can i comply
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Some where over the rainbow
Age: 37
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
can i comply
i remember flying near doncaster once and the controller said:
"G-SJ turn right heading 180, 737 on final for r/wy 28"
out of common sense i turned to avoid it.
the question i am asking is that i am not an IFR flight, wasnt receieving RAS and wasnt in controlled airspace. am i legally allowed to take that instruction?? or should i have replied "cannont comply" and carried on with the lookout?
"G-SJ turn right heading 180, 737 on final for r/wy 28"
out of common sense i turned to avoid it.
the question i am asking is that i am not an IFR flight, wasnt receieving RAS and wasnt in controlled airspace. am i legally allowed to take that instruction?? or should i have replied "cannont comply" and carried on with the lookout?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry I do not understand the problem here. You were not obliged to comply if you were not in CAS but I do not see why you should not be able to comply and still maintain your lookout. The only exception here would be if it put yu into some other situation you could not comply with ie. into cloud/CAS without clearance/too low over built up areas etc. Assuming this was not the case you did the correct thing. the person in the "wrong" if anyone would be the airtrafficker who is going beyond his remit to issue it as an instruction not an advisory.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you answered your own question.
"out of common sense i turned to avoid it."
Where I fly we are also given instructions by ATC in the open FIR, and on occasion are abused by commercial operators for getting in their way.
If I am given an instruction in those circumstances I am usually willing to change course or level, when asked. If it places me in danger by making me enter cloud or near to obstructions, then I would tell the ATCO.
Unfortunately in my area the local regional (sorry, International) airport is looking to control traffic outside its airspace, and some controllers like to give us orders. They are obviously looking for the day when they get Class D and can start refusing us access
"out of common sense i turned to avoid it."
Where I fly we are also given instructions by ATC in the open FIR, and on occasion are abused by commercial operators for getting in their way.
If I am given an instruction in those circumstances I am usually willing to change course or level, when asked. If it places me in danger by making me enter cloud or near to obstructions, then I would tell the ATCO.
Unfortunately in my area the local regional (sorry, International) airport is looking to control traffic outside its airspace, and some controllers like to give us orders. They are obviously looking for the day when they get Class D and can start refusing us access
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Some where over the rainbow
Age: 37
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
even though i did compled with the instruction i carried on with the lookout and i never had visual with the 737.
i did have a moment to think if i could have just carried on forward because i was at 3000ft qnh and surely if the 737 was on final, i would be above it?!?
i did have a moment to think if i could have just carried on forward because i was at 3000ft qnh and surely if the 737 was on final, i would be above it?!?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Basically, no.
You say that you were never visual with the 737 so , as long as it was safe for me to make the turn requested of me, I'd make the turn. And I would have thanked the ATCO as well. One thing that isn't often said here, is that if you can help another person, then the favour, usually, is returned.
If the 737 had had to move out of your way they'd have filed a report giving the ATCO a hard time for not keeping the required separation. The next person to upset them will be given a real roasting.
You say that you were never visual with the 737 so , as long as it was safe for me to make the turn requested of me, I'd make the turn. And I would have thanked the ATCO as well. One thing that isn't often said here, is that if you can help another person, then the favour, usually, is returned.
If the 737 had had to move out of your way they'd have filed a report giving the ATCO a hard time for not keeping the required separation. The next person to upset them will be given a real roasting.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robin - sorry but I do not understand this bit!
!If the 737 had had to move out of your way they'd have filed a report giving the ATCO a hard time for not keeping the required separation. The next person to upset them will be given a real roasting."
To answer the original question, move every time because (unless other circumstances dictate) it is far easier for GA to change course than CAT and no real problem to us.
!If the 737 had had to move out of your way they'd have filed a report giving the ATCO a hard time for not keeping the required separation. The next person to upset them will be given a real roasting."
To answer the original question, move every time because (unless other circumstances dictate) it is far easier for GA to change course than CAT and no real problem to us.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robin - sorry but I do not understand this bit!
