Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
Controllers Ordered to Violate Pilots
- Thread starter Bryan Wood
- Start date
Lycosaurus
Well Known Member
Show is still on
Thanks for pointing this out, Bryan. Joined late, but appreciate the discussions and chat-room.
Thanks for pointing this out, Bryan. Joined late, but appreciate the discussions and chat-room.
Well...in that case I'll start reporting them. Like the time on Flight Following a controller failed to point out opposing traffic, same altitude, that went whizzing by 200-300 yards away. Or the time a tower controller cleared me for takeoff in the face of traffic on short final. Or...
The controllers need to be careful how they proceed with this order. The relationship between pilots and controllers is a cooperative one. I catch them in mistakes too. If they start screwing with the pilots, I think they should expect payment in kind. I keep a couple copies of the NASA Report on hand, just in case. I beleive this is payback from the current admnistration because they got user fees shoved back in their faces.
I have friends who work in our tower. I have a difficult time seeing them really doing this. Safety surely will not be served if the relationship between controllers and pilots becomes adversarial.
I have friends who work in our tower. I have a difficult time seeing them really doing this. Safety surely will not be served if the relationship between controllers and pilots becomes adversarial.
Last edited:
Bryan Wood
Well Known Member
Where this started
I ended up missing the broadcast because we had company drop in and the computer had to be shut off for the next couple of hours. Did anybody listen?What was said? Before logging off there was a controller from Atlanta that said that his group had received no such directive.
Here is a link to the article on AVWEB that got this topic buzzing. I guess we will just have to wait and see. AOPA should be all over this if there is validity to the claims.
http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/ControllersAsAirspacePolice_198538-1.html
I ended up missing the broadcast because we had company drop in and the computer had to be shut off for the next couple of hours. Did anybody listen?What was said? Before logging off there was a controller from Atlanta that said that his group had received no such directive.
Here is a link to the article on AVWEB that got this topic buzzing. I guess we will just have to wait and see. AOPA should be all over this if there is validity to the claims.
http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/ControllersAsAirspacePolice_198538-1.html
N395V
Well Known Member
ATC and FSDOs are understaffed and underfunded as it is. If this new policy is real I suspect it will take less than a week before the ATC system is paralyzed andd the FSDOs are buried under so much paperwork that we will all die of old age before they get around to investigating your alleged infraction.
Or can you imagine...
"Mr. Jones you are accused of busting altitude on your flight from KXXX to KXXY at 2 AM on July the 12th" And Mr. Jones says "I was home in bed, never flew during the month of July, someone must have filed under my name and N number. No I have no idea who that might be.
In fact if this becomes policy I cannot imagine anyone filing an IFR flight plan with their real N number or name.
All the more reason to go VFR and crank up the music.
Or can you imagine...
"Mr. Jones you are accused of busting altitude on your flight from KXXX to KXXY at 2 AM on July the 12th" And Mr. Jones says "I was home in bed, never flew during the month of July, someone must have filed under my name and N number. No I have no idea who that might be.
In fact if this becomes policy I cannot imagine anyone filing an IFR flight plan with their real N number or name.
All the more reason to go VFR and crank up the music.
It doesn't matter - they will match you by transponder serial number. And it will be much harder to explain what your airplane was doing up there when you say you were in bed.
Don't get me wrong - I'm strongly opposed this new "way to look at existing rules" as FAA call s it. But unfortunately in current state of invigilation technology is against you.
And that is just one reason I don't feel the need to have Mode S.....Unless I am IFR, I am just another "1200"....
I was telling Louise just yesterday that now that she has her instrument ticket, she should try to file for her daily commute to College Station, even if the weather is good....but now (assuming this actually happens), I am not sure that's good advice. I agree with milt - if this policy is real, and implemented, it would bring the system to it's knees.
I was telling Louise just yesterday that now that she has her instrument ticket, she should try to file for her daily commute to College Station, even if the weather is good....but now (assuming this actually happens), I am not sure that's good advice. I agree with milt - if this policy is real, and implemented, it would bring the system to it's knees.
