Go around, NOW!!

[Jim Burns]

This past Sunday, while visiting Lawrenceville, GA (KLZU Class C just under
the outer ATL Class B), traffic was landing and departing 25. The
controller was busy, coordinating with Atlanta, handling clearance delivery,
ground, and tower simultaneously. He was broadcasting on all frequencies,
while receiving GC/CD and Tower separately. We started engines and prepared
to call for taxi instructions when I heard him blurt out "Cessna 1234 go
around NOW!!! YOU ARE LINED UP WITH RUNWAY 7, YOU WERE CLEARED TO LAND
RUNWAY 25, 25 IS THE ACTIVE RUNWAY, RIGHT TURN, GO AROUND NOW!!! I HAVE
LANDING TRAFFIC 25!!" (this guy was rightfully ****ed and obviously
rattled) Then he issued a right turn and a go around to traffic landing 25
and lit into the Cessna driver again. "What were you doing? why were you
landing runway 7, I cleared you #2 on 25" The Cessna pilot must have
responded with some excuse about a mistake and the controller came back
"mistakes are what get people in airplanes killed, next time you make sure
you know where you are! Now join a left downwind for Runway 25, that's
runway 25, traffic at your 3:00 opposite direction, a Piper on an upwind leg
for runway 25, I said runway 25!"

Ouch! So... after hearing that, it made me wonder if the tower/only
controller actually ever had or was maintaining visual contact with the
Cessna before he lined up for final on the opposite runway or not.

This same controller gave another pilot a lesson in courtesy when a
different pilot had called for an IFR Clearance then the first pilot
immediately called for taxi instructions. The taxiing pilot was chastised
quite severely for not giving the IFR pilot time to copy and readback his
IFR clearance. "Piper 1234, when you hear another pilot call for an IFR
clearance on Ground Control (GC and CD are the same freq at KLZU) and I give
that pilot his clearance, it would be nice if you'd give him time to write
it down, read it back, and get confirmation before you interrupt him with
your taxi request!"

Although he sounded rude it was obvious he wasn't having a good day and at
the very least had his hands full, I'm just curious about what standard
procedures are for tower controllers maintaining visual contact with planes
once they are actually in the traffic pattern.

Jim

[Dudley Henriques]

Just an opinion on this if I may please;

This type of outburst on an open tower frequency could lead to a disaster.
Although it happens from time to time, it's not good professional
operational practice for several reasons, the most important of these being
flight safety.
The overriding reason is that for the time span...even seconds...of the
outburst, the tower operator can easily be distracted from something ELSE
that is happening in real time. Job one is traffic separation, NOT pilot
admonishment!
The professional approach to handling a situation like this one is for the
tower operator is realize up front that the "go around NOW" call will itself
be an emergency situation for both the aircraft lined up on the wrong
runway, and any traffic conflict the go around situation could conceivably
cause as the new and sudden situation develops in real time.
In other words, it's a potential traffic conflict issue happening in real
time, and that type of situation requires a calm professional approach so
that the right thing gets done NOW...and with as little additional stress
level as possible imparted on the offending aircraft AND others who might be
affected by the changing chain of events.
A tower frequency is no place for this type of admonishment or anger. Job
one is flight safety NOW! People involved in critical aviation professions
should know better....and thank God most of them DO!
You save this kind of thing for later.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
(take out the trash :-)


