What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Controllers Ordered to Violate Pilots

A Gentleman's Sport

As a guy that flies Part 121 and GA, I didn't see this directive (or whatever form it has taken) as painting a target on GA pilots. It has my attention in both arenas, and I feel just as exposed to this whether I'm in the jet (working not to speed underneath a Class B shelf or not miss a crossing restriction) or the RV (staying clear of no-go airspace or just playing the see and avoid game). Probably obviously more exposed when IFR, or when working with ATC, yet VFR (when they know who I am!).

Never working with ATC just doesn't seem to be a viable alternative, and I don't think this new spectre is an attack on any segment of aviation, but rather something all pilots and all controllers should work together to mitigate, from the bottom up. My first flight instructor instilled in me that flying is a "Gentleman's Sport" (and that's a unisex term for the ladies out there! :)). By that, he meant how we interact, work with, and communicate with ATC and other pliots makes all the difference in the world. His words have been proven true many times over the years, and a little humilty, versus a full frontal attack has been much more effective in potentially "tough spots" so far.

I'm not saying one should naively lay oneself open after committing an error, but I do think that continuing to foster a positive relationship with ATC, whether the situation be good, bad or ugly, will keep those of us in the trenches (on both sides of the microphone) working together, and will be the best presciption for success in the face of this updated "enforcement call to action". Seems a much better course of action than to call for a "First Strike" (and that's not an attack on previous posters...just my thoughts).

On the job, working with ATC is part of the territory. In the RV, I try to carry over the same professionalism, as I think most GA pilots do. I think ATC repsects that, and I sure hope (and believe) that most contollers want this to remain a "Gentleman's Sport"...and maybe they know that busting pilots for every minor infraction would be very, very counterproductive, somewhat hypocritical (I think they know we all make mistakes on both sides of the mic), and could lead to unsafe practices to avoid getting caught! We sure don't need pilots being so uptight about making a mistake and getting busted, that they make more "unforced errors".

IMHO, ATC wants, and needs, pilots to work with them, and I'd be very interested in what the ATC union forums are seeing on this topic.

Hope that wasn't too much of a soap box! I'm just a "let's all get along" kinda guy! ;)

Cheers,
Bob
 
Last edited:
CE196 said:
Boy's and Girl's,
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!......
Click to expand...
Nope. You would be wrong. Please recheck your regulations on the obligations for transponder and radio usage. As I said, one should get well clear of any airspace. That would include well below any traffic utilizing collision avoidance. Last, please use caution flying in my vicinity with your head down in the cockpit talking on your radio and utilizing your dashboard TCAS. I might just sneak up on you in my non-electric J-3.

Just to clarify, this is a little excursion into hangar flying. Ever done that? Try it - it's fun. And I bet you would make a good fed! have a good day!
 
Last edited:
Still no mention of this by AOPA and not many controllers seem aware of a "new" policy. Are we really dealing with a rumor gone amok?
 
What violations?

If this is true, the FAA must have something specific in mind. I'd like to know what violation they are concerned about and whether or not it may affect me.

I have gotten slack from ATC and have needed it.

On the other hand, they make plenty of mistakes as well and I've yet to report one.

I realize that this is "not their fault", but if it actually takes effect we may have to respond in kind. The enforcement clutter that ensues will certainly get their role redefined as "Air Traffic Control" rather than "Air Traffic Police"

I hope it doesn't come to that.

Also, as some have pointed out, this is something that AOPA should be all over. The fact that they haven't said a word makes me wonder if this is the pipe dream of a few FAA zealots rather than a real policy change.
 
Steve Brown said:
If this is true, the FAA must have something specific in mind. I'd like to know what violation they are concerned about and whether or not it may affect me.

I have gotten slack from ATC and have needed it.

On the other hand, they make plenty of mistakes as well and I've yet to report one.

I realize that this is "not their fault", but if it actually takes effect we may have to respond in kind. The enforcement clutter that ensues will certainly get their role redefined as "Air Traffic Control" rather than "Air Traffic Police"

I hope it doesn't come to that.

