WBS - yep, we probably could resolve it over a coffee somewhere, but I don't see the point.:p

brain fade - every time you have asked a question (on any Anti-Bristol thread), I have answered it to the best of my abilities, this isn't some conspiracy to evade answers. Even other ATCO's from other units have answered some of your questions but you're still not satisfied. I'm beginning to think you're suffering from broken pencil syndrome............................pointless.:bored:

i dont mind pilots asking where their traffic is when i'm not busy. What does annoy the hell out of me is when the pilot then questions my instruction because he thinks he can overtake the other or asks why he's slowing down and not the other guy.
Here's a tip if we think you can be no1 we'll bloody well put you no.1. if we don't we won't. Its not a popularity contest or a race it just a fact. If you are landing at the same airport as the one in front and we don't think you're going to overtake we will slow you down to maintain the gap or put you on a heading to engineer a gap and if we're not busy we may even explain that to you but please dont assume that because the r/t has gaps that we are doing this for the hell of it.
and as a final note, questioning my judgement as to the best way of controlling the aircraft in my sector at that moment is not going to increase the chances of my changing my mind.
Thanks for listening
Rant over

Ayrprox
Can't speak for anyone else but the only time I ask what number we are is when I'm hoping we're no 1 so I can ask for a visual!

standard.
I prefer tea. i'll come and see you when I get the chance. Your'e right tho, it is a bit pointless asking you and I agree you've made the best job of trying to answer that you can. It's also plain that I still don't know why you do the silly warnings and I still don't know why you do the 'threshold elev' calls either. i shall seek enlightenment elsewhere but I'd have thought, since it's your practice, that you'd be well placed to know why you do it??
BF wrong again!




Evil J
I agree. It's a bit like being asked if you've remembered to put the wheels down.

And even when you know where the traffic is on TCAS you STILL ask for further descent. eg "AAA123 approaching FL310 requesting lower"

"AAA123 maintain FL310 traffic just below you"

"Yes we've got it on TCAS"

Only happened a few times over the winter months but for Gods sake don't make a habit of it during the summer. Anyone who does will go right to the back of the queue.;) ;)

OK, things have moved on a bit - but not necessarily for the better.

brain, you ask why the threshold elevation is put on the ATIS. Well, here goes my take on it again. BRS IS ON TOP OF A 600ft HILL. If a pilot gets something wrong there's every possibility that the aeroplane will make a dent in the side of the hill before the pilot gets a chance to spot his error. Whilst I respect your experience and professionalism, as Standard points out, not all pilots are as good as you and the belt and braces stuff is for their benefit. Be kind and put up with a bit more info than you need for the benefit of those less fortunate than yourself.

Oh, and

in the interests of brevity and good use of R/T time, why not say "ABC123 has the field in sight and happy to take a visual approach". This will save the controller having to guess why you're asking that question - that we've established is of little value - and clearly indicates your wishes.

Out.

250Kts posted

"And even when you know where the traffic is on TCAS you STILL ask for further descent. eg "AAA123 approaching FL310 requesting lower"

This came up here on the ATC section of the prune a number of months ago. I as a pilot would wait till obvious TCAS conflictions were gone until making a request. I was told by a controllers not to wait, as the sooner they know about my request, the sooner they can plan and act upon it. Just know your rant isn't shared by all your controller brethern.

Not a rant. Just reporting levelling at FL310 would suffice. My attention will then be drawn to it for further action.

This has been GREAT fun to watch <G>... Pilots are indeed for the most part a clueless bunch when it comes to ATC... I too am a pilot and I teach pilots, so the things that I hear in class is quite interesting. Then the comments after putting said pilots through radar simulator is also quite interesting... It ought to be a requirement...

regards

Scott

Just as controllers should be required to sit in the sim and run a practice QRH on an electrical fire to get an idea of what we are up against.

Hey, I'm game, is anyone else???

Seriously, as has been said numerous times whenever debates like this crop up, pilot/ATCO liason should be positively encouraged by our respective employers. It is fine talking about it on Proon but nothing beats experiencing how the other half live in the flesh, as it were. We need regular fam flights. You guys need to plug in on sectors. Might just make us appreciate what the other is has to deal with.

