ATC question

On Apr 16, 4:56 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:

A question for Stephen, Newps or other folks knowledgeable in the finer
points of ATC. A friend of mine flew into Reading, PA last week with
another pilot. Since Reading is a class D airport with no TRSA, but
with radar approach control, they elected to simply call tower directly
6 or so miles out. My friend said that the controller was quite nasty
and told them they had to contact approach first if they wanted to land.
By then they were even closer in, but they called approach who
"informed" them gruffly that they were now 4 miles from the airport and
needed to contact tower "immediately." They then called tower and landed.

My friend is a new private pilot (last December) and both he and the
person flying (a pretty experienced pilot, I believe) were rather taken
aback by this. What authority does a class D tower have to refuse entry
to an airplane that hasn't called approach control?


None. There are certainly reasons for a tower controller in Class D
airspace to deny entry, but that is not one of them.



Even a TRSA is
voluntary, so I can't imagine that a non-TRSA, non-class B, non-class C
airport can mandate use of approach control.


Reading approach provides Basic radar service for VFR aircraft. Basic
radar service consists of safety alerts, traffic advisories, limited
radar vectoring when requested by the pilot, and sequencing at
locations where procedures
have been established for that purpose. I examined the RDG SOP, there
are no procedures for sequencing VFR arrivals.



Is there some new regulation that I've missed?


No.

Come on guys, get real... The controller may refuse entry to a calling
aircraft only for valid operational reasons.. He is accountable for
his every word and decision (controllers exist in a fishbowl)... If
he refuses entry without a valid reason there will be questions and
the tapes will be reviewed - especially if there is a formal
complaint...

If a controller simply refuses entry to his airspace without any hint
as to when he can accomodate you, ask why and for how long... His
transmissions are recorded (as are yours so think before flying off at
the mouth)... He may have a runway blocked or a lost aircraft,
military activity in his airspace, Airforce One might be in the
pattern, lots of things could be going on... This can be on other
frequencies, so silence doesn't mean that he isn't really busy...
There may be things going on he can't say over the air...
If you feel the answers are unsatisfactory ask the telephone number
for the facility supervisor... Just remember the squeaky wheel will
get attention also...

denny

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
On Apr 16, 4:56 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
A question for Stephen, Newps or other folks knowledgeable in the finer
points of ATC. A friend of mine flew into Reading, PA last week with
another pilot. Since Reading is a class D airport with no TRSA, but
with radar approach control, they elected to simply call tower directly
6 or so miles out. My friend said that the controller was quite nasty
and told them they had to contact approach first if they wanted to land.
By then they were even closer in, but they called approach who
"informed" them gruffly that they were now 4 miles from the airport and
needed to contact tower "immediately." They then called tower and landed.

My friend is a new private pilot (last December) and both he and the
person flying (a pretty experienced pilot, I believe) were rather taken
aback by this. What authority does a class D tower have to refuse entry
to an airplane that hasn't called approach control?


None. There are certainly reasons for a tower controller in Class D
airspace to deny entry, but that is not one of them.


Even a TRSA is
voluntary, so I can't imagine that a non-TRSA, non-class B, non-class C
airport can mandate use of approach control.


Reading approach provides Basic radar service for VFR aircraft. Basic
radar service consists of safety alerts, traffic advisories, limited
radar vectoring when requested by the pilot, and sequencing at
locations where procedures
have been established for that purpose. I examined the RDG SOP, there
are no procedures for sequencing VFR arrivals.


Is there some new regulation that I've missed?


No.



Thanks, that was my suspicion.

Matt

On 2007-04-16 14:56:13 -0700, Matt Whiting said:


A question for Stephen, Newps or other folks knowledgeable in the finer
points of ATC. A friend of mine flew into Reading, PA last week with
another pilot. Since Reading is a class D airport with no TRSA, but
with radar approach control, they elected to simply call tower directly
6 or so miles out. My friend said that the controller was quite nasty
and told them they had to contact approach first if they wanted to
land. By then they were even closer in, but they called approach who
"informed" them gruffly that they were now 4 miles from the airport and
needed to contact tower "immediately." They then called tower and
landed.

My friend is a new private pilot (last December) and both he and the
person flying (a pretty experienced pilot, I believe) were rather taken
aback by this. What authority does a class D tower have to refuse
entry to an airplane that hasn't called approach control? Even a TRSA
is voluntary, so I can't imagine that a non-TRSA, non-class B,
non-class C airport can mandate use of approach control.

Is there some new regulation that I've missed?

Matt

I remember a time that a pilot contacted Tacoma Narrows tower to inform
them that he was going to overfly the airspace. Tower rather gruffly
told him to contact Seattle approach, because although he was in TIW's
class D space, they had an operating agreement with Seattle that anyone
above a certain altitude (but below the overlying B) that Seattle would
handle that traffic. The pilot replied, "Oh, sorry. I didn't have a
copy of the operating agreement here in the AF/D." The tower controller
was testy the rest of the afternoon. This was the same tower controller
that was paying so little attention to what was going on that he had
two airplanes touch down on the runway simultaneously -- and didn't
know it, despite having cleared both to land. Fortunately, they didn't
hit each other. He is no longer there. (The reason the planes did not
hit each other was one was flown by a student pilot -- missed the
center line and landed on the right side of the runway and somewhat
short. The other was flown by an airline pilot -- he also could not hit
the center line with a small plane and landed left and long. They
didn't see each other until after they touched down.)