Also, as some have pointed out, this is something that AOPA should be all over. The fact that they haven't said a word makes me wonder if this is the pipe dream of a few FAA zealots rather than a real policy change.
Click to expand...

As a potential ATC... I can tell you most controllers won't change a thing that they do unless their supervisor is looking over their shoulder. A couple of bad apples will use this directive as an excuse to bust more people for airspace violations and the like, but not much will really change. Mostly because they don't like the rules any more than we do.

The FAA isn't really concerned with violations either, they are just being a pain in the but because NATCA hasn't rolled over and signed their 'contract' and they still can't get a re-authorization through congress yet... a year later.
 
John,

Thanks for that link. Here's the quote from it:

?The FAA has apparently ordered controllers to violate pilots for any and all errors and has threatened to discipline them if they don't file the reports.?

Quote continues:

"There?s no telling the thought process of whatever genius came up with this one. I suspect there could be many an unintended consequence because of it though. The rank-and-file controllers haven?t got the briefing from the FAA yet -- but if you know anything about the process, you know that it will be interpreted as many different ways as there are FAA managers. The only thing I?m willing to say for certain is that the folks at NASA?s ASRS will be busy. This could get ugly."

That, and some of the comments from the original AvWeb article sum up about what I thought controllers would think of this...that their job is safe and efficient movement of air traffic, not ticket writing. The quoted person in the blog appears to think just as we do, and I suspect that's the view of the many.

Concur with Steve and Stephen...there has been good tolerance shown for the "human factor" in the past, and my gut says that if we keep doing our part to keep it safe and do it right, I wouldn't expect that to change.

And it is good to "hangar fly" this, as it airs it out, maybe dispells some myths about it, and helps us get to ground truth, so we can prevent overreaction, and keep working with ATC to keep the system safe!

Cheers,
Bob
 
N395V said:
Still no mention of this by AOPA and not many controllers seem aware of a "new" policy. Are we really dealing with a rumor gone amok?
Click to expand...

I keep thinking the same thing Milt. One report, on Avweb, is what started all this, and none of the alphabet organizations have said anything yet. SO I am still wondering if this absurd idea is real or not. I say absurd, because it is 100% anti-safety, and in fact, (if implemented the way Avweb reported), puts the Controllers in the vice worse than the pilots. They are the ones that supposedly get disciplined if they DON'T report violations, yet we all know that the only way to ensure air safety is for pilots and controllers to work as a team.

I have no intention of violating regulations or safety standards, but if this does go into affect, I will only use "the system" when I need it. In the Houston area, it does no good for single engine GA aircraft to call approach in order to go more direct - VFR or IFR, you are going to get shunted down, under, and around the Class B anyway (except on Sunday morning...)!

Paul
 
Enforcement

rvmills said:
Concur with Steve and Stephen...there has been good tolerance shown for the "human factor" in the past, and my gut says that if we keep doing our part to keep it safe and do it right, I wouldn't expect that to change.

And it is good to "hangar fly" this, as it airs it out, maybe dispells some myths about it, and helps us get to ground truth, so we can prevent overreaction, and keep working with ATC to keep the system safe!

Cheers,
Bob
Click to expand...

I agree. Those of us that have been flying a long time know that the FAA management tends to ebb and flow on how to enforce the rules. Some years ago they announced the "kinder and gentler" approach. A few years later it was back to the iron fist. But for those of us flying the line nothing changed. I have made my share of mistakes and I have never been taken to task. Gently nudged, perhaps, but never more that a reminder. I have also saved a few controllers along the way. The only time I was given the fearsome "are your ready to copy a phone number" in 43 years of flying it was a TRACON supervisor asking if I wanted to "take any action" on another pilot that had blown through the parallel localizer and turned a little close to my path on the approach to LAX. I told him no, I saw it developing and it wasn't a problem.

John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top