Pet peeves from the ATC folks

[JohnnyP]

....

A Squared,

Your probably right, but im in denial. A guy can dream, cant he?

 

[Corona]

Third (I know I said two peeves, but I'm on a roll) why do many pilots wait until I spew a whole bunch of approach clearance phraseology before reporting the airport in sight? The situation is this: ATIS reporting VFR weather, ILS and visual approaches to Runway 2 in use. Every aircraft that checks on landing I vector to the localizer. Then, I watch and wait, and timing it just right, I rattle off, "ABC666, 6 miles from DAFIX, turn left heading 050, maintain 3000 til established on the localizer, cleared ILS runway 2 approach". The reply is "ABC666, field in sight". So I go back and say "ABC666, cleared visual approach". Can't we just eliminate the middle man, and report the field in sight, save me a little breath? And, to confuse me all the more, why are pilots intent on a visual approach clearance, yet pick up the intercept heading I gave them anyway, and fly the approach all the way to the runway? I mean, I understand flying a stabilized approach and all that, but why not just accept the instrument approach clearance?

Good thread so far...

I can think of one reason pilots do this (as I've been here meself): We are still looking for the airport! Sometimes even large airports are difficult to pick out of the surrounding urban debris, especially if you throw in haze, smoke, scuddy clouds etc, plus other traffic. (Not every Intl. airport looks like LAS!)
This also touches on a pet peeve of mine on ground operations. When you taxi in a low-sitting airplane, ie Turbo Commander, Westwind, Cessna single etc, it is very difficult to see over even a slight rise in the pavement, especially where you have multiple taxiways intersecting. Sometimes you can't even see the signs from that perspective. There's only a few Intl. airports I've been to where this is a problem, but to a controller who is not only familiar with his own airport but also has a bird's-eye view of same, it probably looks like pilots are easily confused and/or are clueless! We ain't (usually); we're just taxiing slow & double-checking the diagram to be sure!

C

 

[MJG]

Here's some ATC gripes that I have with my fellow pilots:

First, when you check in on approach or ground to taxi, tell the poor controller that you have the ATIS. For heaven's sake this will not take you but an extra 2 seconds. News flash here, if you don't tell the poor guy you got atis "XXXX", then he has to break his flow and verify that you have it. Some facilities are more relaxed on this then others but certain ones (NEW YORK TRACON) come to mind as particularly more annoyed when they have to ask a pilot if they have the ATIS.

Second, LISTEN UP !!! I swear some days I just want to bury my head in the sand I'm so embarrassed by my fellow pilot's lack of attention. Granted there are times when the controller calls right in the middle of a checklist or an alarm going off but when the same flight misses one radio call after another it's pathetic. What is going on in that cockpit???

Third, when you are sitting in line for takeoff not moving, turn off you friggin taxi/landing light already. Do you really need to light up the back of my aircraft, the one in front of me and the one in front of him?? I swear the bigger the aircraft type, the worse the offenders.

Now for my controller gripes.

When you call us the wrong flight number, don't get pissed just because I don't reply to your call even though I'm pretty certain it's for us. I realize that you have a ton of data blocks starring you in the face but we have to cover our butts as well. Taking someone else's call could be very bad.

Here's a crossing restriction pet peave: Clearance goes something like this: Indebt 1234, pilot's descretion to maintain flight level 240, then cross 30 north of XYZ at 13000. Can't you just clear us for the one altitude restriction instead of adding a layer of complexity to the situation?? With jet fuel over $2 bucks a gallon, I'm not going to start descending to 240 or 13000 until you make me.

When you're trying to get me to see the aircraft ahead of us on the visual approach, again don't get pissed when I can't see the little bugger. Depending on time of day, weather condtions, terrrain features, etc. 10 miles vis reported on the ATIS doesn't mean we can really see 10 miles.

Ahhh, I feel better now.

But I will say this, having flown in Mexico I'll take our worst controller any day over anyone else in the world.

 

[hyper]

OK, two peeves, having to do with visual approaches.

First, why are so many pilots tacking on "when it helps" reporting the airport in sight? Helps who? I don't get it. If I can immediately clear you for a visual approach, I will. If I can't I won't. Simple as that. Can't you just say "airport in sight"?

Second, what's wrong with actually saying "Airport in sight"? Lots of pilots out there saying "We have the field all the way" (or my real favorite, "field all the way when it helps". All the way to what? I've taken to asking pilots who say that, "Verify field in sight?" And trust me, if anything untoward ever happens, my bosses will bust my chops for accepting that as a report that you have the airport in sight.