"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
> This past Sunday, while visiting Lawrenceville, GA (KLZU Class C just
> under
> the outer ATL Class B), traffic was landing and departing 25. The
> controller was busy, coordinating with Atlanta, handling clearance
> delivery,
> ground, and tower simultaneously. He was broadcasting on all frequencies,
> while receiving GC/CD and Tower separately. We started engines and
> prepared
> to call for taxi instructions when I heard him blurt out "Cessna 1234 go
> around NOW!!! YOU ARE LINED UP WITH RUNWAY 7, YOU WERE CLEARED TO LAND
> RUNWAY 25, 25 IS THE ACTIVE RUNWAY, RIGHT TURN, GO AROUND NOW!!! I HAVE
> LANDING TRAFFIC 25!!" (this guy was rightfully ****ed and obviously
> rattled) Then he issued a right turn and a go around to traffic landing
> 25
> and lit into the Cessna driver again. "What were you doing? why were you
> landing runway 7, I cleared you #2 on 25" The Cessna pilot must have
> responded with some excuse about a mistake and the controller came back
> "mistakes are what get people in airplanes killed, next time you make sure
> you know where you are! Now join a left downwind for Runway 25, that's
> runway 25, traffic at your 3:00 opposite direction, a Piper on an upwind
> leg
> for runway 25, I said runway 25!"
>
> Ouch! So... after hearing that, it made me wonder if the tower/only
> controller actually ever had or was maintaining visual contact with the
> Cessna before he lined up for final on the opposite runway or not.
>
> This same controller gave another pilot a lesson in courtesy when a
> different pilot had called for an IFR Clearance then the first pilot
> immediately called for taxi instructions. The taxiing pilot was chastised
> quite severely for not giving the IFR pilot time to copy and readback his
> IFR clearance. "Piper 1234, when you hear another pilot call for an IFR
> clearance on Ground Control (GC and CD are the same freq at KLZU) and I
> give
> that pilot his clearance, it would be nice if you'd give him time to write
> it down, read it back, and get confirmation before you interrupt him with
> your taxi request!"
>
> Although he sounded rude it was obvious he wasn't having a good day and at
> the very least had his hands full, I'm just curious about what standard
> procedures are for tower controllers maintaining visual contact with
> planes
> once they are actually in the traffic pattern.
>
> Jim
>
>

[No Such User]

In article et>,
Dudley Henriques wrote:

>A tower frequency is no place for this type of admonishment or anger. Job
>one is flight safety NOW! People involved in critical aviation professions
>should know better....and thank God most of them DO!
>You save this kind of thing for later.

Indeed, the usual way for a controller to yell at a pilot starts with that
dreaded radio call, "Cessna 1234, copy down this telephone number and call
me when you get on the ground."

[Jim Burns]

>People involved in critical aviation professions
> should know better....and thank God most of them DO!
> You save this kind of thing for later.
> Dudley Henriques

Agreed. While I was surprised that I did not here "Cessna 1234, call the
tower on the telephone after parking", I was slightly relieved, because this
controller was busy enough at the time. I wouldn't have wanted him
distracted even further. I think it could have been handled more
professionally, perhaps "Cessna 1234, please report to or call the tower on
the telephone at 14:00Z" or when ever he had assistance available or his
shift changed.

There was a third lecture to a pilot directly behind me during taxi for not
reading back taxi and hold short instructions. Understandably another
dangerous situation, but rather than reading the guy the riot act, he could
have simply said "Piper1234, Readback of all taxi and hold short
instructions is mandatory" But he went on and on about how you just can't
say "Roger".

Before anybody jumps on me, I'll correct my position report in the original
post to "traffic 9:00" not 3:00.

Jim

[Mark Hansen]

On 3/24/2005 12:38, Dudley Henriques wrote:

> Just an opinion on this if I may please;
>
> This type of outburst on an open tower frequency could lead to a disaster.
> Although it happens from time to time, it's not good professional
> operational practice for several reasons, the most important of these being
> flight safety.
> The overriding reason is that for the time span...even seconds...of the
> outburst, the tower operator can easily be distracted from something ELSE
> that is happening in real time. Job one is traffic separation, NOT pilot
> admonishment!
> The professional approach to handling a situation like this one is for the
> tower operator is realize up front that the "go around NOW" call will itself
> be an emergency situation for both the aircraft lined up on the wrong
> runway, and any traffic conflict the go around situation could conceivably
> cause as the new and sudden situation develops in real time.
> In other words, it's a potential traffic conflict issue happening in real
> time, and that type of situation requires a calm professional approach so
> that the right thing gets done NOW...and with as little additional stress
> level as possible imparted on the offending aircraft AND others who might be
> affected by the changing chain of events.
> A tower frequency is no place for this type of admonishment or anger. Job
> one is flight safety NOW! People involved in critical aviation professions
> should know better....and thank God most of them DO!
> You save this kind of thing for later.
> Dudley Henriques
> International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
> dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
> (take out the trash :-)

Well put, Dudley. I was thinking the same thing. It seems to me
that there is no place in an aviation frequency for any type of
anger-based response.