!If the 737 had had to move out of your way they'd have filed a report giving the ATCO a hard time for not keeping the required separation. The next person to upset them will be given a real roasting."
To answer the original question, move every time because (unless other circumstances dictate) it is far easier for GA to change course than CAT and no real problem to us.
!If the 737 had had to move out of your way they'd have filed a report giving the ATCO a hard time for not keeping the required separation. The next person to upset them will be given a real roasting."
To answer the original question, move every time because (unless other circumstances dictate) it is far easier for GA to change course than CAT and no real problem to us.
If it is that difficult for CAT to integrate themselves with the rest of the flying fraternity in the open FIR I suggest they pay for those mode-S transponders so they can watch them on their TCAS.
Back to the original question. Comply if you want to but make it clear that you can't if circumstances dictate (weather or other traffic - would spoil your day if you turned onto the heading and collided with something else not on the ATC scope)
Guest
Posts: n/a
FD
I see your point, but there is a grey area surely?
Years ago I was practising an ILS approach into Southend when we popped out of cloud to find that we had just an airprox with a helicopter that was, clear of cloud, in sight of the ground and outside CAS, as was part of the approach.
I really wish that an ATCO had been able to ask the helicopter to turn away.
In fairness to the ATCO, he didn't have radar and I don't think that the helicopter was on his frequency frequency.
I see your point, but there is a grey area surely?
Years ago I was practising an ILS approach into Southend when we popped out of cloud to find that we had just an airprox with a helicopter that was, clear of cloud, in sight of the ground and outside CAS, as was part of the approach.
I really wish that an ATCO had been able to ask the helicopter to turn away.
In fairness to the ATCO, he didn't have radar and I don't think that the helicopter was on his frequency frequency.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have turned as you did but asked for the position on the 737 to help me understand the situation. If another aircraft has appeared unexpectedly – no transponder and unknown to ATC I would need to know more about the local traffic environment to do the safe thing. If you had turned and collided with another aircraft it would have been all your fault!!
Rod1
Rod1
Doncaster Robib Hood Galactic Spaceport is situated within some of the busiest open FIR in the country - Gamston,Sandtoft, Netherthorpe are all close by ,Sherburns training area is to the north and a lot of GA/military traffic transit via GAM.
Doncasters IAPs are in open FIR. Listen to Donc App trying to provide a safe RAS with so much unidentified traffic on their screen to get an idea of their workload.
Doncaster are in the process of applying for Class D protection and this will inevitably be approved.
I would urge anyone flying close to Doncaster to make use of their FIS/RIS/RAS and to comply with any ATC requests. A mid-air between a light aeroplane and a civil airliner in open FIR would lead to knee-jerk draconion airspace restrictions.
Flying out of Sherburn I have found the Doncaster controllers(based in Scouseland) extremly helpful and accomodating and I hope that they will continue to be so when they have their Class D airspace.
Doncasters IAPs are in open FIR. Listen to Donc App trying to provide a safe RAS with so much unidentified traffic on their screen to get an idea of their workload.
Doncaster are in the process of applying for Class D protection and this will inevitably be approved.
I would urge anyone flying close to Doncaster to make use of their FIS/RIS/RAS and to comply with any ATC requests. A mid-air between a light aeroplane and a civil airliner in open FIR would lead to knee-jerk draconion airspace restrictions.
Flying out of Sherburn I have found the Doncaster controllers(based in Scouseland) extremly helpful and accomodating and I hope that they will continue to be so when they have their Class D airspace.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Doncaster are in the process of applying for Class D protection and this will inevitably be approved"
I do hope this is not correct. As I understand it from many other threads on this kind of subject it most certainly IS NOT a forgone conclusion. Others have tried and failed to get Calss D (Humberside? comes to mind).
Yes ATC at Finningly are very very good and are to be congratulated BUT (and I mean no disrespect to these people) will they be as good when they do not have to be. One only needs to look at the complaints on these threads to see what happens at other CAS operations.