Last edited:
To everyone who missed the show,
The 25Zulu Show from last night with Russ Niles, who broke the story on AvWeb.com, Patrick Forrey President of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, and Aviation Attorney Alan Armstrong is now avialable for download.
Thanks to everyone who joined it was a great show. We also had several listeners call in and discuss this issue.
You can download the show at www.goldseallive.com/archives.aspx. It is also available via iTunes with a link on the archives page, or search for 25 Zulu Show.
Ostrich99
To those who recommended "responding in kind" to the controllers, a few thoughts...
If you bust controllers for mistakes, you aren't getting back at the idiots who made this policy.
If you bust controllers for mistakes, they will be taking heat from BOTH directions.
We need to take action to prevent this nonsense, but making the controllers our enemies will not probably be helpful in this regard.
If you bust controllers for mistakes, you aren't getting back at the idiots who made this policy.
If you bust controllers for mistakes, they will be taking heat from BOTH directions.
We need to take action to prevent this nonsense, but making the controllers our enemies will not probably be helpful in this regard.
jmartinez443
Well Known Member
After reading a couple of the posts in this thread, I think I figured out why they are doing this.
One poster said that this might be payback for the user fees thing. Then someone else said that if this is true he'll be cranking up the tunes and going VFR.
It will have the very outcome they want: less IFR from GA. Opinions?
One poster said that this might be payback for the user fees thing. Then someone else said that if this is true he'll be cranking up the tunes and going VFR.
It will have the very outcome they want: less IFR from GA. Opinions?
And just last year someone was giving me a hard time using the word violate here. Seems the term is used the same in Canada and the US.
This would be a very sad situation, one I'm sure most controllers would not want to comply with. Without a cooperative effort between pilots and ATC, there would be chaos. I'd guess that pilots would have no choice but to report controller mistakes, bog down the whole system and force the powers that be to recognize their stupidity.
We all make mistakes being human and sometimes we have to answer for them when we really goof up but this directive is counterproductive to safety and common sense. I can't believe that AOPA and other pilot groups will let this one slide through. Whoever thought this one up should be sent packing IMO.
This would be a very sad situation, one I'm sure most controllers would not want to comply with. Without a cooperative effort between pilots and ATC, there would be chaos. I'd guess that pilots would have no choice but to report controller mistakes, bog down the whole system and force the powers that be to recognize their stupidity.
We all make mistakes being human and sometimes we have to answer for them when we really goof up but this directive is counterproductive to safety and common sense. I can't believe that AOPA and other pilot groups will let this one slide through. Whoever thought this one up should be sent packing IMO.
rv7boy
Forum Peruser
I'm wondering what's going on...
I agree. I just visited the AOPA site and saw nothing on their web page. I did a Google search on the AOPA site of "pilot infractions" and had some hits which were several years old. I'm wondering if this is aimed more at commercial airline pilots than toward us GA pilots, although I really think it's probably the other way around.
I know there are some airline pilots as well as ATC controllers on this forum. Maybe you guys can't speak up right now, but this one really took me by surprise.
I'm also wondering if the timing is coincidental to the week AFTER EAA Airventure. They could have really shut the system down if they were going after GA pilots flying into Oshkosh last week.
Don
I agree. I just visited the AOPA site and saw nothing on their web page. I did a Google search on the AOPA site of "pilot infractions" and had some hits which were several years old. I'm wondering if this is aimed more at commercial airline pilots than toward us GA pilots, although I really think it's probably the other way around.
I know there are some airline pilots as well as ATC controllers on this forum. Maybe you guys can't speak up right now, but this one really took me by surprise.
I'm also wondering if the timing is coincidental to the week AFTER EAA Airventure. They could have really shut the system down if they were going after GA pilots flying into Oshkosh last week.
Don
gvgoff99
Well Known Member
Transponder and other thoughts
They can look up the Mode C transponder and find you. A friend of mind flew his 1966 C-172 during a presidential TFR in the Houston area. It took them about a week to get the letter to him and pull his ticket for a month.