Everyone has a bad day, I guess, but it seems, from the number of
complaints here, that Reading has more bad days than good ones. Tough.
I don't have to go bowling with them. But for them to play games like
that increases the chance of lost communication and endangers everyone.
File the NASA report. Maybe if NASA gets enough of them they will do
something about it. That's what they say the reports are for.

I would be tempted to suggest that every pilot who flies in there and
gets that kind of treatment to call the tower and ask for a detailed
explanation on what they thought the proper procedures were. Either
they would get tired of constantly having to explain themselves and
lighten up, or they would get even nastier, so it is a risk.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

C J Campbell wrote:

I remember a time that a pilot contacted Tacoma Narrows tower to inform
them that he was going to overfly the airspace. Tower rather gruffly
told him to contact Seattle approach, because although he was in TIW's
class D space, they had an operating agreement with Seattle that anyone
above a certain altitude (but below the overlying B) that Seattle would
handle that traffic. The pilot replied, "Oh, sorry. I didn't have a copy
of the operating agreement here in the AF/D." The tower controller was
testy the rest of the afternoon. This was the same tower controller that
was paying so little attention to what was going on that he had two
airplanes touch down on the runway simultaneously -- and didn't know it,
despite having cleared both to land. Fortunately, they didn't hit each
other. He is no longer there. (The reason the planes did not hit each
other was one was flown by a student pilot -- missed the center line and
landed on the right side of the runway and somewhat short. The other was
flown by an airline pilot -- he also could not hit the center line with
a small plane and landed left and long. They didn't see each other until
after they touched down.)

I'm always amazed when I hear things like this. I listen to all radio
traffic when flying, not just calls to me. If I hear another airplane
cleared to land on the same runway as me at the same time, I don't have
to wait until we're rolling out side-by-side to know it. I'd have
busted both pilots along with the controller on this one.

Matt

On 2007-04-18 03:45:54 -0700, Matt Whiting said:

C J Campbell wrote:

I remember a time that a pilot contacted Tacoma Narrows tower to inform
them that he was going to overfly the airspace. Tower rather gruffly
told him to contact Seattle approach, because although he was in TIW's
class D space, they had an operating agreement with Seattle that anyone
above a certain altitude (but below the overlying B) that Seattle would
handle that traffic. The pilot replied, "Oh, sorry. I didn't have a
copy of the operating agreement here in the AF/D." The tower controller
was testy the rest of the afternoon. This was the same tower controller
that was paying so little attention to what was going on that he had
two airplanes touch down on the runway simultaneously -- and didn't
know it, despite having cleared both to land. Fortunately, they didn't
hit each other. He is no longer there. (The reason the planes did not
hit each other was one was flown by a student pilot -- missed the
center line and landed on the right side of the runway and somewhat
short. The other was flown by an airline pilot -- he also could not hit
the center line with a small plane and landed left and long. They
didn't see each other until after they touched down.)

I'm always amazed when I hear things like this. I listen to all radio
traffic when flying, not just calls to me. If I hear another airplane
cleared to land on the same runway as me at the same time, I don't have
to wait until we're rolling out side-by-side to know it. I'd have
busted both pilots along with the controller on this one.

Matt

Me, too. But they got away with it. This time.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On 2007-04-18 03:45:54 -0700, Matt Whiting said:

C J Campbell wrote:

I remember a time that a pilot contacted Tacoma Narrows tower to inform
them that he was going to overfly the airspace. Tower rather gruffly
told him to contact Seattle approach, because although he was in TIW's
class D space, they had an operating agreement with Seattle that anyone
above a certain altitude (but below the overlying B) that Seattle would
handle that traffic. The pilot replied, "Oh, sorry. I didn't have a
copy of the operating agreement here in the AF/D." The tower controller
was testy the rest of the afternoon. This was the same tower controller
that was paying so little attention to what was going on that he had
two airplanes touch down on the runway simultaneously -- and didn't
know it, despite having cleared both to land. Fortunately, they didn't
hit each other. He is no longer there. (The reason the planes did not
hit each other was one was flown by a student pilot -- missed the
center line and landed on the right side of the runway and somewhat
short. The other was flown by an airline pilot -- he also could not hit
the center line with a small plane and landed left and long. They
didn't see each other until after they touched down.)

I'm always amazed when I hear things like this. I listen to all radio
traffic when flying, not just calls to me. If I hear another airplane
cleared to land on the same runway as me at the same time, I don't have
to wait until we're rolling out side-by-side to know it. I'd have
busted both pilots along with the controller on this one.

