Amazing unprofessionalism in Africa
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: london
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amazing unprofessionalism in Africa
Anyone else hear the exchange between Niamey control and the pilot of a major international airline this morning 13th July? In a relatively short aviation career (7 years) it has to go down as the most childish and unprofessional exchange I have ever heard. In a procedural ATC environment a conflict was identified overhead ROFER reporting point (3 mins), the resolution ordered by Niamey was to descend said pilot, who not only refused but did so in a manner as if to say "I`m not moving, move the other guy" (another major international airline). Further pleas from ATC for him to descend were met with arrogant disdain and a repeated refusal to descend. He went on to quote ICAO Rules of the Air, paragraphs from Jeppeson, the Charter of Godknowswhat etc. both on 126.9 and Niamey ATC frequency, all the time remaining at his assigned level causing a loss of separation.
He was not only childish, arrogant and stupid, but sounded ridiculous and endangered the lives of up to 400 people. All those who fly regularly in the IFBP area know its limitations and safety relies on the utmost professionalism of those involved. It saddens and worries me to know that there are pilots prepared to compromise our most basic tenets for the sake of misguided "principle".
He was not only childish, arrogant and stupid, but sounded ridiculous and endangered the lives of up to 400 people. All those who fly regularly in the IFBP area know its limitations and safety relies on the utmost professionalism of those involved. It saddens and worries me to know that there are pilots prepared to compromise our most basic tenets for the sake of misguided "principle".
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The frequency jungle
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3 mins in a radar environment could be anything from 15 to 20 nm. Enough for said environment. In a procedural environment 10min are required.
Flight levels are hotly contested in Africa and being a non-RVSM environment the chap from the "major international airline" didnt want to sacrifice 4000' which in his mind were HIS.!!
Jay Jay, did their routes converge from there on?? If not, It wouldnt have been too much of a hassle climbing back up to the previous cruising level. If they were to stay on same tracks, then it would be bad luck. This chap should understand that he is not the only one out there. Very unproffesional indeed.
Maybe too much reliance on TCAS and his own abilities to provide ATC on 126,9 !!
You gonna tell us which "major international airline" it was??
Flight levels are hotly contested in Africa and being a non-RVSM environment the chap from the "major international airline" didnt want to sacrifice 4000' which in his mind were HIS.!!
Jay Jay, did their routes converge from there on?? If not, It wouldnt have been too much of a hassle climbing back up to the previous cruising level. If they were to stay on same tracks, then it would be bad luck. This chap should understand that he is not the only one out there. Very unproffesional indeed.
Maybe too much reliance on TCAS and his own abilities to provide ATC on 126,9 !!
You gonna tell us which "major international airline" it was??
Join Date: Sep 1998
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talking with the guys here at the Orval, a lot of whom operate the length and breadth of Africa, to a ‘person’ they were astounded, disgusted, even stupefied that anybody – let alone from a ‘national carrier’ - should behave in this way.
None of them had heard the exchange so, give us a clue; about which nationalities are we talking?
It almost makes you want to go by train!
Hadn’t these guys done a CRM course?
If you have to fly at a lower altitude and burn more gas then it’s not that much of a strain to land and pick up some more.
Flying through Africa any ‘professional’ commander would have covered the lower altitude scenario, before leaving the departure point!
None of them had heard the exchange so, give us a clue; about which nationalities are we talking?
It almost makes you want to go by train!
Hadn’t these guys done a CRM course?
If you have to fly at a lower altitude and burn more gas then it’s not that much of a strain to land and pick up some more.
Flying through Africa any ‘professional’ commander would have covered the lower altitude scenario, before leaving the departure point!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: london
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn`t include the airlines as I didn`t want to provoke parochial mud slinging, but on reflection it is no slur on the airline and the vast majority of their exemplary crew, merely on this one individual. The "offender" was from South African and the conflicting aircraft was Alitalia. We were very impressed with the way the situation was handled by the Italian crew who refused to be drawn into an R/T based slanging match, treating his repeated haranguing on 126.9 with the contempt it deserved.
Pegase Driver
This illustrate extremely well the limits of concepts such as Free flight. An FMS nost economic profile should not be the most important thing in our minds.
Safety should take priority.
I hear more and more, even in Europe, crews refusing clearances, Even the now infamous " do we have to descend now " has already causes some close calls.
Safety should take priority.
I hear more and more, even in Europe, crews refusing clearances, Even the now infamous " do we have to descend now " has already causes some close calls.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not just in Africa...either
Have noticed this type of 'operation' only one time, while deadheading on the obs seat west of Medan.
Our aircraft, having reached FL350 about ten minutes before, was asked by Lumpur to descend to FL310 due to crossing traffic ahead.
The Captain 'politely refused'...Lumpur directed again, and the Captain refused once more and promptly switched off the HF.
Yep, there it was, passing ahead about three miles away, was the crossing traffic.
Have to wonder about the thinking process that goes on with these folks.
Our aircraft, having reached FL350 about ten minutes before, was asked by Lumpur to descend to FL310 due to crossing traffic ahead.