The other problem is that the controller was taking up a lot of
frequency time with his admonishments - time which the frequency
really couldn't afford.

Of course, I can only imagine what the controllers have to go
through day after day; especially in a busy area like the one
mentioned in the original post. However, if this controller's
reaction is *normal* for him, then perhaps he's in the wrong
job (or at the wrong tower).


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL
Sacramento, CA

[Steve Foley]

The best one I heard was on the scanner at Oshkosh. The controller
announced:

All aircraft on final, we are using runway 27. Please look at your magnetic
compass. If it reads 9, please break off your approach. That was the last he
said about it.



"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
> to call for taxi instructions when I heard him blurt out "Cessna 1234 go
> around NOW!!! YOU ARE LINED UP WITH RUNWAY 7, YOU WERE CLEARED TO LAND
> RUNWAY 25, 25 IS THE ACTIVE RUNWAY, RIGHT TURN, GO AROUND NOW!!! I HAVE
> LANDING TRAFFIC 25!!" (this guy was rightfully ****ed and obviously
> rattled) Then he issued a right turn and a go around to traffic landing
25
> and lit into the Cessna driver again. "What were you doing? why were you
> landing runway 7, I cleared you #2 on 25" The Cessna pilot must have

[Jim Burns]

No doubt that this kind of calm, low key, yet informative approach was
exactly why that controller was chosen to work at OSH.
Jim

"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
news:i6G0e.15958$aS5.13642@trndny05...
> The best one I heard was on the scanner at Oshkosh. The controller
> announced:
>
> All aircraft on final, we are using runway 27. Please look at your
magnetic
> compass. If it reads 9, please break off your approach. That was the last
he
> said about it.

[Michael]

Jim Burns wrote:
> Although he sounded rude it was obvious he wasn't having a good day
and at
> the very least had his hands full, I'm just curious about what
standard
> procedures are for tower controllers maintaining visual contact with
planes
> once they are actually in the traffic pattern.

Standard procedure is to know where everyone is to the extent necessary
to ensure that separation on the runway is provided. It is actually
acceptable to clear an aircraft to land when not in sight, provided the
traffic situation is such that loss of separation on the runway will
not occur.

In a situation where there are lots of planes in the pattern, the
normal procedure is to use visual sequencing and that does mean
maintaining visual contact - but this is not always possible. Bright
sun and obstacles around the tower can interfere with this. This does
not relieve the controller of his responsibility for correct sequencing
and ensuring separation on the runway.

I believe it was the creator of Dilbert who pointed out that aviation
was an industry that had made no progress in decades, and that he
believed flight control RADAR still involved having interns on towers
with binoculars screaming "Turn right, turn right." Spookily accurate
for someone without aviation knowledge. My point is basically that
both pilot and controller made mistakes, but the system is such that
mistakes like this are guaranteed to happen.

I have also noticed that when pilots screw up in a situation where the
controller is ahead of the game and not screwing up, there is very
little chewing out on the radio. The pilot is, at worst, told to call
the tower - calmly and professionally. Every time a controller is
chewing out someone on the frequency, he is screwing up - and usually
it's not his first screwup either. He's mad because he knows he didn't
do a good job with the situation, and he's taking it out on the pilot.
Basically, it's unprofessional.