On the other hand I suspect the real adjenda is to increase work and thus an argument for more funding and the "need" for user fees. The administration is really pushing for user fees. Don't let your guard down. Being a government employee has made me realize that there is frequently a hidden adjenda when the "higher ups" are telling you something.
As for ordering ATC to violate everyone. Good luck! Having been a government employee for a few years.......since 1980, I have found that change is possible but it does not happen fast. The "not higher ups" have enough to do without filling out more forms every time some poor fellow (you or me) does something that is in violation. I suspect that AOPA is on this as should be the EAA too. It is counter productive and will not contribute to safety. I guess time will tell.
They can look up the Mode C transponder and find you. A friend of mind flew his 1966 C-172 during a presidential TFR in the Houston area. It took them about a week to get the letter to him and pull his ticket for a month.
On the other hand I suspect the real adjenda is to increase work and thus an argument for more funding and the "need" for user fees. The administration is really pushing for user fees. Don't let your guard down. Being a government employee has made me realize that there is frequently a hidden adjenda when the "higher ups" are telling you something.
As for ordering ATC to violate everyone. Good luck! Having been a government employee for a few years.......since 1980, I have found that change is possible but it does not happen fast. The "not higher ups" have enough to do without filling out more forms every time some poor fellow (you or me) does something that is in violation. I suspect that AOPA is on this as should be the EAA too. It is counter productive and will not contribute to safety. I guess time will tell.
rv7boy
Forum Peruser
"...Less IFR from GA..."
Jorge, you may be right, especially if they are going to violate pilots who use the IFR system. Hmmm, I'm a long way from designing my RV-7 panel, but I can see buying only one EFIS now if I'm only gonna be flying VFR.
Jorge, you may be right, especially if they are going to violate pilots who use the IFR system. Hmmm, I'm a long way from designing my RV-7 panel, but I can see buying only one EFIS now if I'm only gonna be flying VFR.
Geico266
Well Known Member
I had this happen to me......Twice in the lst month.
Geico266
Well Known Member
Well then, just turn off your transponder. If they think you are doing something wrong they will follow you to your uncontrolled airport. If the FAA is gonna get stupid... they will get stupid thrown right back at them.
We have two FSDO FAA guys on our field, both come from the commercial world, and both say there is not a flight made the FAA could not find something wrong with.
Here I always thought controllers were suppose to be neutral / helpful so we weren't afraid to use them.
We have two FSDO FAA guys on our field, both come from the commercial world, and both say there is not a flight made the FAA could not find something wrong with.
Here I always thought controllers were suppose to be neutral / helpful so we weren't afraid to use them.
Last edited:
ChiefPilot
Well Known Member
I'm not sure how they'd trace it to a mode C - I suspect your friend's N-number was called in either by a tower or other witness.
In any event, if this continues forward I think there will still continue to be IFR; it just won't be "official". I could see lots of folks climbing/descending through layers, especially in areas w/o much traffic with the resultant decrease in safety.
JC/ELP
I'm New Here
Controllers ordered to violate pilots...
Well, I hope no one here believes that controllers want this. We ARE here to help, and no one should be discouraged from requesting service. Be assured that our union (NATCA) is vigorously opposing this policy.
FWIW, we have not been briefed on this at my facility. As far as the Mode-S being recorded thing, I've never heard of that but I'll check into it next week.
Believe me, nobody is more disgusted with the FAA these days than air traffic controllers.
Jim L. Cox
N612JC reserved.
Well, I hope no one here believes that controllers want this. We ARE here to help, and no one should be discouraged from requesting service. Be assured that our union (NATCA) is vigorously opposing this policy.
FWIW, we have not been briefed on this at my facility. As far as the Mode-S being recorded thing, I've never heard of that but I'll check into it next week.
Believe me, nobody is more disgusted with the FAA these days than air traffic controllers.