I do hope this is not correct. As I understand it from many other threads on this kind of subject it most certainly IS NOT a forgone conclusion. Others have tried and failed to get Calss D (Humberside? comes to mind).
Yes ATC at Finningly are very very good and are to be congratulated BUT (and I mean no disrespect to these people) will they be as good when they do not have to be. One only needs to look at the complaints on these threads to see what happens at other CAS operations.
I've had Doncaster do this to me also.
Why is it that particular airport (or is it a particular controller) doesn't understand the difference between a request and an instruction?
If I'm receiving a FIS, and outside of controlled airspace it is my decision whether I change course. of-course, if I'm passed a request, and I can reasonably comply, I'll do so. But for a controller to give me an instruction under those circumstances is inappropriate, not to mention likely to land him in trouble sooner or later since he's effectively taking responsibility for my actions.
If RT is quiet, my mildly sarcastic response would be something like "G-CD is outside controlled airspace, but say again your request". I'll still do as I'm asked, but it makes a point that the controller needs making to him.
G
Why is it that particular airport (or is it a particular controller) doesn't understand the difference between a request and an instruction?
If I'm receiving a FIS, and outside of controlled airspace it is my decision whether I change course. of-course, if I'm passed a request, and I can reasonably comply, I'll do so. But for a controller to give me an instruction under those circumstances is inappropriate, not to mention likely to land him in trouble sooner or later since he's effectively taking responsibility for my actions.
If RT is quiet, my mildly sarcastic response would be something like "G-CD is outside controlled airspace, but say again your request". I'll still do as I'm asked, but it makes a point that the controller needs making to him.
G
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In Class G unregulated airspace the VFR pilot under a FIS decides the appropriate course of action. All that is necessary is traffic information. If VFR then own separation in VMC is acceptable. If the IFR CAT flight requires radar separation from the VFR then it is up to the approach controller to provide the IFR flight with vectors accordingly, not the other way round.
Talkdownman, you are absolutely correct, but surely it is good airmanship to be helpful to the controllers - they can be our best friend when we have a problem in the air.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In Class G unregulated airspace the VFR pilot under a FIS decides the appropriate course of action. All that is necessary is traffic information. If VFR then own separation in VMC is acceptable. If the IFR CAT flight requires radar separation from the VFR then it is up to the approach controller to provide the IFR flight with vectors accordingly, not the other way round.
a) because it is easier
b) because the IFR traffic 'asked' the controller to do so from a TCAS contact
c) because the IFR CAT didn't want to lose it's slot
Normally this isn't too much of a problem, but trouble came on the day when the vectoring put the GA traffic into an area of low cloud and hills. It was an experience that cured any constipation I might have had.
Interestingly, we (and others) heard on the radio that GA traffic were having difficulty maintaining VMC and asking for an alternate routing. This was denied them, as by that point the safe route would have taken them into the ATZ.
When I called to to say I would be passing clear of the ATZ on the safe side, the ATCO refused that too, as he had a commercial jet about to take off and turn in that direction.
So, we had roughly 10-12 aircraft willingly cooperating with the controller, but being placed in a risky situation because the controller didn't want to delay a CAT departure, or to 'knit a hole' for us to pass safely by.
Once they get their massively extended Class D, they'll have more power to exclude VFR from the area and ease their workload. Trouble is, the VFR traffic will be squeezed closer together.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Some where over the rainbow
Age: 37
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
intererstiing to hear what you all had to say. it is quite reasonable for the pilot to deicide whether the turn would put him into trouble and hence tell the controller.
i can also sense that some of you guys think that 737s shouldnt really get piority over our pipers and cessnas, in fact why should they! thats why ryanair has a customer service desk for delayed passengers!
finally what does CAT mean...the only CATs i can think are clear air tubulence and catagory
i can also sense that some of you guys think that 737s shouldnt really get piority over our pipers and cessnas, in fact why should they! thats why ryanair has a customer service desk for delayed passengers!
finally what does CAT mean...the only CATs i can think are clear air tubulence and catagory