The Captain 'politely refused'...Lumpur directed again, and the Captain refused once more and promptly switched off the HF.
Yep, there it was, passing ahead about three miles away, was the crossing traffic.
Have to wonder about the thinking process that goes on with these folks.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATC Watcher
Sometimes when you receive a clearance to a lower altitude it will include the phrase "at pilot's discretion", sometimes not. If I receive a descent clearance well before my 'ideal' descent point I will ask if it is at my discretion or if they want me to descend now - no harm in that, surely?
I hear more and more, even in Europe, crews refusing clearances, Even the now infamous " do we have to descend now " has already causes some close calls.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Geneva
Age: 51
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IT's unreal what you describe, sometimes you wish you could reach through your headset and grab the pilot on the other end and shake him!!!
I had a flight a few weeks ago that did something to me:
my call " xxx air descend to FL 250"
pilot "XXX air cleared to FL 250, do we have to start down now"
my call "sir, descend means descend, yes start down now there is traffic"
pilot "well sir, if you want us down you have to say descend now"
my call "read the rules, i did not say cleared to or descend at your discretion i said DESCEND"
How much clearer do we have to make it. I say climb, then climb, i say descend, then descend. You want safety then play the game boys, we don't do this to piss you off.
I had a flight a few weeks ago that did something to me:
my call " xxx air descend to FL 250"
pilot "XXX air cleared to FL 250, do we have to start down now"
my call "sir, descend means descend, yes start down now there is traffic"
pilot "well sir, if you want us down you have to say descend now"
my call "read the rules, i did not say cleared to or descend at your discretion i said DESCEND"
How much clearer do we have to make it. I say climb, then climb, i say descend, then descend. You want safety then play the game boys, we don't do this to piss you off.
And yesterday, inbound to EBBR with runway 02 in operation: "Maastricht xxxxxx we have negotiated direct GSY with Brussels". While he was at it why didn't he also negotiate a lower level with Brussels and seperation with all the other traffic around? 
I remember a colleague once said on the r/t, "you fly your aeroplane and let me do the controlling"!
I remember a colleague once said on the r/t, "you fly your aeroplane and let me do the controlling"!
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Angels Playmate;
Just to provide possible answers to your statement
Off air, there was probably a mad scramble to make way for this guy who was refusing instructions. Additionally, MCT may have just received co-ord on him at FL350, none of the rest of the story, and if they had known the story, a path would have been cleared for him anyway by then. (As an aside- in a non-radar environment, sometimes your requested level may be available, but you can't get up there as 'the heavies' are blocking the intermediate levels. This may have been what the 'rogue pilots' were thinking. Not making excuses for them.)
How long ago was this? I'd like to see someone refuse instructions like that in these times.
Before this descends into pilots Vs ATC, it works both ways. I find it only common sense to add "due traffic" to an unexpected clearance out of the blue. We are all so used to everything being regimented these days, it is quite reasonable to expect pilots to query instructions out of the blue. We've got the picture, they haven't. But when it's busy, the last thing you need is "is that for us?", "why am I No 2?", etc. etc.
Just to provide possible answers to your statement
Interestingly, no other ATC unit in charge later on-neither Mumbai or Muscat took him down . He flew all the way at 350 to AUH !!
How long ago was this? I'd like to see someone refuse instructions like that in these times.
Before this descends into pilots Vs ATC, it works both ways. I find it only common sense to add "due traffic" to an unexpected clearance out of the blue. We are all so used to everything being regimented these days, it is quite reasonable to expect pilots to query instructions out of the blue. We've got the picture, they haven't. But when it's busy, the last thing you need is "is that for us?", "why am I No 2?", etc. etc.
Paxing All Over The World
In the two years and two months that I have been privileged to read and post on PPRuNe, nothing has made my hair stand on end - like this thread.
From 411a "The Captain 'politely refused' ... Lumpur directed again, and the Captain refused once more and promptly switched off the HF."
I cannot imagine someone who thinks that the instruments that they have on board are so 110% certain that he will actively ignore key information. Information that, if it all goes wrong, will condem his memory (I say memory, as not many people survive mid-air's). Perhaps folks have been getting away with it for so long, they think that it won't happen to them. Whatever they think - they are not thinking about the right things.
411a:- In the case that you quote, it seems that the pilot was asked to descend from FL350 to FL310 and then (presumebly) could go back up to FL350 again? If so - what impact on fuel would this short dip have? Or might he have thought that he would be held low for some time?
In the case of the 767 who was being held under the 747s, the fuel impact was obviously high and it seems that planning was not all that it should have been! It was encouraging to hear that he was brought to account.
From 411a "The Captain 'politely refused' ... Lumpur directed again, and the Captain refused once more and promptly switched off the HF."
I cannot imagine someone who thinks that the instruments that they have on board are so 110% certain that he will actively ignore key information. Information that, if it all goes wrong, will condem his memory (I say memory, as not many people survive mid-air's). Perhaps folks have been getting away with it for so long, they think that it won't happen to them. Whatever they think - they are not thinking about the right things.