Matt

I should expand on that, because it gets worse (for the pilots). The
airline pilot not only never saw the other plane, even after they both
landed and did a touch and go, but he had his radio tuned to the wrong
frequency and never even heard or acknowledged his clearance to land!
And he did not find out about that until later when he checked his
frequency when he returned to the airport. Oops.

Well, if we busted people for every violation or stupid act there
wouldn't be many of us left. He learned his lesson, and some of us
learned from his experience. (For one thing, if he is ever in the area
again, go someplace else. :-) ) Seriously, it is a common problem at
TIW for some reason. People are always trying to talk to the tower on
the wrong frequency, usually the CTAF at Shelton. Or they are trying to
talk to Shelton traffic on TIW's frequency. I have started making it a
habit to monitor both frequencies because of it. One of the tower
controllers was doing that for awhile, too. Pilots would call Tacoma
Tower using Shelton's CTAF and he would reply "You are on Shelton's
frequency." That was a smart controller. I liked him.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2007-04-18 03:45:54 -0700, Matt Whiting said:

C J Campbell wrote:

I remember a time that a pilot contacted Tacoma Narrows tower to
inform them that he was going to overfly the airspace. Tower rather
gruffly told him to contact Seattle approach, because although he was
in TIW's class D space, they had an operating agreement with Seattle
that anyone above a certain altitude (but below the overlying B) that
Seattle would handle that traffic. The pilot replied, "Oh, sorry. I
didn't have a copy of the operating agreement here in the AF/D." The
tower controller was testy the rest of the afternoon. This was the
same tower controller that was paying so little attention to what was
going on that he had two airplanes touch down on the runway
simultaneously -- and didn't know it, despite having cleared both to
land. Fortunately, they didn't hit each other. He is no longer there.
(The reason the planes did not hit each other was one was flown by a
student pilot -- missed the center line and landed on the right side
of the runway and somewhat short. The other was flown by an airline
pilot -- he also could not hit the center line with a small plane and
landed left and long. They didn't see each other until after they
touched down.)

I'm always amazed when I hear things like this. I listen to all radio
traffic when flying, not just calls to me. If I hear another airplane
cleared to land on the same runway as me at the same time, I don't
have to wait until we're rolling out side-by-side to know it. I'd
have busted both pilots along with the controller on this one.

Matt

I should expand on that, because it gets worse (for the pilots). The
airline pilot not only never saw the other plane, even after they both
landed and did a touch and go, but he had his radio tuned to the wrong
frequency and never even heard or acknowledged his clearance to land!
And he did not find out about that until later when he checked his
frequency when he returned to the airport. Oops.

Let me guess ... he flies for Northwest! :-)

Matt

On 2007-04-18 14:42:40 -0700, Matt Whiting said:

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2007-04-18 03:45:54 -0700, Matt Whiting said:

C J Campbell wrote:

I remember a time that a pilot contacted Tacoma Narrows tower to inform
them that he was going to overfly the airspace. Tower rather gruffly
told him to contact Seattle approach, because although he was in TIW's
class D space, they had an operating agreement with Seattle that anyone
above a certain altitude (but below the overlying B) that Seattle would
handle that traffic. The pilot replied, "Oh, sorry. I didn't have a
copy of the operating agreement here in the AF/D." The tower controller
was testy the rest of the afternoon. This was the same tower controller
that was paying so little attention to what was going on that he had
two airplanes touch down on the runway simultaneously -- and didn't
know it, despite having cleared both to land. Fortunately, they didn't
hit each other. He is no longer there. (The reason the planes did not
hit each other was one was flown by a student pilot -- missed the
center line and landed on the right side of the runway and somewhat
short. The other was flown by an airline pilot -- he also could not hit
the center line with a small plane and landed left and long. They
didn't see each other until after they touched down.)

I'm always amazed when I hear things like this. I listen to all radio
traffic when flying, not just calls to me. If I hear another airplane
cleared to land on the same runway as me at the same time, I don't have
to wait until we're rolling out side-by-side to know it. I'd have
busted both pilots along with the controller on this one.

Matt

I should expand on that, because it gets worse (for the pilots). The
airline pilot not only never saw the other plane, even after they both
landed and did a touch and go, but he had his radio tuned to the wrong
frequency and never even heard or acknowledged his clearance to land!
And he did not find out about that until later when he checked his
frequency when he returned to the airport. Oops.

Let me guess ... he flies for Northwest! :-)

Matt

That was my understanding, actually.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

C J Campbell wrote:
Everyone has a bad day, I guess, but it seems, from the number of
complaints here, that Reading has more bad days than good ones. Tough.

I learned to fly near there and did my long solo cross-country into
Reading in 1994 or so. Damned unpleasant experience, but everyone
afterwards said "oh, yeah, Reading is like that". (Actually, that was
about the nicest thing I heard; most of it was unprintable.) They've
been getting complaints for years, but "cranky and unhelpful" seems to be
within the realm of acceptable behavior.