Hear hear Balix,
About time we got back into Fam flights and Pilots visits.
I was lucky a few years ago to go to Cranebank and sit in the simulator for several hours with a crew whilst they did there 6 monthly check. I did the ATC RT for them and observed as they went through numerous emergency drills. It was possibly the best emergency training I could have experienced.

I am hoping to set up simulator runs at Cardiff for locally based airline crews this year and I know other units do it as well. The more we understand each others jobs the better for us all.

As has been said earlier, when I get the R/T time, I will pass the reason for the vector and the relevant traffic to the pilot. More often than not, if I am vectoring I don't have time, and the only time I will pass traffic is when I want the aircraft involved to know about each other so as to adjust rates of climb and descent to try and avoid a superfluous RA.

Just a tip (especially to the Speedbird moron who flew into Abu Dhabi a while ago), if you are 6 NM behind and 30 Kts faster than the preceding traffic and you have 20 minutes to touchdown, yes you could get your nose in front at some point in your descent. BUT, I have a choice of slowing you and maybe giving you a little turn, and getting my ten (ie. an adjustment of 4 NM) and all the while being able to give unrestricted descent to both aircraft. The alternative (the preferred one for whinging "but we are faster than him, it's not fair" poms) is to restrict the following aircrafts descent, and push down the preceding traffic early, while I try and get the following traffic in front, then vector the crap and slam the brakes on the front aircraft, so I can get my ten (ie. an adjustment of 16 NM).

Bottom line, someone has to be number one and someone has to be number last. The world isn't out to get you if you are number last, and whether you understand why you are number last or not, you will still be number last. Moaning about where and why you are where you are in the sequence, will only succeed in you and your airline's fellow crew members, being number last all the more often.

brain, you ask why the threshold elevation is put on the ATIS. Well, here goes my take on it again. BRS IS ON TOP OF A 600ft HILL. If a pilot gets something wrong there's every possibility that the aeroplane will make a dent in the side of the hill before the pilot gets a chance to spot his error.........

Pilots are very aware of what the airfield/threshold elevation is and these days the transmission of this information is no longer of any benefit.

If a pilot is making an instrument approach, they will make a missed approach at the DA/MDA. The airfield elevation or the passing of that information makes little difference because;

a) The most likey reason for hitting the hill is going below minima

b) The next most likely is not setting the correct QNH or QFE or worse still setting QNH and using an D/MDH i.e. flying into Bristol and trying to descend to 200ft AMSL on an ILS with QNH set.

In those cases knowing that the hill is 600ft high makes no difference because the pilot thinks they are above it.

It is ironic that the field elevation is not passed on departure when QNH is always used and things like 1000ft checks are made at 1000ft ASFC not AMSL.

We have a bug on our altimeter set to the airfield elevation prior to approach and prior to departure not to mention the fact that it is on every chart we have.

I can imaging the guy at Innsbruck saying in a very camp voice.....the runway elevation is xxxx and we have 6000ft hills here here and here and 10000ft hills there there and there now don't go catching your little bottom on any.

On the ILS protection - don't assume that just cause the pilot is visual that protection is no longer required - the aircraft may still be completing an autoland for training or currency or equipment check.

Regards,

DFC

PS British Midland sims in Stockley Park have had lots of guys over from West Drayton in the past and made return visits. I think that the only problem controllers had with it was that they had to do it on their own time.

Years ago I worked at Denver Center. We began using a metering program that assigned crossing times at fixes about 150 miles from the airport. We worked a "4 post", so the computer would look at traffic over Arizona, Utah, Nebraska and Kansas and set up the arrival order. As a result, the aircraft arriving from, say, the southeast might be "following" an aircraft from the northwest.

See how it works?

Frequently pilots, when slowed to meet a metering time, would ask, "Where's my traffic?" Try to explain to a guy in western Nebraska that his traffic is just east of Salt Lake City, Utah.

The better informed the pilot is, the more cooperative he'll be - usually - but some situations are too complicated to explain on frequency.
---
ATC 24/7

Ah sorry West Coast, i hadn't realised that you need continuous descent because you now have an electrical fire. You only had to say.

Yes we do need fam flights just as we need you guys to visit the ATC units. But it doesn't change the fact that if I haven't got the required separation you ain't getting the clearance.