Michael

[Newps]

Jim Burns wrote:

> This past Sunday, while visiting Lawrenceville, GA (KLZU Class C just under
> the outer ATL Class B), traffic was landing and departing 25. The
> controller was busy, coordinating with Atlanta, handling clearance delivery,
> ground, and tower simultaneously. He was broadcasting on all frequencies,
> while receiving GC/CD and Tower separately. We started engines and prepared
> to call for taxi instructions when I heard him blurt out "Cessna 1234 go
> around NOW!!! YOU ARE LINED UP WITH RUNWAY 7, YOU WERE CLEARED TO LAND
> RUNWAY 25, 25 IS THE ACTIVE RUNWAY, RIGHT TURN, GO AROUND NOW!!! I HAVE
> LANDING TRAFFIC 25!!" (this guy was rightfully ****ed and obviously
> rattled) Then he issued a right turn and a go around to traffic landing 25
> and lit into the Cessna driver again. "What were you doing? why were you
> landing runway 7, I cleared you #2 on 25" The Cessna pilot must have
> responded with some excuse about a mistake and the controller came back
> "mistakes are what get people in airplanes killed, next time you make sure
> you know where you are! Now join a left downwind for Runway 25, that's
> runway 25, traffic at your 3:00 opposite direction, a Piper on an upwind leg
> for runway 25, I said runway 25!"


And if the pilot would have landed and caused a loss of separation the
FAA would have hammered that facility for only having one controller
working. After that reaming if it would have been me I would have had
my passenger say "kiss my ass".

[Matt Whiting]

Steve Foley wrote:

> The best one I heard was on the scanner at Oshkosh. The controller
> announced:
>
> All aircraft on final, we are using runway 27. Please look at your magnetic
> compass. If it reads 9, please break off your approach. That was the last he
> said about it.

I understand that only the best controllers get selected for OSH duty
and this is clear evidence of that.


Matt

[Jim Burns]

>"Newps" > wrote in message
...
> And if the pilot would have landed and caused a loss of separation the
> FAA would have hammered that facility for only having one controller
> working. After that reaming if it would have been me I would have had
> my passenger say "kiss my ass".

I've been wondering about the "second" controller. It's always been my
understanding that there is supposed to be 2 on duty, every controll tower
I've ever visited always had at least 2. Although at that particular time,
he only had 2 aircraft in the air, he was also talking to me and the fellow
behind me on the ground, a guy on clearance delivery, and a helicopter
inbound. I never heard the "second" controllers voice. Maybe #2 was taking
a #2?

Jim

[Jose]

> "Piper 1234, when you hear another pilot call for an IFR
> clearance on Ground Control (GC and CD are the same freq at KLZU) and I give
> that pilot his clearance, it would be nice if you'd give him time to write
> it down, read it back, and get confirmation before you interrupt him with
> your taxi request!"

Why?

Often when I get an IFR clearance it is long and involved. The other
guy would have to wait (with his hobbs running) while I read it back and
get a confirmation. OTOH taxi instructions are generally pretty short
(taxi 26 via charlie) and wouldn't cause a problem should another
aircraft slip in. He could be on his way while I'm getting the charts out.

r.a.s trimmed
Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Blanche]

Michael > wrote:
>the tower - calmly and professionally. Every time a controller is
>chewing out someone on the frequency, he is screwing up - and usually
>it's not his first screwup either. He's mad because he knows he didn't
>do a good job with the situation, and he's taking it out on the pilot.

But isn't this true of any situation? I've noticed road rage, nasty
people in parking lots, softball fields, etc. And the one being
hostile is always the one who is wrong -- and they probably realize
it and refuse to deal with it in a rational manner.

[Jim Burns]

I think the controller was waiting and expecting the IFR pilot to read back
the clearance. If the IFR pilot was unable to do so promptly, he should
have told the controller to "stand-by", he didn't say stand-by, but he
didn't immediately read back the clearance either. Again, I think several
people created that problem, I think that the pilot requesting taxi
instructions was unaware that CD was also on the same freq, and didn't have
a clue as to what the controller was giving the IFR pilot and that the IFR
pilot was expected to read back the clearance but hesitated. That's just
how it sounded to me at the time, I may be wrong.
Jim