Third (I know I said two peeves, but I'm on a roll) why do many pilots wait until I spew a whole bunch of approach clearance phraseology before reporting the airport in sight? The situation is this: ATIS reporting VFR weather, ILS and visual approaches to Runway 2 in use. Every aircraft that checks on landing I vector to the localizer. Then, I watch and wait, and timing it just right, I rattle off, "ABC666, 6 miles from DAFIX, turn left heading 050, maintain 3000 til established on the localizer, cleared ILS runway 2 approach". The reply is "ABC666, field in sight". So I go back and say "ABC666, cleared visual approach". Can't we just eliminate the middle man, and report the field in sight, save me a little breath? And, to confuse me all the more, why are pilots intent on a visual approach clearance, yet pick up the intercept heading I gave them anyway, and fly the approach all the way to the runway? I mean, I understand flying a stabilized approach and all that, but why not just accept the instrument approach clearance?

Dog's on, I'm going to go watch TV.... :laugh:

Well, "when it helps" is more of a consideration to you guys. Much like "ready in sequence" is a consideration to you and the 2 guys across the r/w from me that I'm not being pushy or expect a t/o clearance right now. I'm just letting you know that I'm ready when you are and am "in line". When I call the field 25-30 miles out "when it helps", I'm conveying that I'm not expecting that you'll clear me just yet or being a d1ck about it, just lettin' ya know I'm ready when you are, a consideration. Otherwise I'll forget to tell you, have you call the app. clearance and then you get mad when i tell you it's in sight.

 

[dhc8fo]

What's with pilots that say "I have the numbers?" No, obviously you don't or you would say which ATIS (Victor, Bravo, etc..) you have.

Sometimes I forget WHICH ATIS I got and can't find it on my scribbles so rather than waste all of our time stopping and looking for it, I just say numbers. It isn't my habit, but I have done it and this is why.

 

[Hold West]

Here are my gripes:

Center controllers who aren't listening on Uniform.

It's not that we're not listening, it's that UHF radios suck. Mine or yours, I don't know, but it's routine that I can talk to a tanker on Victor 5x5 and can't hear anything from the fighters on Uniform in exactly the same place. There's nothing more fun than trying to break up a formation and spread them out for arrival sequencing when you can only talk to one out of 5-7 planes. Then you get a little closer to the antenna, and I can hear every other word, that's a big help.

This has been a standard complaint since I started in 1984, and well before that. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

 

[Hold West]

What's the procedure for a Tower controller giving intermediate taxi questions (FBO) or taxi instructions on the roll out? I understand he/she is trying to keep traffic flowing BUT a flight crew might be a little too busy to answer questions while rolling thru 100 knts w/ a strong gusty crosswind, slippery runway, etc. Some days it might be no big deal but other times we actually are working. This has happened a couple of times to me recently.

A snippet of my handbook:

3-10-9. RUNWAY EXITING​

a. Instruct aircraft where to turn-off the runway after landing, when appropriate, and advise the aircraft to hold short of a runway or taxiway if required for traffic.​

PHRASEOLOGY-
TURN LEFT/RIGHT (taxiway/runway),

or

IF ABLE, TURN LEFT/RIGHT (taxiway/runway)

and if required

HOLD SHORT OF (runway).​

NOTE-
Runway exiting or taxi instructions should not normally be issued to an aircraft prior to, or immediately after, touchdown.
​

More follows that segment, the emphasis is of course mine.
​

It's a judgement call, and like all judgement calls, is prone to occasional misjudgement, or a controller that doesn't understand the problem. If there's time, a non-confrontational mention that you thought the timing was inappropriate might help.
​

 

[81Horse]

... Well, "when it helps" is more of a consideration to you guys. Much like "ready in sequence" ...

Useless, excess verbiage, both phrases.

As to "with/have the numbers," this was a courtesy back in the day -- before ATIS. Now it serves no useful purpose, assuming the airport is ATIS-equipped; saying it does not relieve the controller of verifying that you actually have all the current ATIS info. The AIM says this:

[4-1-13]h. While it is a good operating practice for pilots to make use of the ATIS broadcast where it is available, some pilots use the phrase "have numbers" in communications with the control tower. Use of this phrase means that the pilot has received wind, runway, and altimeter information ONLY and the tower does not have to repeat this information. It does not indicate receipt of the ATIS broadcast and should never be used for this purpose.

 

[Brett Hull]

Here's one for the Tower guys. Aren't you guys supposed to assume jets are ready upon reaching the departure runway? Here in BHM it's a tossup. Some controllers seem like they want the call, and others have an "I know" tone when answering after I call ready after sitting at the hold line for a minute with no traffic in sight.