Jim L. Cox
N612JC reserved.
gvgoff99
Well Known Member
Transponder
I think that tracing transponders is related to some of the info that you provide to the FAA about your transponder when you put it in service. I don't know how so maybe one of the controllers (Alex D.or Jim Cox) or techno guys could let us know. I do know that my friend was on a local training flight at an uncontrolled grass strip on the western side of Houston without radio contact and they still busted him. The sad part is that he is a West Point grad, retired Colonel and Purple Heart recipient with a son in the Army. As they say "that and $ will get you a cup of coffee."
BTW I listened to the braodcast and though the original info came from AVweb it seems as if it is not based on anything solid at this point. It seems as if many of the controllers have not heard of any change. I think we may be doing too much of a knee jerk reaction to the broadcast at this point in time. The Controllers Union is opposed to any change in reporting policy.
I think that tracing transponders is related to some of the info that you provide to the FAA about your transponder when you put it in service. I don't know how so maybe one of the controllers (Alex D.or Jim Cox) or techno guys could let us know. I do know that my friend was on a local training flight at an uncontrolled grass strip on the western side of Houston without radio contact and they still busted him. The sad part is that he is a West Point grad, retired Colonel and Purple Heart recipient with a son in the Army. As they say "that and $ will get you a cup of coffee."
BTW I listened to the braodcast and though the original info came from AVweb it seems as if it is not based on anything solid at this point. It seems as if many of the controllers have not heard of any change. I think we may be doing too much of a knee jerk reaction to the broadcast at this point in time. The Controllers Union is opposed to any change in reporting policy.
Last edited:
I just looked up the encoding scheme for data with Mode C, because I didn't trust my memory, and there just isn't anything in there that uniquely identifies an aircraft (which is what I recalled). You don't give the FAA anything when you install a Mode C transponder - Mode S, absolutely! I just put a new Mode C transponder in Louise's -6, and there isn't any setup or "registration" to be done.
They must have used "other methods" to track your friend, and probably spent a lot of taxpayer's dollars to do it...
Same thought here. Mode C gives position but nothing specific on aircraft ID.I just looked up the encoding scheme for data with Mode C, because I didn't trust my memory, and there just isn't anything in there that uniquely identifies an aircraft (which is what I recalled). You don't give the FAA anything when you install a Mode C transponder - Mode S, absolutely! I just put a new Mode C transponder in Louise's -6, and there isn't any setup or "registration" to be done.
They must have used "other methods" to track your friend, and probably spent a lot of taxpayer's dollars to do it...
Since this topic is bouncing around, I thought I'd add my 2 cents on how *not* to let the FAA track you back home with ATC radar. I've always thought if I ever inadvertently busted airspace - and not already tagged by ATC - I'd immediately get out of the area. Fly well clear of the mode C veil and "offended" radar site and shut down the xpdr. Then fly the patten at a satellite airport or two, preferably with some other planes. Xpdr back on when over the numbers to blend back in.
Or possibly evacuate the area, shut down the xpdr and drop to min safe altitude and take that training run to the satellite airport for a little pattern work. Fill out the ASRS form when back home and reflect on how it's best to not bust airspace in the first place!
Re. TFRs, maybe there's more sophisticated radar in use. Or, whoever fouled up flew straight back to home base to be met by law enforcement or airport management.
Not advocating breaking the rules. Just thinking about avoiding painful encounters for an inadvertent mistake.
Best is to turn off the transponder and land at an airport with no tower, FBO, etc. that the FAA can call to get help identifying landing traffic. Wait some minutes, preferably for another aircraft to land. Then takeoff. There's no way they can legally sort out the radar track and ID you.
Strictly as time permits..
Unless something has changed when VFR under flight following the controller has no obligation to point out anything unless he has the time away from IFR aircraft. It's a strictly an "advisory" service.
Unless something has changed when VFR under flight following the controller has no obligation to point out anything unless he has the time away from IFR aircraft. It's a strictly an "advisory" service.
Hehe -the "BEST" way to avoid getting busted is not to go there in the first place!
I always flightplan with AOPA's on line flight planner, and keep my XM subscription for my 496 current and audio alerts on. It's an expensive solution, but I think it is cheaper than trusting my MK-1 computer to "remember" where any TFRs are.
