Class D Sucks

Over the years, I have posted several diatribes against Class D (so-called)
"controlled" airspace. In my opinion, having guys standing in a control
tower with binoculars, trying to "control" air traffic is, at best, a
ludicrous throw-back to a simpler time. At worst, it's dangerous.

Yesterday we once again had the misfortune of flying into Class D, when we
flew to Dubuque (DBQ) for breakfast -- and again witnessed a potentially
dangerous situation.

The University of Dubuque has their flight school there, which means
high-density student traffic in the pattern. There are also four regular
airline flights into/out of DBQ every day. Add to this the occasional $100
hamburger flight and corporate charters, and you've got an airport which
can, on occasion, rival Chicago for business.

Yesterday was one of those days. After several days of crap, the skies
cleared and the wind, while gusting to 23 knots, was right down Rwy 18. As
a result the pattern was full of students and people like us, enjoying the
day.

As we arrived in the pattern on a right downwind, with Mary acting as PIC,
we were number three to land behind a 182 coming into the pattern on a left
downwind. This always presents a problem, IMHO, since traffic is hard to
spot when you're flying opposing patterns. There were numerous targets in
the area, all trying to land at once, the tower controller had his hands
full, and he was putting guys into 360 degree turns for spacing.

After extending our downwind quite a ways, we finally spotted the 182 we
were to follow. As Mary was turning right base, we heard the controller
tell an older guy in a different 182 "Okay, that's not going to work. Fly
directly toward the tower now and re-enter the right downwind for 18..."

By now we were turning base to final, with Mary fighting the burbles and
updrafts caused by the 20+ knot wind. Out of the corner of my eye I spotted
a Cessna angling toward us from high and to the right, in what seemed like a
very awkward position, given the traffic density in the pattern. He was in
a shallow bank to the right, but, as long as he didn't descend, we would
pass under him as we turned final, so I didn't mention him to Mary.

As we were sliding down final approach, this guy was still out my right
window, above us and approaching the runway at a 45 degree angle, clearly
out of position. My thoughts were that this *must* be the guy that the
tower had told to "head toward the tower" and that the controllers surely
knew where he was, and that he/they knew what they were doing.

Wrong.

As we were on short final the guy passed above us, and out of sight. I was
now getting pretty uncomfortable, being unable to see him, but I was
confident that we weren't in any danger of collision -- he'd have had to be
a Harrier to land on top of us from that position. Mary was busy fighting
the wind, and I didn't want to interrupt her battle with bitching about this
doofus, but I sure was wondering what the heck the guy was doing
above/behind and now to our left. Besides, the controller surely knew
where he was, right?

Wrong.

Suddenly the controller spotted the transgressor, and started a rapid-fire
interrogation of the guy, asking him what he was doing and where he was
going. The guy responded that he was told to "fly to the tower" -- so he
did! He had missed the second half of the controller's instruction, and
was apparently going to be content doing 360 degree turns over the tower, or
something, awaiting further instructions? More likely he had no idea what
to do when he got over the tower, but couldn't get a word in edgewise for
further instructions...

Needless to say, the controller laid into the guy, at one point stating "I
assume you are a student pilot?" (to which the guy actually answered "No.").
He continued talking to him until we shut down to go into the FBO, so I
don't know if he had to go "visit the tower" or not.

This type of thing has happened to us so many times in Class D airspace,
it's just not funny anymore. There is just no way a guy in a glass tower
can visually track so many targets, or provide spacing guidance with the
parallax caused by trying to judge distance from the ground. In my opinion,
we would have been far safer if Dubuque were UNcontrolled airspace, because
at least everyone would be flying the same pattern -- no one would be flying
opposing RIGHT and LEFT hand converging traffic patterns simultaneously.
Also, everyone would be more on their toes, without the false security
blanket of being in "controlled" airspace.

IMHO, the FAA should either:

1. Provide radar separation in all controlled airports
2. Ban converging patterns at non-radar, controlled airports
3. Make non-radar controlled airport uncontrolled -- period
4. Call non-radar controlled airports what they really a
Semi-Controlled.

We are much more comfortable flying into busy uncontrolled airports than we
are flying into Class D "partially" controlled airspace -- which is just an
absurd situation, when you think about it. It needn't be this way.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Copy this text onto a NASA Form 277 and ship it off to the ASRS for
action. If you don't complaint to the right people, nothing gets done!

Jay Honeck wrote:
Over the years, I have posted several diatribes against Class D (so-called)
"controlled" airspace. In my opinion, having guys standing in a control
tower with binoculars, trying to "control" air traffic is, at best, a
ludicrous throw-back to a simpler time. At worst, it's dangerous.