 

[A Squared]

A Squared,

Your probably right, but im in denial. A guy can dream, cant he?

I feel your pain. Flying the dc-6, pretty much everyone climbs faster than us, so from ATC's perspective it's worlds easier to depart a 737 then let the 6 go. I know that, but it's still irritating to arrive at the runway and be told we're #2 behind an Alaska 737, which we can see is just starting pushback. Ok that's a slight exaggeration. Anyway, I understand why they're doing it and just shrug, but there's one guy at my company who gets enraged and argues with the controllers, even refused to give way once. Doesn't help our company image with ATC much.

 

[81Horse]

From the AIM:

4-3-14. Communications ...
a. Pilots of departing aircraft should ... change to local control frequency when ready to request takeoff clearance.
NOTE-
Pilots are encouraged to monitor the local tower frequency as soon as practical consistent with other ATC requirements.
[SIZE=-2]REFERENCE-[/SIZE][SIZE=-2]
AIM, Automatic Terminal Information Service (ATIS), Paragraph 4-1-13.[/SIZE]
b. The tower controller will consider that pilots of turbine-powered aircraft are ready for takeoff when they reach the runway or warm-up block unless advised otherwise.

So, jets and turboprops.

 

[Hold West]

TRACON controllers who can't read my aircraft type. "/P" means "I don't have a VOR, dude"...don't get pissed when I'm "unable" your STAR/SID.

This may be a gap in my education, but /P means you do have a TACAN though, and just about all the SID/STAR procedures (obviously excepting RNAV procedures) I can think of use colocated VOR/TACAN installations, VORTACS, for navigational guidance. There's probably a procedure or two out there predicated on a VOR/DME, but the vast majority use VORTACS. What part of them can you not navigate?

 

[CrimsonEclipse]

Pilots:
The term "with you"
Citaion 1952B with you at FL 350.

Well no $hit!

..and quit making up terminology!!!! You're not cool OR FUNNY!!

ATC:
I also wish ATC would realise that the old dog of an F27 I'm flyin' doesn't
climb OR decend fast. Minimal power setting limits, no spoilers, no speed
breaks, no gear, 'till 170IAS no flaps until 144IAS. Wanting 200KTS until
short final?! Anything over 180kts at glideslope intercept means a possible
go-around.

"you have a B747 heavy trailing 3 miles"

Sounds like you have a problem.

I don't mind using the term "unable" but we come in the same airport, the
same time EVERY DAY. If I couldn't decend at 2500fpm on visual the last 2000 times,
I probably can't to it tonight.

Oh, and that Level 5 TS ahead of me? I'm not flying into it, no matter
how many times you ask. And stating "needing 20 deg. left for weather"
is NOT a request!! It means I'm turning in about 20 seconds so make a hole.


Don't get me wrong, ATC usually is VERY helpful and I'll usually bend over
backwards to assist. The pet peeves just set me off.

CE

 

[moonlight]

Here's one for the Tower guys. Aren't you guys supposed to assume jets are ready upon reaching the departure runway? Here in BHM it's a tossup. Some controllers seem like they want the call, and others have an "I know" tone when answering after I call ready after sitting at the hold line for a minute with no traffic in sight.

Yeah, I used to LOVE listening to pilots unfamiliar w/ ops at LAS call up the tower w/ a "Ready for takeoff or Ready in Sequence". As they would make this mistake over on the 19's, you could practically feel the rage of the controller boiling over. We would literally cringe and duck, as if the Great Hand of the Almighty was going to reach right through the radio and strangle someone. On a good day, the reply was simply, "Roger". On a bad day, anything from, "I know" to "Don't call us, we'll call you!"

 

[Fury220]

This may be a gap in my education, but /P means you do have a TACAN though, and just about all the SID/STAR procedures (obviously excepting RNAV procedures) I can think of use colocated VOR/TACAN installations, VORTACS, for navigational guidance. There's probably a procedure or two out there predicated on a VOR/DME, but the vast majority use VORTACS. What part of them can you not navigate?

True... /P means "TACAN only," and we use VORTACs all the time...no issue there. However, there are MANY STARs and SIDs that are VOR/DME only. The DFW terminal area and just about anywhere east of the Mississippi (it seems) is thick with VORs.

If I get cleared the JOE POOL 1 departure just one more time out of KNFW, I'm going to eject, walk to the dude at the scope, and strangle him. They deal with mil jets all the friggin time down there and still get pissed when we declare "unable." It's not a huge hassle for me, as I'm used to it. Throw a German/Italian student in there (who's trying to learn IFR nav when his English is passable at best), and it can really throw the dude a curve ball he's not ready for.