West Coast;

I agree, controllers should be able to find out MORE of what goes on on the other side... In fact, next week that is going to be one of the discussions that I have on the panel that I am on for Communicating for Safety. It ought to be an interesting discussion to say the least...

later

Scott

DFC,

As a mil controller at West Drayton, (recently passed NATS interview awaiting class 1 medical and security clearance) I would be really interested in visiting the British Midland simulator.

Do you have any contacts there or an email address I can go on.

PM me if you have.

Regards

Doody

tori chelli DAT&S = Department of ATC Training & Simulation. Or something like that.
Who dreams these up?

That'll be the College and the EU then, Bern?

rgds BEX:ok:

You are showing your age Bex--it was a School when Bern and I went through it!!

West Coast
 

Would love to! I think you'll find most controllers would be interested. Sort it, and we'll turn up.

On the other hand, pilots have ALWAYS been welcome to visit us, and we're constantly reminding you all on here. But when was the last time I saw an ATPL holder visit the centre? Never, that's when.

PS We get 15 hours flying training (used to be more) and many hours of lectures (and part of several exams) on aircraft characteristics, physics of flight etc. How much does a CPL holder have to learn about ATC?

"where's the traffic?"
 

Given that the aircraft commander is ultimately responsible for the safety of his aircraft and passengers, I don't find the request at all offensive. Its all too easy to think of ATC as a real-life video game....there are real people on the other end of the radio!
With sectorisation and procedures in use to-day it is quite likely that some of the conflicting traffic may be on a different freq, and it is not always possible for the pilot to be situation-aware from R/T traffic.....and more so when he/she has just checked in.

"PS We get 15 hours flying training (used to be more) and many hours of lectures (and part of several exams) on aircraft characteristics, physics of flight etc. How much does a CPL holder have to learn about ATC?"

ATC is in the service industry, here to provide a product to pilots not the other way around. That said, pilots don't know as much about the ATC system as we could. However the nature of the relationship requires you know more about my needs than me of yours.

West Coast;

Actually we are more a Safety Industry ie fire service etc... We are here to move aircraft first of all safely and then expeditiously. All the other stuff has always been on a as time permits basis. Our job is to safely move aircraft from point a to b, but we are not here to answer to every whim as many feel. Do we try to do what we can when we can? Certainly we do, that is what we all try to do, but if things are a bit busy for us, we will load shed all the nice stuff that many pilots expect or sometimes even demand.

regards

Scott

After thinking about it, your correct, more in common with the field of safety. Still providing a service however. I have no heartburn with not approving direct or answering all the ride requests, etc.

Whilst the Septics are here......;)
Why is there sooo many ride reports/requests here.....especially from Minibus pilots?

I have noticed that US pilots (Most not all) in Canada seem a bit behind the drag curve when it comes to the RT. Surely when they fly around places like ORD they have to be alert and responsive? My instructors insist I only give American pilots one instruction at once or they won't get it, this has been proved by experience.

We had a similar problem with Emirates pilots in Dubai, relaxing a little too much because "ahh its only Dubai, it's not that busy". Speaking of Dubai, I know a simulator swap was arranged and it went down real well with the few who were involved but sadly it fell by the wayside due to lack of staff.

Rgds FT

PS. This ain't Yank bashing before anyone starts.......I'm marrying one!!

Over here in the sandpit, we seem to have this problem mainly in the enroute phase of flight.

Usually when someone doesn't get the level of their choice.

And no, to all you pilots out there, we haven't chopped you off at a level for controller amusement.
When it's busy asking who is the traffic stopping me getting the level of my choice, what is his destination, can I speed up or slow down etc etc isn't going to help the situation.

I understand that you all would like to get your planned levels, but when several aircraft from the same company depart with minimum runway spacing, going into procedural airspace, I'm here to tell you, you will NOT get the same level!

So either give a bit of thought to your departure times, or liase amongst yourselves to decide who wants what, BEFORE you enter our patch. (lets not forget there are other users apart from yourselves).

Muscat is between the rock and the hard place. UAE at one end, Tehran, Karachi and Bombay at the other.