Yesterday we once again had the misfortune of flying into Class D, when we
flew to Dubuque (DBQ) for breakfast -- and again witnessed a potentially
dangerous situation.

The University of Dubuque has their flight school there, which means
high-density student traffic in the pattern. There are also four regular
airline flights into/out of DBQ every day. Add to this the occasional $100
hamburger flight and corporate charters, and you've got an airport which
can, on occasion, rival Chicago for business.

Yesterday was one of those days. After several days of crap, the skies
cleared and the wind, while gusting to 23 knots, was right down Rwy 18. As
a result the pattern was full of students and people like us, enjoying the
day.

As we arrived in the pattern on a right downwind, with Mary acting as PIC,
we were number three to land behind a 182 coming into the pattern on a left
downwind. This always presents a problem, IMHO, since traffic is hard to
spot when you're flying opposing patterns. There were numerous targets in
the area, all trying to land at once, the tower controller had his hands
full, and he was putting guys into 360 degree turns for spacing.

After extending our downwind quite a ways, we finally spotted the 182 we
were to follow. As Mary was turning right base, we heard the controller
tell an older guy in a different 182 "Okay, that's not going to work. Fly
directly toward the tower now and re-enter the right downwind for 18..."

By now we were turning base to final, with Mary fighting the burbles and
updrafts caused by the 20+ knot wind. Out of the corner of my eye I spotted
a Cessna angling toward us from high and to the right, in what seemed like a
very awkward position, given the traffic density in the pattern. He was in
a shallow bank to the right, but, as long as he didn't descend, we would
pass under him as we turned final, so I didn't mention him to Mary.

As we were sliding down final approach, this guy was still out my right
window, above us and approaching the runway at a 45 degree angle, clearly
out of position. My thoughts were that this *must* be the guy that the
tower had told to "head toward the tower" and that the controllers surely
knew where he was, and that he/they knew what they were doing.

Wrong.

As we were on short final the guy passed above us, and out of sight. I was
now getting pretty uncomfortable, being unable to see him, but I was
confident that we weren't in any danger of collision -- he'd have had to be
a Harrier to land on top of us from that position. Mary was busy fighting
the wind, and I didn't want to interrupt her battle with bitching about this
doofus, but I sure was wondering what the heck the guy was doing
above/behind and now to our left. Besides, the controller surely knew
where he was, right?

Wrong.

Suddenly the controller spotted the transgressor, and started a rapid-fire
interrogation of the guy, asking him what he was doing and where he was
going. The guy responded that he was told to "fly to the tower" -- so he
did! He had missed the second half of the controller's instruction, and
was apparently going to be content doing 360 degree turns over the tower, or
something, awaiting further instructions? More likely he had no idea what
to do when he got over the tower, but couldn't get a word in edgewise for
further instructions...

Needless to say, the controller laid into the guy, at one point stating "I
assume you are a student pilot?" (to which the guy actually answered "No.").
He continued talking to him until we shut down to go into the FBO, so I
don't know if he had to go "visit the tower" or not.

This type of thing has happened to us so many times in Class D airspace,
it's just not funny anymore. There is just no way a guy in a glass tower
can visually track so many targets, or provide spacing guidance with the
parallax caused by trying to judge distance from the ground. In my opinion,
we would have been far safer if Dubuque were UNcontrolled airspace, because
at least everyone would be flying the same pattern -- no one would be flying
opposing RIGHT and LEFT hand converging traffic patterns simultaneously.
Also, everyone would be more on their toes, without the false security
blanket of being in "controlled" airspace.

IMHO, the FAA should either:

1. Provide radar separation in all controlled airports
2. Ban converging patterns at non-radar, controlled airports
3. Make non-radar controlled airport uncontrolled -- period
4. Call non-radar controlled airports what they really a
Semi-Controlled.

We are much more comfortable flying into busy uncontrolled airports than we
are flying into Class D "partially" controlled airspace -- which is just an
absurd situation, when you think about it. It needn't be this way.

In my opinion, having guys standing in a control
tower with binoculars, trying to "control" air traffic is, at best, a
ludicrous throw-back to a simpler time.

Jay, as has been pointed out here before, class D controllers do not
control air traffic. They control ground traffic, and sequence air
traffic to the ground. While in the air, see and avoid remains fully
in force. It is thinking that they "control" air traffic that leads
to relaxed vigilance, and bent aluminum.

The events you describe are not unique to class D. There are yoyos at
uncontrolled airports too.

There is just no way a guy in a glass tower
can visually track so many targets, or provide spacing guidance

Exactly right. But that's not their job (though it really helps their
job!)