I always flightplan with AOPA's on line flight planner, and keep my XM subscription for my 496 current and audio alerts on. It's an expensive solution, but I think it is cheaper than trusting my MK-1 computer to "remember" where any TFRs are.
gvgoff99
Well Known Member
Transponders
Paul, Thanks for the clear up on this. I remember giving a lot of numbers for my transponder (Mode S) and thought that this was SOP and the way that they nailed my friend with his Mode C. You are probably correct that they spent a bunch tracking him down. What a waste! Do they really think that making an example of him would deter anyone who wished to do some nefarious deed?
Back to the thread: I don't see the controllers issuing a bunch of tickets but I also have the feeling we are heading toward a much more controlled society in every aspect of our lives.
Paul, Thanks for the clear up on this. I remember giving a lot of numbers for my transponder (Mode S) and thought that this was SOP and the way that they nailed my friend with his Mode C. You are probably correct that they spent a bunch tracking him down. What a waste! Do they really think that making an example of him would deter anyone who wished to do some nefarious deed?
Back to the thread: I don't see the controllers issuing a bunch of tickets but I also have the feeling we are heading toward a much more controlled society in every aspect of our lives.
Geico266
Well Known Member
Well, their "advisory service" vectored me into a aerobatic box with the guy doing all kinds of manuvers. Seems to me they just missed me going into the area. When they assign you alt & heading, and get PO'ed if you don't hold that assignment seems to me they should be looking out for where I'm going.
The facts are ATC makes mistakes. IF they are going to report me for an infraction, stand by. I'm going on the offensive and reporting every move they make wrong. Including inaccurate / outof date ATIS info, mis-speaking on the radio, mis-identifying my call sign, any unnessesay transmissions from the tower, ect. If they want to get petty, I can get REAL petty. I'm not going to complain to the FAA, I'll do my complaining to sitting congressmen.
Remember the FAA is a lowly division of the NTSB, and you know what happens when "STUFF" rolls down hill.
The FAA will soon get the message.
Last edited:
John Clark
Well Known Member
Conflicted?
Here is what the AIM has to say:
5-5-10. Traffic Advisories (Traffic Information)
a. Pilot.
1. Acknowledges receipt of traffic advisories.
2. Informs controller if traffic in sight.
3. Advises ATC if a vector to avoid traffic is desired.
4. Does not expect to receive radar traffic advisories on all traffic. Some aircraft may not appear on the radar display. Be aware that the controller may be occupied with higher priority duties and unable to issue traffic information for a variety of reasons.
5. Advises controller if service is not desired.
b. Controller.
1. Issues radar traffic to the maximum extent consistent with higher priority duties except in Class A airspace.
2. Provides vectors to assist aircraft to avoid observed traffic when requested by the pilot.
3. Issues traffic information to aircraft in the Class B, Class C, and Class D surface areas for sequencing purposes.
I must have missed the part about "they should be looking out for where I'm going." The only time that works is on an IFR flight plan in IMC conditions. I am amused by your rant being followed by "Let's all be careful out there."
John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
Here is what the AIM has to say:
5-5-10. Traffic Advisories (Traffic Information)
a. Pilot.
1. Acknowledges receipt of traffic advisories.
2. Informs controller if traffic in sight.
3. Advises ATC if a vector to avoid traffic is desired.
4. Does not expect to receive radar traffic advisories on all traffic. Some aircraft may not appear on the radar display. Be aware that the controller may be occupied with higher priority duties and unable to issue traffic information for a variety of reasons.
5. Advises controller if service is not desired.
b. Controller.
1. Issues radar traffic to the maximum extent consistent with higher priority duties except in Class A airspace.
2. Provides vectors to assist aircraft to avoid observed traffic when requested by the pilot.
3. Issues traffic information to aircraft in the Class B, Class C, and Class D surface areas for sequencing purposes.
I must have missed the part about "they should be looking out for where I'm going." The only time that works is on an IFR flight plan in IMC conditions. I am amused by your rant being followed by "Let's all be careful out there."
