Pet peeves from the ATC folks

[JetPilot500]

(5) Pilots who can't be bothered to listen to ATC and have to be repeatedly called by ATC before they answer and then they read the clearance back wrong. Put down the paper, turn off the Ipod, let the FA go back in the cabin to do her job and listen up!

Hey! Give me a break! Sometimes my mouth is full while I'm busy eating. Don't speak with your mouth full, right? Or maybe I'm deep involved into a conversation of company politics and I don't want to be bothered right now with a silly hand-off!

Geez! Some people just don't get it!

 

[Caveman]

(6) You check in with approach with something like this : "Anytown approach, Airliner 123, one five thousand descending one two thousand, kilo." They respond: "Airliner 123, roger, expect visual two four left, confirm you have kilo." WTF, I just said it.

 

[HS125]

Hey! Give me a break! Sometimes my mouth is full while I'm busy eating. Don't speak with your mouth full, right? Or maybe I'm deep involved into a conversation of company politics and I don't want to be bothered right now with a silly hand-off!

Geez! Some people just don't get it!

Yeah I know, how foolish of me? Mustn't let anything get in the way of the Prawn Shrimp and Lobster Tail appetizer and Chateaubriand. God forbid someone interfere with good juicy gossip!:laugh:

 

[Hold West]

1. Probably because we are waiting for you to clear us for the visual.

But I can't clear you for a visual approach unless you report the airport in sight!

My 7110.65 says:

a. Controllers may initiate, or pilots may request, a visual approach even when an aircraft is being vectored for an instrument approach and the pilot subsequently reports:​

1. The airport or the runway in sight at airports with operating control towers.​

2. The airport in sight at airports without a control tower.​

The AIM says:

a. A visual approach is conducted on an IFR flight plan and authorizes a pilot to proceed visually and clear of clouds to the airport. The pilot must have either the airport or the preceding identified aircraft in sight.

You gotta say it, man, before I can clear you for it!

Also, unless I'm completely confident you'll get a visual on the field, I initiate vectors for an instrument approach, since it really sucks to vector you to a point where a legal instrument approach is not possible, and have you say "sorry, there's a few clouds out here, I can't see the airport"! Then I'm scrambling and you're pissed 'cause I have to vector you back out for an approach. I'm paid to hedge my bets, and I do exactly that.

 

[Groucho]

Last mimute approach changes or runway changes on computerized aircraft.

In the old days, on the Diesel 9 or Mad Dog if an arrival procedure or runway was changed it was no big deal, dial up the new loc freq and review the approach or arrival procedure.

In the airbus, however, if you are using managed mode descents a modification to the arrival or runway requires that the pilot first modify the runway, change it, then change the arrival. It has to be done this way cause that's the only way the computer will accept it. Then the computer has to think about all the new crossing restrictions and then it will tell you it can't make them as published. The A321 is a real pig at getting down.

ATC gets mad but with fuel costs the the way they are we are trying to stay high and get the best economy. This problem is especially bad at the three major California airports, SFO, LAX, and SAN.

I would propose that ALPA, or some other organization, have ATC folks attend recurrent ground school and invite the personel to reprogram an FMS on short notice and try to also comply with the procedure and all the restrictions and limitations. Computers can actually complicatie the job and the Airbus is not designed to just go into DC-9 mode. It doesn't downgrade to manual vor type flying easily.

The same can be said for some of the Boeing FM's, depending on vintage and probably some of the RJ boxes as well.

 

[Hold West]

The airport that I'm based at, uses the approach control for a neighboring airport. Approach control is intent on vectoring us for the approach regardless of the weather and traffic. It could be clear and a million with no traffic within 1,000 miles and they still make us fly the approach. The controllers will ask us if we have the airport in sight and still vector us for an approach even after we confirm airport in sight.:angryfire I guess these guys are in training to go to CLE!

Have you asked? Called the facility, or better yet, stopped by for a visit? I don't know where you're based, and even if I did, I wouldn't know enough about the intricacies of their airspace to comment, but just generally there may be adjacent airspace of some type to protect for - though I'd think they'd say that if it was the case. The FAA in its infinite wisdom has taken away most of the forums where we'd meet face to face, but a visit to the facility involved might answer the question.

 

[EagleRJ]

(7) Controllers who act like you're ruining their day when you ask for verification of a takeoff clearance, TIPH, altitude change, etc. It's not that I wasn't paying attention- you were just blocked by another aircraft, my altitude chime, or crew callouts. If you just verify for me, it will save both of us a lot of paperwork and hassle.

(8) Controllers who misuse visual approaches to increase traffic flow during peak periods. Example: you are vectored perpendicular to a heavy, or Tower calls the heavy that has slowed in front of you as traffic, and when you call them in sight, your 5 miles of separation has legally vanished. Only a few facilities seem to do this regularly <cough>ATL<cough>.

(9) Pilots who change to a new frequency and begin talking immediately, blocking 3/4 of the clearance that was being given to someone. Listen, then transmit, just like you were taught when you were learning in the C-152. You're not special just because you're flying an MD-80 <cough>American<cough>.

 

[Gorilla]

10) Pilots who use non-standard phraseology, embellishments, talk reeeaaaal slowly, and most often simply rattle off a flight number instead of your full call. As in "Twenty-Two thirty-one left to 320" <cough>Eagle<cough>

 

[HS125]

But I can't clear you for a visual approach unless you report the airport in sight!

My 7110.65 says:

a. Controllers may initiate, or pilots may request, a visual approach even when an aircraft is being vectored for an instrument approach and the pilot subsequently reports:​

1. The airport or the runway in sight at airports with operating control towers.​

2. The airport in sight at airports without a control tower.​

The AIM says:

a. A visual approach is conducted on an IFR flight plan and authorizes a pilot to proceed visually and clear of clouds to the airport. The pilot must have either the airport or the preceding identified aircraft in sight.

You gotta say it, man, before I can clear you for it!

Also, unless I'm completely confident you'll get a visual on the field, I initiate vectors for an instrument approach, since it really sucks to vector you to a point where a legal instrument approach is not possible, and have you say "sorry, there's a few clouds out here, I can't see the airport"! Then I'm scrambling and you're pissed 'cause I have to vector you back out for an approach. I'm paid to hedge my bets, and I do exactly that.

Agreed, it's a two way street though. You as a controller can ask us if we have the airport in sight before you issue the approach clearance. I try to always call the airport in sight as soon as I can. Sometimes you controllers are very busy and I can't get a word in, and don't want to, because you are on a roll an I don't want to screw up your rhythm.

Also, how about updating the ATIS, the fog has burned off and it is clear with unlimited visibility. I can't request and you can't clear me for a visual as long as the ATIS is still reporting less than 3 miles vis.

 

[EagleRJ]

10) Pilots who use non-standard phraseology, embellishments, talk reeeaaaal slowly, and most often simply rattle off a flight number instead of your full call. As in "Twenty-Two thirty-one left to 320" <cough>Eagle<cough>

We got an email recently reminding us that our callsign is "Eagleflight", not "Eagle". Apparently some ATC facility complained that some pilots are shortening the callsign when things are busy, and ATC doesn't want to confuse us with the California Civil Air Patrol :laugh: .
I think I've heard more controllers say "Eagle" than I've heard the pilots say it.