"Jose" > wrote in message
. com...
> > "Piper 1234, when you hear another pilot call for an IFR
> > clearance on Ground Control (GC and CD are the same freq at KLZU) and I
give
> > that pilot his clearance, it would be nice if you'd give him time to
write
> > it down, read it back, and get confirmation before you interrupt him
with
> > your taxi request!"
>
> Why?
>
> Often when I get an IFR clearance it is long and involved. The other
> guy would have to wait (with his hobbs running) while I read it back and
> get a confirmation. OTOH taxi instructions are generally pretty short
> (taxi 26 via charlie) and wouldn't cause a problem should another
> aircraft slip in. He could be on his way while I'm getting the charts
out.
>
> r.a.s trimmed
> Jose
> --
> Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Newps]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Steve Foley wrote:
>
>> The best one I heard was on the scanner at Oshkosh. The controller
>> announced:
>>
>> All aircraft on final, we are using runway 27. Please look at your
>> magnetic
>> compass. If it reads 9, please break off your approach. That was the
>> last he
>> said about it.
>
>
> I understand that only the best controllers get selected for OSH duty

No. Anybody from the Great Lakes region, and only that region, is
eligible. That's the only criteria.

[Newps]

Jim Burns wrote:


>
> I've been wondering about the "second" controller. It's always been my
> understanding that there is supposed to be 2 on duty, every controll tower
> I've ever visited always had at least 2.

The number depends on how much traffic can be expected at a given time
of day and how many people are on duty. There's nothing worse for a
tower manager and his supervisors than to have something happen and the
investigation reveals controllers on the couch.


Although at that particular time,
> he only had 2 aircraft in the air, he was also talking to me and the fellow
> behind me on the ground, a guy on clearance delivery, and a helicopter
> inbound. I never heard the "second" controllers voice. Maybe #2 was taking
> a #2?

What time of day?

[Jose]

> I think that the pilot requesting taxi
> instructions was unaware that CD was also on the same freq

....which brings up another pet peeve - controllers who use both
frequencies to broadcast on. I'm on tower and hearing a lot of ground
radio traffic, I turn to ground and hear the same ground traffic, and
can't get a word in edgewise. So my motor's running at the threshold
while three airplanes are taxiied into place, two aircraft get IFR
clearances and a reroute... what's a pilot to do? :)

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jim Burns]

11:00am Sunday morning

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Jim Burns wrote:
>
>
> >
> > I've been wondering about the "second" controller. It's always been my
> > understanding that there is supposed to be 2 on duty, every controll
tower
> > I've ever visited always had at least 2.
>
> The number depends on how much traffic can be expected at a given time
> of day and how many people are on duty. There's nothing worse for a
> tower manager and his supervisors than to have something happen and the
> investigation reveals controllers on the couch.
>
>
> Although at that particular time,
> > he only had 2 aircraft in the air, he was also talking to me and the
fellow
> > behind me on the ground, a guy on clearance delivery, and a helicopter
> > inbound. I never heard the "second" controllers voice. Maybe #2 was
taking
> > a #2?
>
> What time of day?
>
>

[C J Campbell]

"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
>
> Although he sounded rude it was obvious he wasn't having a good day and at
> the very least had his hands full, I'm just curious about what standard
> procedures are for tower controllers

He did not just sound rude. He was rude. The standard procedure is to behave
in a professional manner. This guy lost it, has lost it before, and is
likely to do it again.

I would not be surprised if he vectored the Cessna to the wrong runway in
the first place.

[houstondan]

what 'i've been told to do is to call the tower later and ask a
supervisor to listen to the tape. i know of at least one case where
that was done with satisfactory results. counselling and retraining of
the controller. no fighting, no accusations or threats...just have 'em
listen to the tape.

dan

[Peter Clark]

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 15:31:54 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> wrote:

>
>"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> Although he sounded rude it was obvious he wasn't having a good day and at
>> the very least had his hands full, I'm just curious about what standard
>> procedures are for tower controllers
>
>He did not just sound rude. He was rude. The standard procedure is to behave
>in a professional manner. This guy lost it, has lost it before, and is
>likely to do it again.
>
>I would not be surprised if he vectored the Cessna to the wrong runway in
>the first place.