In my opinion,
we would have been far safer if Dubuque were UNcontrolled airspace, because
at least everyone would be flying the same pattern -- no one would be flying
opposing RIGHT and LEFT hand converging traffic patterns simultaneously.

Wrong.

They just wouldn't be =told= to. But given the same number of
airplanes, splitting them into left and right traffic spreads them out
in the air. Were they all in the same pattern, they'd be tighter. I
see nothing =inherently= wrong with split patterns in class D.

IMHO, the FAA should either:

1. Provide radar separation in all controlled airports
2. Ban converging patterns at non-radar, controlled airports
3. Make non-radar controlled airport uncontrolled -- period
4. Call non-radar controlled airports what they really a
Semi-Controlled.

This is not a job for the FAA. It's a job for pilots. They MUST
become comfortable in class D when operating there, and they MUST
become comfortable at uncontrolled airports when operating there.

As for your (4), changing the terminology will =not= enhance safety.
Calling a tail a leg doesn't help a horse to walk.

We are much more comfortable flying into busy uncontrolled airports than we
are flying into Class D "partially" controlled airspace -- which is just an
absurd situation, when you think about it. It needn't be this way.

Agreed. But I'd reccomend as a solution that pilots practice more in
environments with which they are unfamiliar. I fly class D all the
time (I'm in the northeast) and have not found them to be more or less
safe than uncontrolled (or as they like to say now, "nontowered")
airports. But all pilots need to pay attention to the transparant
high resolution datascreen that surrounds the airplane, rather than
rely on a headset.

Jose
--
Freedom. It seemed like a good idea at the time.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:03:06 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Over the years, I have posted several diatribes against Class D (so-called)
"controlled" airspace. In my opinion, having guys standing in a control
tower with binoculars, trying to "control" air traffic is, at best, a
ludicrous throw-back to a simpler time. At worst, it's dangerous.

Jay - it might be time to buy a TCAD or at least a Mode S-TIS equipped
transponder :-)

-Nathan

Jose wrote:

This is not a job for the FAA. It's a job for pilots.

Indeed.

Put the same amount/mix of traffic at an untowered airport. Would it be
better or worse?

My club moved from TEB to CDW about the time I joined. TEB gets relatively
little student/pattern traffic (as it charges a landing fee), and the tower
has real RADAR. CDW gets a *lot* of student/pattern traffic, and the
"RADAR" is incredibly primitive (for one: no codes, just VFR vs. IFR; for
two: blind spots in the traffic pattern).

Many of the club members have indicated a strong dislike for the chaotic
nature of CDW. They're certainly right that the place is busier, and with
a greater number of inexperienced pilots, than TEB. But with a good
controller in the tower, it's still better than an untowered airport for
"sanity".

However, put a bad controller in place and it gets *much* worse *very*
quickly. There's nothing particular about a class D that causes a
controller to waste precious airtime...period.

Even w/o the stupidity of wasting airtime, controller skill makes a major
difference (and is probably the paramount variable by far). I was in the
pattern with about six or eight other planes one day, with others coming in
and leaving. A normal weekend day at CDW. It became a mess, as the
controller lost track of who was where.

A new controller took over, and in minutes the same planes were in a well
oiled dance (to mix metaphors {8^). That's with the same crappy RADAR and
the same mix of traffic.

- Andrew

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:uCnwd.511240$wV.477723@attbi_s54...
Over the years, I have posted several diatribes against Class D
(so-called)
"controlled" airspace.

Actually, too many Class D tower operators spend way to much time staring at
the radar repeater, if they have one, and not enough time looking out the
window with binoculars. It is like pilots who stare at the instruments and
don't look out the windows.

Class D may be controlled airspace, but that does not relieve you of the
responsibility to see and avoid. Even class B or A airspace does not relieve
you of that responsibility.

"Jose" wrote in message
m...

Jay, as has been pointed out here before, class D controllers do not
control air traffic.

The FARs say that class D is controlled airspace. They also say that you
have to obey ATC instructions. What are the tower controllers controlling
there if not air traffic? Ground controllers control ground traffic. They
are sometimes the same person as the tower controller, sometimes they are
not.

Class D towers do a lot more than sequencing. They can also keep you out of
their airspace, issue instructions to aircraft within their airspace and
expect to be obeyed (or know the reason why not) and so forth. They will
also issue advisories of other traffic and they will control the traffic
pattern.