John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
Geico266
Well Known Member
Check your registration. They have a number there for Mode S identification. Can't they use this to identify us?
My transponders are OFF until further notice. Look out for me.
Last edited:
Geico266
Well Known Member
You are getting the quote confused with me wanting us to be careful so no one gets hurt. Now I just don't want anyone to get caught doing something wrong!
Boy's and Girl's,
Let us not turn this into a you know what contest!!! We, pilots, will NOT WIN!!! We must work with ATC, remember it's not the voice who wants to violate you, its his or her boss. Don't go on the "offensive".
I have had Tampa controllers put me through parachutes twice now while I was on an IFR flight plan. Did I call and tell on them, no, but I did let the controller know how unhappy I was at the time. WE MUST NOT HIT THE BEE HIVE WITH A LARGE STICK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And to those of you who feel compelled to duck and run, while turning off your transponders, you would then be twice operating contrary to the regs.
Not really some one I want to share the sky with. Not only this, your now running the risk of a mid air collision. Those of us who fly jets with TCAS won't have the advantage to have an alert to your, duck and run, hide from the fed's cause YOU scewed up, poor decision making, and piloting skills!
We don't need bad publicity, and reading some of your comments here, thats what we will get.
If I was a FED, and I read these comments, I'd want to talk to some of you! Please don't be offended, alot of people want little airplanes to go away, so we need to befriend ALL who come in contact with little airplanes. I really like flying my little airplanes as well as the jet, so for that reason I feel compelled to make these comments.
Let us not turn this into a you know what contest!!! We, pilots, will NOT WIN!!! We must work with ATC, remember it's not the voice who wants to violate you, its his or her boss. Don't go on the "offensive".
I have had Tampa controllers put me through parachutes twice now while I was on an IFR flight plan. Did I call and tell on them, no, but I did let the controller know how unhappy I was at the time. WE MUST NOT HIT THE BEE HIVE WITH A LARGE STICK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And to those of you who feel compelled to duck and run, while turning off your transponders, you would then be twice operating contrary to the regs.
Not really some one I want to share the sky with. Not only this, your now running the risk of a mid air collision. Those of us who fly jets with TCAS won't have the advantage to have an alert to your, duck and run, hide from the fed's cause YOU scewed up, poor decision making, and piloting skills!
We don't need bad publicity, and reading some of your comments here, thats what we will get.
If I was a FED, and I read these comments, I'd want to talk to some of you! Please don't be offended, alot of people want little airplanes to go away, so we need to befriend ALL who come in contact with little airplanes. I really like flying my little airplanes as well as the jet, so for that reason I feel compelled to make these comments.
John Clark
Well Known Member
Only if you have Mode S...
The FAA is assigning Mode S numbers on registrations to everyone. Don't make no nevermind unless you have a Mode S transponder and the unit is registered.
John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
Check your registration. They have a number there for Mode S identification. Can't they use this to identify us?
My transponders are OFF until further notice. Look out for me.
The FAA is assigning Mode S numbers on registrations to everyone. Don't make no nevermind unless you have a Mode S transponder and the unit is registered.
John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
Geico266
Well Known Member
Remember when this country was built on a constitution that created a "Government of the people, by the people, and FOR the people?"
Those were the good ol days. The first casualty of a government gone wild is freedom of speech.
Last edited:
Remember when this country was built on a constitution that created a "Government of the people, by the people, and FOR the people?"
Your 100 percent correct. It should now read OVER the people.
Thanks, you understand what I was saying.
ChiefPilot
Well Known Member
Check your registration. They have a number there for Mode S identification. Can't they use this to identify us?
My transponders are OFF until further notice. Look out for me.
Mode S != Mode C.....
w1curtis
Well Known Member
There is nothing in Mode C that can provide "unique" tracking capabilities as you describe. There is more to this story. What they can do is; usually with presidential TFRs there are AWACS tracking local traffic. Those AWACS can "follow" a target very accurately and once that target puts down somewhere, they contact the local staff and inquire about the tail number of the aircraft that just landed. Oh, and the AWACS can do this even with the transponder OFF.