Well, regardless of the issue at hand, the OP did say the person was
running tower+ground+clearance simultaneously. I don't think towers
provide vectors, that's usually handled by an approach or center
(depending on what services are available in the area). At least
let's get him for things he was actually doing...

Am I reading this right that the pilot involved set himself up to land
against the departing traffic? No excuse for how it was handled, but
still..

[kontiki]

Wow... I didn't know Lawrenceville was a class C... class D maybe but...
sheesh, the area must have grown a lot since I left there a year ago.

[Newps]

Jim Burns wrote:

> 11:00am Sunday morning

There would have been at least 4 controllers on duty, possibly more.
Would have been a bad deal for the manager.

[Newps]

Peter Clark wrote:


>
>
> Well, regardless of the issue at hand, the OP did say the person was
> running tower+ground+clearance simultaneously. I don't think towers
> provide vectors,

It was a class C field. Towers at class C can provide vectors.


that's usually handled by an approach

Yes.


or center

No, not at a class C.


> (depending on what services are available in the area). At least
> let's get him for things he was actually doing...

All class C's provide the same service at 11 am on a Sunday morning.


>
> Am I reading this right that the pilot involved set himself up to land
> against the departing traffic?

Yes, and depending on what kind of training happens in the area this
wouldn't be unusual. Perhaps there was a recent windshift.

[Brad Zeigler]

Speaking of controllers on duty, I learned during a recent tower visit that
there is only one controller on duty during the overnight at my local Class
C tower. Who handles tower duties when the controller has to do a "number
two"?

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Jim Burns wrote:
>
>> 11:00am Sunday morning
>
> There would have been at least 4 controllers on duty, possibly more. Would
> have been a bad deal for the manager.

[Morgans]

> I understand that only the best controllers get selected for OSH duty
>
> No. Anybody from the Great Lakes region, and only that region, is
> eligible. That's the only criteria.

Just curious; where did you get that information?
--
Jim in NC

[Colin W Kingsbury]

"Brad Zeigler" > wrote in message
...
> Speaking of controllers on duty, I learned during a recent tower visit
that
> there is only one controller on duty during the overnight at my local
Class
> C tower. Who handles tower duties when the controller has to do a "number
> two"?

Approach? Or maybe they keep a handheld handy...

[Dave Butler]

Jose wrote:
>> I think that the pilot requesting taxi
>> instructions was unaware that CD was also on the same freq
>
>
> ...which brings up another pet peeve - controllers who use both
> frequencies to broadcast on. I'm on tower and hearing a lot of ground
> radio traffic, I turn to ground and hear the same ground traffic, and
> can't get a word in edgewise. So my motor's running at the threshold
> while three airplanes are taxiied into place, two aircraft get IFR
> clearances and a reroute... what's a pilot to do? :)

A controller using multiple freqs was a contributing factor in an ASRS report I
filed one time. Briefly, I called clearance, was read my clearance and given a
taxi clearance on the CD frequency, was told to follow another aircraft. I
continued to monitor the freq I was on (CD), didn't realize that the aircraft I
was following had switched to the tower freq. I followed the other aircraft
right out onto an active runway. I thought he was crossing that runway enroute
to another one, but he had actually been cleared for takeoff. Clearly an error
on my part, but IMO the use of broadcasting on multiple freqs was a contributing
factor.

[John Gaquin]

"Blanche" > wrote in message
>
> I've noticed road rage... And the one being
> hostile is always the one who is wrong .....

I disagree. It is wrong to react with hostility, but the genesis of that
frustration and the ultimate cause of the rage is usually found elsewhere.
There are incredible numbers of oblivious people driving cars, some of them
truly stupid. The only real requirement is to *pay attention*, and they
fail at even that.

[Larry Dighera]

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 16:49:04 -0600, "Jim Burns"
> wrote in
>::

>the IFR pilot was expected to read back the clearance but hesitated.

While it is, of course, not mandatory for a pilot to read back his IFR
clearance, s/he should have at least acknowledged its receipt.

[RST Engineering]

Jim...

The operative word here is "eligible". The statement is true on its face --
only Great Lakes region controllers are eligible. However, being "eligible"
and being "selected" are two totally different things.