411a:- In the case that you quote, it seems that the pilot was asked to descend from FL350 to FL310 and then (presumebly) could go back up to FL350 again? If so - what impact on fuel would this short dip have? Or might he have thought that he would be held low for some time?
In the case of the 767 who was being held under the 747s, the fuel impact was obviously high and it seems that planning was not all that it should have been! It was encouraging to hear that he was brought to account.
Interestingly, I had kind of the antithesis the other day...
Padova radar came over and said "You have traffic same level 20 miles, is your TCAS working?"
When I told him my TCAS was working fine he replied "Then do you need a Vector?"
My reply was that if there was a separation breakdown, I most definatley needed a vector!!
TCAS is an emergency tool designed to be a last ditch stand against a collision, not a tool for routine seperation.
ASR duly submitted and awaiting the outcome...
Padova radar came over and said "You have traffic same level 20 miles, is your TCAS working?"
When I told him my TCAS was working fine he replied "Then do you need a Vector?"
My reply was that if there was a separation breakdown, I most definatley needed a vector!!
TCAS is an emergency tool designed to be a last ditch stand against a collision, not a tool for routine seperation.
ASR duly submitted and awaiting the outcome...
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the CIR
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wizofoz
Padova?? Jeez, these guys dont really know what the work is all about. The tfc comes to us at non-standard levels, parallel, faster behind etc etc and we have to sort it out because the French are difficult on the other side. It doesnt surprise me hearing your comment about Padova asking if your tcas is working.......
Padova?? Jeez, these guys dont really know what the work is all about. The tfc comes to us at non-standard levels, parallel, faster behind etc etc and we have to sort it out because the French are difficult on the other side. It doesnt surprise me hearing your comment about Padova asking if your tcas is working.......
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PAXboy,
Don't think in this particular case that our flight would have been held down long, just descended for the crossing traffic.
Lumpur can be a headache at times.
Oddly enough, this particular guy was the chief pilot for awhile, and quite a nice fellow as well. Sure don't understand the reasoning on this afternoon however. My First Officer (also deadheading on the other obs seat), just stared into space, not saying a word. In reality, what else could he do...complain?
Yep, and be sent home without pay for awhile.
Sadly, some areas of the world just work like this.
Don't think in this particular case that our flight would have been held down long, just descended for the crossing traffic.
Lumpur can be a headache at times.
Oddly enough, this particular guy was the chief pilot for awhile, and quite a nice fellow as well. Sure don't understand the reasoning on this afternoon however. My First Officer (also deadheading on the other obs seat), just stared into space, not saying a word. In reality, what else could he do...complain?
Yep, and be sent home without pay for awhile.
Sadly, some areas of the world just work like this.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: In the State of Perpetual Confusion
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In response to the earlier comments about he meaning of "descend to" (descend now), while you are correct that "descend to" means to descend now, I've have been in enough places around the world where the controller said to descend to and when queried, replied that it was pilot's discretion. You can usually get a pretty good idea by where you are, the quality of the R/T by ATC and how busy it is whether a question would be appropriate. It would be nice if everyone used standard R/T (pilots and controllers) but that is just not the case (and in my opinion it is getting worse). This part of the thread does point out the safety implications of standard R/T.
To our ATC colleagues.
We are controlled by ATC in all parts of the world whose operations vary from country to country. Unless I knew from previous experience what was intended, I would consider it perfectly normal to ask if an early descent was 'Right now' or 'At pilot's discretion.'
e.g: In USA or approaching EDDF I expect an early descent.
If RT is v-busy & can't get word in then immediate descent is safest option but then I've never been coy about carrying extra fuel
We are controlled by ATC in all parts of the world whose operations vary from country to country. Unless I knew from previous experience what was intended, I would consider it perfectly normal to ask if an early descent was 'Right now' or 'At pilot's discretion.'
e.g: In USA or approaching EDDF I expect an early descent.
If RT is v-busy & can't get word in then immediate descent is safest option but then I've never been coy about carrying extra fuel
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gillegan
I agree with you. In about 50% of cases, ATC come back and say that the descent is at my discretion. If the descent is early, I will ask as part of acknowledging the descent clearance, and am always prepared to descend straight away.
Again if standards were just that, and that 'at your discretion' was ALWAYS added when meant, then there'd be no confusion ever...
I agree with you. In about 50% of cases, ATC come back and say that the descent is at my discretion. If the descent is early, I will ask as part of acknowledging the descent clearance, and am always prepared to descend straight away.
Again if standards were just that, and that 'at your discretion' was ALWAYS added when meant, then there'd be no confusion ever...
Pegase Driver
Are you guys really ATPL rated or you're having a wind up.?
the R/T phraseo whether ICAO or FAA is clear ; there is no " now" in the book. you might asume or think what you like but not following the book will get you one day in trouble.
the R/T phraseo whether ICAO or FAA is clear ; there is no " now" in the book. you might asume or think what you like but not following the book will get you one day in trouble.