request.
Personally I am not a fan and I still like to offer the best and most flexible type of service available given the circumstances. Luckily as a licence holder we're still allowed a degree of personal choice within the framework of the rules.

I can only think of a couple of UK units (pre COVID) that have genuine traffic reasons to deny airspace crossings all the time. Everywhere else is just laziness or lack of skills/confidence.

Well said, Mike.
It's worth quoting the MATS procedure:
"When an aircraft requests permission to enter controlled airspace for the purposes of landing at the associated aerodrome or transiting the airspace, it may not be possible, for traffic reasons, to issue that clearance immediately. In such situations controllers shall advise the pilot to remain outside controlled airspace, when to expect clearance and give a time check"
...which implies at least identifying the aircraft, providing a relevant service initially outside CAS, and informing the pilot of the situation - not an immediate response of "ROCAS."
So where have the instructors (OJTIs) got this idea, if that is correct? Not reading MATS or from NATS?
2 s

This summarises it nicely. At a previous ANSP I worked for, the emphasis was on defensive controlling techniques. Defensive as in "cover your arse for the purposes of a subsequent investigation" as opposed to any emphasis on dealing with the issue that has been presented to you. As long as an ATCO was correct from a legal angle then their actual lack of skills or appreciation of the problem was deemed largely irrelevant. Welcome to the modern world folks!

Remain outside CAS has been standard in the UK since the 1970s at least, and was introduced because of pilots who believed that the fact that they were talking to the ATC unit believed that they had a right to enter CAS, whether a clearance had been issued or not. This led to as high a number of airspace busts as we have today, and as a defensive measure the phrase was introduced as a barrier. In the old FIR positions, when aircraft requested joining or crossing clearances of airways, a time check was also added, so that if the sector issued a clearance such as 'cross XXX not before TIME' everyone was singing from the same hymn sheet. It is a barrier, just like we use 'after departure' now in amended clearances, rather than 'after take off', because historically aircraft, on hearing an amended clearance phrased in the former manner, lined up without permission. It could be still considered a useful barrier.

HB

Many years ago I had the pleasure of working at BRS. At the time the place had a reputation for being unfriendly to GA, in fact there were regular letters in Pilot magazine singling out the unit for its collective attitude. The reputation was well-deserved, with many of the old hands seeing their job as being to protect the local airspace from traffic, especially ‘tiddlers’, that was not inbound or outbound to the airport. Over time, the old guard retired and new blood, who believed in the concept of providing a service to aircraft, came in - and the poor reputation in the eyes of the GA community was, gradually, redeemed. I have no idea what it’s like there nowadays but it is a shame to see what appears to be a poor reputation developing again.

When I was there, it was a great place to do ATC - a great mix of all sorts of aircraft, the CTR/CTA was not connected to the airways system so there was none of this ‘must keep it inside controlled airspace’ malarkey and, for the most part, it was possible to accommodate many of the more conventional requests that pilots made (although, there are one or two requests that stick in my mind and could not be approved). Since then, much has changed, and significantly perhaps, this includes the operator of the unit.

When I started my basic training I can recall being told, during my first few days, that I was privileged to be joining the National Air Traffic Service and that where ever I worked I would be a part of that service. I guess you might call that the ‘Civil Service’ attitude which has become rather outdated in some respects as the years have passed. I’m not really sure how much that view really reflected reality given that there was a very clear State/Non-State distinction made at every turn but when I got out into the real world, in practise, it did not make much difference whether one spoke to a NATS person or one of the others.

At the turn-of-the-century or thereabouts, however, the NATS part of that national service became NATS Ltd (or one of a number of similarly named limited companies), or as some people called them, business entities, or worse, cost centres. What previously had been ATC units became businesses which, amongst other things, had to focus on what it was required to do (because the contract said so) and not to waste money and other resources on things that might be ‘nice to do’ but were not actually required, and more importantly, that the unit was not being paid for.

Maybe what is seen at BRS today is the logical end result of this change.

Spot on. Aviation has grown up and turned into a business. Back in the day we campaigned for 'Public Service, not Private Profit', and the British electorate told us to go away. If I was an ATS Manager at a regional airport, and I walked down the corridor to my Finance and Business Manager and said that I want to staff an ATS service that generated no revenue for the business, once the laughing had stopped, I'd be told to get real. Similarly, my Safety and Compliance Manager would be asking why I am letting VFR GA transits potentially provoke TCAS alerts with our core customers, and their crew reports are automatically forwarded to the SM inbox for investigation. The world has changed.

HB

My personal experience last summer on Bristol transit in my glider was better than the previous years.

Marly_lite, if you asked for a transit and were refused, FCS1522: FCS 1521 (caa.co.uk)

If you feel your safety could have been compromised or might be in similar situation, MOR

Maybe it stems from the few pilots in the UK who have trained in the USA where if you call an ATC unit for transit and they say 'standby' without adding 'remain outside controlled airspace' you can still enter the CTR.
I only ever noticed one ATC unit, Southampton, who would routinely say 'remain outside controlled airspace' even when accepting a radar handover, but that was before I retired just over 11 years ago for low level traffic; if it was about FL60 or higher they would issue a clearance via the SAM

...which makes you wonder - as the transferring controller - does (s)he serioiusly expect me to parrot that to the pilot while changing code and frequency?

2 s

If we didn't, they would phone us back and moan about it.

Not just UK pilots trained in the States, continental light aircraft struggled with the concept too. Luton in the '80s & '90s, remain outside was used regularly, whether a handover or a freecall: at times the airspace was already approaching capacity, no way you'd want someone barging through without being 100% sure you knew what they were doing. Never had a complaint from aircraft or the transferring agency, either: if they grumbled in the cockpit, they kept it to themselves, I imagine. They rarely actually suffered any delay, it was more an insurance against infringement issues, since the airspace constraints meant most clearances were tactical, rather than procedural. Paperwork only triggered if there was a problem, which zone infringements absolutely were, & I imagine, still are.. No idea what the situation is since Farnborough picked up the baton.

How would they know?

There's at least one civil LARS unit in middle of England which routinely says "remain outside controlled airspace" during radar hangovers and pre-notes almost every single time. They do generally accommodate transits though.

My interactions with Bristol are limited but not so long ago I was working a helicopter based just north of Bristol (PlodCopter). I phoned Bristol to pass details when Plod was on the way home, only to be told "they don't normally talk to us." I told the pilot that Bristol didn't want a handover, and he said "yeah, we don't get along."

I wonder where that is?

Please excuse autocorrect for knowing me too well.

Great chat guys/gals.

I completely understand the initial "remain clear of controlled airspace" phrase on an initial call. Its effectively a plea to not do anything silly until i have capacity to deal with you...

My only ask is that ATCers give me an actual chance to express a request. I ALWAYS have fuel to go around airspace, but purrlease at least allow me to ASK for a crossing or smillar. I might only want to chamfer the corner off!

Marley Lite
"Remain outside...", I hope, as the standard terminology, but a valid and practical point, not understood by some!
2 s

There was a case many years ago (late '70s I think) of a Navajo departing Gatwick VFR. He was assigned a heading (about 020 deg I think though I may be wrong) to leave the CTR to the north then he was (apparently) forgotten, so after leaving the Gatwick CTR, he entered the Heathrow CTR still on an assigned heading.
Gatwick did not at that time, have their CTR boundary marked on their video maps.
As far as I recall, it was decided that it was the pilot's fault; he should have known where he was and requested clearance to enter the Heathrow CTR.

And the point is...? "ROCAS" should never be required?

2 s