I am "eligible" to pitch for the Red Sox this year. My chances of being
selected are slim.

Jim in GV



"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
>> I understand that only the best controllers get selected for OSH duty
>>
>> No. Anybody from the Great Lakes region, and only that region, is
>> eligible. That's the only criteria.
>
> Just curious; where did you get that information?
> --
> Jim in NC
>
>

[Newps]

Brad Zeigler wrote:
> Speaking of controllers on duty, I learned during a recent tower visit that
> there is only one controller on duty during the overnight at my local Class
> C tower. Who handles tower duties when the controller has to do a "number
> two"?

Nobody, you just go.

[Newps]

Morgans wrote:

>>I understand that only the best controllers get selected for OSH duty
>>
>>No. Anybody from the Great Lakes region, and only that region, is
>>eligible. That's the only criteria.
>
>
> Just curious; where did you get that information?

I worked at GFK for 4 years. Every January the bid for OSH comes out.
Anybody interested fills out the paperwork and sends it in. To say that
only the best work at OSH is a joke. Same goes for Sun N Fun, only
Southern region controlelrs need apply. It's a government boondoggle.
Always has been. Out here in the West our boondoggle is fire towers.

[Newps]

Colin W Kingsbury wrote:

> "Brad Zeigler" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Speaking of controllers on duty, I learned during a recent tower visit
>
> that
>
>>there is only one controller on duty during the overnight at my local
>
> Class
>
>>C tower. Who handles tower duties when the controller has to do a "number
>>two"?
>
>
> Approach?

Nope, there's one guy in the facility. Period.


Or maybe they keep a handheld handy...

Yeah, but they don't work too good from the ****ter.

[Trevor Cudmore]

Unfortunately I have suffered a similar outburst from New York
Departure/Approach on 118.0, and often hear other pilots being given a
verbal bashing. New York is understaffed and has recently been held
accountable for a number of errors, and I guess the stress must be too much
for some. There are two in particular that I dread to hear when I switch
over, and sure enough I had the misfortune to be stuck with one a couple of
weeks ago when I took my first solo trip away from the airport to a practice
area north of ISP. I understand the importance of the job they provide, but
some just do not seem capable of acting professionaly when under stress.

That being said, there are two ways to ruin my day. One being to yell
unprofessionally, and the second failing to provide my separation. Yell if
you must!

On the flips-side, thanks go to the controllers at ISP who have been more
than accomodating during my training, even when I probably did deserve more
than a correction or gentle reminder :)

Trevor Cudmore

"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
> This past Sunday, while visiting Lawrenceville, GA (KLZU Class C just
> under
> the outer ATL Class B), traffic was landing and departing 25. The
> controller was busy, coordinating with Atlanta, handling clearance
> delivery,
> ground, and tower simultaneously. He was broadcasting on all frequencies,
> while receiving GC/CD and Tower separately. We started engines and
> prepared
> to call for taxi instructions when I heard him blurt out "Cessna 1234 go
> around NOW!!! YOU ARE LINED UP WITH RUNWAY 7, YOU WERE CLEARED TO LAND
> RUNWAY 25, 25 IS THE ACTIVE RUNWAY, RIGHT TURN, GO AROUND NOW!!! I HAVE
> LANDING TRAFFIC 25!!" (this guy was rightfully ****ed and obviously
> rattled) Then he issued a right turn and a go around to traffic landing
> 25
> and lit into the Cessna driver again. "What were you doing? why were you
> landing runway 7, I cleared you #2 on 25" The Cessna pilot must have
> responded with some excuse about a mistake and the controller came back
> "mistakes are what get people in airplanes killed, next time you make sure
> you know where you are! Now join a left downwind for Runway 25, that's
> runway 25, traffic at your 3:00 opposite direction, a Piper on an upwind
> leg
> for runway 25, I said runway 25!"