Last edited:
w1curtis
Well Known Member
There is this;
and then there is this in your signature;My transponders are OFF until further notice. Look out for me.
The two items are contradictory.
Geico266
Well Known Member
Read post #39, and try and keep up.
I'm being sarcastic, and saying what hundreds of pilots out there in VAF land are thinking. The discourse of this thread is to shed light on the problem of ATC becoming cops, hense I'm still keeping up with my montra of "Let's be careful out there!".
Last edited:
Geico266
Well Known Member
I have an idea (I know that is scary ) Lets all start a movement to squawk 0021 (1200 backwards) when flying VFR so ATC know we are PO'ed.
I'll write a letter to the FAA saying I'm William Curtis and we ain't gonna take it no more! AND we are squawking 0021 in protest.
) Lets all start a movement to squawk 0021 (1200 backwards) when flying VFR so ATC know we are PO'ed.I'll write a letter to the FAA saying I'm William Curtis and we ain't gonna take it no more! AND we are squawking 0021 in protest.
Last edited:
CE196
I think youve a bit over reacted to the "proposed" duck and cover routine. I mean come on you have never thought about how to say....rob a bank....sneak contraband onto an airliner after you got through security at an airport, use a radar detector?
Im not condoning illegal flying but its akin to speeding to get to work on time and oops there is a cop, better put on the brakes and get back in the right lane to blend in to the flow of traffic.
You fly jets....Tcas...thats all fine and well but I hope you have not forgot that some of us fly aircraft with NO ELECTRIC which means no transponder for your tcas to ping. And its possible that they have no radio also so everyones eyes are the only defense on both sides.
Again believe me it makes me hot under the coller to hear guys who fly into IMC with no IFR flight plan because it makes it unsafe for all of us but my bottom line is no amount of black box gadgetry will keep all aircraft from close proximitry.
And to qualify my statements I have lost two friends in a midair accident in which the gadgets probably had to do with why they were not looking outside and avoiding the cessna that was on a IFR training flight in VFR conditions.
Lets all just keep those heads spinning and looking outside for that j-3, champ, glider,pietenpol, one off homebuilt with no elect. or someguy trying to get back into the right lane so the cops wont catch him(theoreticly of course)
I think youve a bit over reacted to the "proposed" duck and cover routine. I mean come on you have never thought about how to say....rob a bank....sneak contraband onto an airliner after you got through security at an airport, use a radar detector?
Im not condoning illegal flying but its akin to speeding to get to work on time and oops there is a cop, better put on the brakes and get back in the right lane to blend in to the flow of traffic.
You fly jets....Tcas...thats all fine and well but I hope you have not forgot that some of us fly aircraft with NO ELECTRIC which means no transponder for your tcas to ping. And its possible that they have no radio also so everyones eyes are the only defense on both sides.
Again believe me it makes me hot under the coller to hear guys who fly into IMC with no IFR flight plan because it makes it unsafe for all of us but my bottom line is no amount of black box gadgetry will keep all aircraft from close proximitry.
And to qualify my statements I have lost two friends in a midair accident in which the gadgets probably had to do with why they were not looking outside and avoiding the cessna that was on a IFR training flight in VFR conditions.
Lets all just keep those heads spinning and looking outside for that j-3, champ, glider,pietenpol, one off homebuilt with no elect. or someguy trying to get back into the right lane so the cops wont catch him(theoreticly of course)
osxuser
Well Known Member
Actually, this is a GREAT idea. Under IFR, you are cleared through all airspace along your routing automatically.... no concerns about bravo even...
As for the FAA, they are a division of the DOT, nothing to do with the NTSB.
And it's not the controllers fault, if you start ragging on them and their human errors, you are setting yourself up for a disaster. Pilots and controllers both work together to create a safe environment for air travel, the management at the FAA are doing their best to create a hostile work environment for controllers, and this is just another result of that. Creating a war against the controllers will accomplish nothing, you can change this with your vote...
