View Single Post
  #77  
Old August 14th 04, 05:59 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Jim Cummiskey" wrote in message
news:XlrTc.37461$ih.19822@fed1read07...

Actually, ATC Doug has a theory WHY she felt it was important for her to
call it to my attention. According to Doug, KPRC is a training facility,
and they have a lot of inexperienced controllers there undergoing

training.
As I reported earlier, there was no radio traffic (to my recollection)
within five minutes either side of my initial radio call and my wheels
touching down. Since I was responsible for my own separation, I was quite
attentive to traffic. I don't think there was any other traffic in the
entire Class D airspace. Doug thinks the controller was "pulling my
chain"--perhaps ensuring I understood the domain of her authority on a

slow
Sunday morning. But, according to ATC Paul, the Tower Manager, HIS
controller was absolutely WRONG! Does his vote count? Or, am I still

just
a troller?


Some people just do not handle authority well, that may be the case with
this controller. If there was no other traffic she had no reason to require
you to adjust your flight path in any way. Perhaps that's what ATC Paul and
ATC Doug mean when they say the controller was wrong. Nontheless, her
instruction to report a five mile final was a valid one and you did not
comply with it.



So, yes Maria. I am very concerned about "not being wrong" when I
fly. The consequences are too high. The point is: if it IS perfectly

proper
procedure to fly "angled finals" and report them as "finals," then

shouldn't
we pilots began to do a little better job of scanning the entire final
quadrant vice only checking only the extended centerline?


But it's not proper procedure to fly "angled finals" and report them as
"finals". "Final" has a specific meaning and is defined in the
Pilot/Controller Glossary to ensure pilots are on the same page when they
use the term "final".



So, it has nothing to do with the "semantics of the arguments." It has to
do with coming up with a common language so that when a Controller
says X, the Pilot understands X (and vice-versa).


That's been done! It's in the P/CG!