Hi Jay,

I have flown into Dubuque a few times so I'm familiar with the area. I have
also more frequently fly in and out of much busier Class D airspaces than
Dubuque, most all of which have traffic simultaneously on left and right
down winds. I have no problem with this. Although I have had my share of
run arounds with incompetent controllers, over all I appreciate their
efforts and believe they provide a professional and needed service.

I'm sure you've already seen all the "see and avoid is your responsibility,
not the controllers" etc etc... I was not there so I am not condemning your
actions, but would like to inject a couple of things for thought.

For example, did you notify the controller that you 'had the traffic
insight" and if you thought he was in the 'wrong' position in the pattern,
did you relay your concerns to the controller?

You stated,

As we were sliding down final approach, this guy was still out my right
window, above us and approaching the runway at a 45 degree angle, clearly
out of position.

Assuming there is no immediate danger and if you've already called the
traffic in sight without a satisfactory response from ATC, this seems the
perfect opportunity to say something such as, "Confirming Nxxxx cleared for
landing"? giving the controller the opportunity to check and possibly see
the other aircraft.

If you don't get the response expected, you might say something such as, "Ok
just checking because it appears there's another aircraft on final just
above us."

I'm not trying to tell you how to talk on the radio, just giving you ideas
of possibilities to think about in unusual situations.

Most important is that if we at all perceive a situation to be dangerous, it
is incumbent upon us as pilots to pass our concerns on to the appropriate
personal, whether it's ATC or another pilot in the area.

We are all responsible for proper safety and communication it every bit as
important as "see and avoid".

PJ

============================================
Here's to the duck who swam a lake and never lost a feather,
May sometime another year, we all be back together.
JJW
============================================

I have flown in different "D" airspaces. The ones that I'm most
comfortable with are ones that have their own radar and approach
control (MFD is one). Youngstown is a TRSA. I also don't have a problem
with OSU since they lie under a "C".

"D" airports that do not have their own radar and are trying to control
things are scary to me. The FAA set up the "D" environment for some
reason. And if there is a lot of traffic, they need RADAR (my opinion).

For any one who has been in MD, I find it very interesting that HGR has
a tower and FDK doesn't (Hagerstown v. Frederick) yet it has more
traffic.

I've had more near misses at HGR than any other airport. Is this a
controller problem or is this a lack of equipment problem. One example
was a controller turned an airplane into me rather than telling them to
follow me as #2 for landing. Another example was an IFR biz jet that
was doing a VOR 9 approach while I was cleared for landing (RWY 9) and
about to turn final (I had to firewall the throttle and climb hard to
keep from becoming a hood ornament). In the latter case, HGR tower
didn't know the biz jet was doing the approach (seems someone forgot to
tell them).

So I can appreciate your comments. And as I've said to others, an ASRS
needs to be filed when things like this happen. Wheels that don't
squeak don't get greased.

Later,
Steve.T

I have flown into Dubuque a few times so I'm familiar with the area. I
have
also more frequently fly in and out of much busier Class D airspaces than
Dubuque, most all of which have traffic simultaneously on left and right
down winds. I have no problem with this.

I doubt you have flown into an environment that was busier than that segment
of time that Mary and I hit Dubuque.

I've flown into Oshkosh and Sun N Fun numerous times -- arguably the busiest
airspace in the world -- and not seen (and heard) more people landing than
we did in Dubuque. It was just a fluke thing, with many students, many
simultaneous arrivals, and one doofus pilot all arriving in DBQ at once.

Twenty minutes later, eating breakfast, we saw nary a plane landing.

I'm sure you've already seen all the "see and avoid is your
responsibility,
not the controllers" etc etc... I was not there so I am not condemning
your
actions, but... snip

Not to pick on you, PJ, but I always have to laugh at the folks on the
newsgroups who immediately swing the old "it's your responsibility to see
and avoid" bat whenever I (or anyone else, for that matter) brings up
problems with controlled airspace. NO ONE is arguing that it is not our
responsibility to see and avoid. NO ONE is advocating any other rule, and
NO ONE is abdicating that responsibility. This point of this thread is an
entirely separate issue, and ONLY pertains to my perceptions of the
weaknesses of the FAA's concept of Class D airspace.

For example, did you notify the controller that you 'had the traffic
insight" and if you thought he was in the 'wrong' position in the pattern,
did you relay your concerns to the controller?

IMHO it would be inappropriate to call out "traffic in sight" to a
controller who (a) had not called out traffic to me specifically, and (b)
was rattling off instructions a mile a minute to half a dozen other planes.
Trust me, if the airwaves had been silent, Mary would have been asking ATC
what the heck that guy was doing.

We are all responsible for proper safety and communication it every bit as
important as "see and avoid".

Agreed.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"