As someone said previously, the conflicting traffic in some cases is not within a bulls roar of where you are now....he will be in 40 minutes though.

Right, off to work!

If this were the case, a ton of pointless unnecessary questions wouldn't be asked. If some of you had a cat's notion of what exactly we do during a shift it would be great.... :sad:

At the last station I worked at, we made simulator time available together with a station visit so we could try and make a pilot informed about what we do - needless to say the project was shelved as nobody was interested. Busy filing deficiency reports instead :yuk:

Where`s your traffic?

He`s just taxying past stand 5 to fit into the 8 mile gap I`ve just made which you seem determined to close by not complying with the speed control I gave you 12miles ago so welcome to the world of extra track miles!

And Westy, this isn't a go at you mate, but as some of my compatriots here have highlighted, we issue control instructions for our needs (and procedures), not for the hell of it.

Jerricho

No offense taken. I agree with your statement, but your still here to provide a service to the pilot are you not? If I was up because you were down there, I would have a general knowledge of your needs, limitations, etc. BTW, I have been up there because your down there. Doing practice ground controlled approaches for student training. I asked what they wanted, needed, expected and didn't want of me of me before I launched every time.

Fly through

Your phraseology is different than what I'm used to hearing. Not much, but enough that sometimes I digest it slower than what I'm used to hearing rapid fire in the states. If I do need it twice, so be it. I would rather clarify it than assume and dick it up. What's up with having to end all transmissions up there?

In our part of the world, they only let pilots in to have a look when you're far from busy, pretty useless really:ok:

WTF....????? :confused:



Hey it's interesting how CUR takes a characteristic shot at pilots then, despite the thread actually turning into a productive exchange (or maybe because of it) she doesn't return to take part in the discussion.

When I was in the RAAF, the studs gradually picked up from the instructors a disdain for ATC, mainly civvy, which our instructors had picked up, themselves in turn, when students years before. It wasn't actively encouraged but it sure wasn't discouraged.

We didn't know why, we just noticed it, and being young, impressionable and pilots, not to mention cool and good-looking, we thought it was funny and carried it on.

Dunno what it's like these days in the RAAF but the relationship is a lot better outside in the civvy world.

A bit of extra info, when time is available, goes a long way to developing SA, as already mentioned. Even the best ATC occasionally make mistakes and it isn't unheard of for a pilot to point it out.

Just because pilots ask for the info doesn't mean ATCOs should develop an obsession with trying to put them off asking, like CUR obviously has. It's like a pilot saying:

"Require HDG ###" and adding: "for weather 1-0 ahead."

Usually the guy's gonna turn anyway and the ATCO might just think to himself, "Hmmm. If there's weather there, maybe I should vector the next tool around it, too."

What's the prob.............. :cool:



I like ATCOs because they are pseudo-sharps who are generally fatter than pilots, can afford to buy more beer than engos and don't provide real competition for the moisties at our parties.

I even like you, CUR, and you too, Jizzmacho!

:ok:

Mate, couldn't agree more. I'm a huge fan of drivers who know what's going on, and when it gets busy are fully prepared to help out as much as possible (and the occasional little prompt is we're kept them a little high or fast without letting them know the reason) ;)

Hey that's just a little challenge. Get high? Can we get down without resorting to popping the boards???

Nowadays the above is an unpopular sentiment because the desk-bounds have brain-washed all pilates into thinking if you're enjoying yourself you are being irresponsible.

In the mundane life of an airline pilot, I find I get a certain amount of satisfaction from working wiv an ATCO who sounds like he knows what he's doing and keeps us in the loop without even having to spell it out.

Even more so is he's a sexy-sounding she with a French accent because I'm basically a sexist.

Oh and I'm also greedy.

:}

Some friends of mine used to let me sit in the tower and record the ATIS - with suitable retarded comments added by me.

Also, I was allowed to occasionally work the GND freq which I enjoyed. It seemed like a fun job.

Where was that? (like you're going to say)
and what licence did you use ?:yuk:

It was at a RAAF base (Willy) and I used my poetic licence due lack of any other.

Unless my R/T licence counts.......

An, the biggest Willy by the sea ;)

I am fairly sure that an ATC qualification is not required to work Willy positions. Or so it seems.