[Robert Chambers]

On the whole, NY approach does a pretty fantastic job of shoe-horning us
VFR guys into their airspace. Today was an exception, I left Bridgeport
destined for Morristown and requested a Bravo clearance to MMU, I've
done this many times before and usually if you're willing to accept
altitude and headings to get you out of their way, they do a great job
of getting you from one side to the other. Today wasn't one of them. I
got a squawk from the sector controller for Bridgeport and he handed me
off to the controller responsible for Bravo clearances. I was at 3500
by that point but not that close to the Bravo. I was turned down flat
for the clearance. At that point I scooted down to 2500 and skirted
HPN's Delta, swung over Westchester to the Hudson river and then called
Morristowns sector controller near the Alpine tower. He was less
stressed I guess and hooked me up with more or less a straight flight to
MMU clearing me through Caldwell's delta. The trip home tonight was a
breeze, was given a squawk on initial call up and after a vector to get
me out of TEB's arrival, was cleared up into the bravo and direct
Bridgeport. Gotta love that. It's a real joy to be able to fly in
amongst the heavy iron and treated with more or less the same status as
them. You can't do that in Chicago, no transitions allowed.

Overworked for sure, but they do a good job.

Robert


Trevor Cudmore wrote:

> Unfortunately I have suffered a similar outburst from New York
> Departure/Approach on 118.0, and often hear other pilots being given a
> verbal bashing. New York is understaffed and has recently been held
> accountable for a number of errors, and I guess the stress must be too much
> for some. There are two in particular that I dread to hear when I switch
> over, and sure enough I had the misfortune to be stuck with one a couple of
> weeks ago when I took my first solo trip away from the airport to a practice
> area north of ISP. I understand the importance of the job they provide, but
> some just do not seem capable of acting professionaly when under stress.
>
> That being said, there are two ways to ruin my day. One being to yell
> unprofessionally, and the second failing to provide my separation. Yell if
> you must!
>
> On the flips-side, thanks go to the controllers at ISP who have been more
> than accomodating during my training, even when I probably did deserve more
> than a correction or gentle reminder :)
>
> Trevor Cudmore
>
> "Jim Burns" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>This past Sunday, while visiting Lawrenceville, GA (KLZU Class C just
>>under
>>the outer ATL Class B), traffic was landing and departing 25. The
>>controller was busy, coordinating with Atlanta, handling clearance
>>delivery,
>>ground, and tower simultaneously. He was broadcasting on all frequencies,
>>while receiving GC/CD and Tower separately. We started engines and
>>prepared
>>to call for taxi instructions when I heard him blurt out "Cessna 1234 go
>>around NOW!!! YOU ARE LINED UP WITH RUNWAY 7, YOU WERE CLEARED TO LAND
>>RUNWAY 25, 25 IS THE ACTIVE RUNWAY, RIGHT TURN, GO AROUND NOW!!! I HAVE
>>LANDING TRAFFIC 25!!" (this guy was rightfully ****ed and obviously
>>rattled) Then he issued a right turn and a go around to traffic landing
>>25
>>and lit into the Cessna driver again. "What were you doing? why were you
>>landing runway 7, I cleared you #2 on 25" The Cessna pilot must have
>>responded with some excuse about a mistake and the controller came back
>>"mistakes are what get people in airplanes killed, next time you make sure
>>you know where you are! Now join a left downwind for Runway 25, that's
>>runway 25, traffic at your 3:00 opposite direction, a Piper on an upwind
>>leg
>>for runway 25, I said runway 25!"
>
>
>

[Ron Natalie]

Dudley Henriques wrote:
> Just an opinion on this if I may please;
>
> This type of outburst on an open tower frequency could lead to a disaster.
> Although it happens from time to time, it's not good professional
> operational practice for several reasons, the most important of these being
> flight safety.

I agree with Dudley 100%. The place to discuss problems is off-frequency.
None of this "Say Initials Bull****" reqiured either. Just note the time
and the frequency and call the supervisor during the next convenient office
hours. Been there, done that.

[Ron Natalie]

Newps wrote:

> No. Anybody from the Great Lakes region, and only that region, is
> eligible. That's the only criteria.

It used to be that they were selected and invited based on their
ability. Now it's doled out as a union perk.