Class D Sucks

I'll chime in on this with a slight tangent...

My airport - HYX / Saginaw Mi - is an uncontrolled field with a 5,000
foot runway, VOR-A approach, GPS approach, NDB approach, and the brand
spanking new ILS is to be turned on 'any day now'...

This oughta get good once the jets (and mucho others) start shooting
ILS into the field and don't understand that local traffic does N O T
listen to ATC - especially the nordo guys... Plus, students will often
be shooting crosswind circuits and bangs for practice (3 flight
schools on field) - and me too, slow learner...
And worse, on nice days the jumpers talk to ATC up until 2 minutes
before jumping when their s**t head pilot makes a single announcement
on a really busy 122.8... Someday there's gonna be a happening due to
that... Meat bombs at 120 mph straight down from 12,000 feet into a
busy airport pattern... (arghh)
Actually, a jumper hit a hangar in November breaking his leg and
denting the hangar, (it used to be my hangar) but I guess you can't
blame that on the radios...
A Class D would actually be an improvement...

Denny

Jay Honeck wrote:

This is precisely my point, which may be summed up thusly: Class D is
"pretend" controlled airspace. It should be regarded as "Barely
controlled" or "Semi-controlled"...

Perhaps you've not a problem with the airspace, but with the term
"controlled". After all, class E airspace is "controlled" too; see the AIM
(section 2 defines "controlled airspace", if memory serves). But (I hope!)
nobody expects VFR separation there.

- Andrew

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:fPAwd.586096$D%.508731@attbi_s51...

Right -- there is no separation provided in Class D. And no one should
expect the controller to maintain separation.


So it appears the problem is pilot's understanding of Class D airspace.



This is precisely my point, which may be summed up thusly: Class D is
"pretend" controlled airspace. It should be regarded as "Barely
controlled" or "Semi-controlled"...


Controlled airspace means an airspace of defined dimensions within which air
traffic control service is provided to IFR flights and to VFR flights in
accordance with the airspace classification. Let's call Class D airspace
what it is - controlled airspace.

"Richard Russell" wrote in message
...

My problem with Class D space is that it seems to impart an
inappropriate comfort level to many pilots who don't understand what
is (and is not) being provided. I have experienced a number of
problems at Class D airports (one in particular) in my short flying
career. I blame those problems on both controller error and pilot
error. I have been told to position and hold and then listened to the
controller clear someone to land on top of me twice.


Cleared someone to land on top of you? How do you know that? A landing
clearance can be issued with aircraft on the runway. The landing aircraft
may have been miles away.

My problem with Class D space is that it seems to impart an
inappropriate comfort level to many pilots who don't understand what
is (and is not) being provided.

This would be because pilots, like all other people, have this idea
that authority and responsibility go together. In other words, if the
controller has the authority to tell you how to fly your pattern, when
to turn, etc - then the responsibility for separation in the air should
also be his. Well, it doesn't work that way. THAT is the primary
weakness of Class D airspace, and it can't be fixed unless you either
make the controller responsible for separation (meaning that unless the
pilot disregarded the controller's instructions, it's controller error,
not pilot error, in the event of a mid-air or near miss) or you give
the pilot the authority to disregard the controller's instructions at
will, not just in the event of an emergency (thus making the airspace
uncontrolled). But while this is an issue in theory, in practice it's
usually not an issue.

In reality, at most Class D's most controllers treat separation as if
it were their responsibility. That means they issue clear and
comprehensible instructions and ask for a readback of the key points,
just as if they were issuing clearances. When that happens, pilots
treat the instructions as if they were clearances - meaning they
question those they don't understand, read back those they do, and
comply - and things work OK - a little better than they would if the
airspace was uncontrolled. Sometimes you get a bad or overloaded
controller, and then things are MUCH worse than they would be if the
airspace was uncontrolled. That's when you get the problems.

I will be the first to admit that I will let a situation that looks
ugly develop a lot further in Class D than I will in Class E or G. I
Class E/G, I know there's nobody looking out for me but me, and if I
don't have a plan nobody does. So when I see things not going to plan
(someone too close for comfort) I take action immediately. Not so in
Class D. Unless the controller has given me reason to doubt his
competence (by doing things like issuing nonsensical or illegal
instructions, chewing out pilots on the frequency rather than calmly
giving them a number to call, and generally acting like he lost SA) I'm
going to assume he has a plan, and I'm going to stick with his plan
until there's just no way. I think most pilots would too. I guess
this is what you call inappropriate comfort level. You are of course
entitled to your opinion, but I don't consider it inappropriate given
the way Class D normally operates. Given the legalities, you have a
point.

Michael

"Michael" wrote in message
oups.com...

This would be because pilots, like all other people, have this idea
that authority and responsibility go together.


Actually, there are quite a few people that don't understand that.

Dubuque controllers seem to firmly believe that they are
"controlling" traffic inside their airspace

Do they accept responsibility for separation?

But at least [uncontrolled] we're all expecting the same thing from each other,
rather than having a binocular-equipped controller trying to send us in
different directions.

I seem to remember you having diatribes against pilots who don't "fly
the pattern" at uncontrolled airports too. Controllers have more than
binoculars - they have pencil and paper, and minds. They don't just
"send you in different directions" (though I had one at EMT that sent
me almost all around the airport to approach from the other side).
They do so with a purpose. Sometimes, like anybody, they make errors.

almost every time I fly
into busy non-radar Class D airspace, I witness something stupid and/or
borderline dangerous.

Either you fly in wild places, or you have a different threshold of
"stupid/dangerous".

What makes [split patterns] wrong in non-radar Class D airspace is the fact that the
controller is still relying on each of us seeing each other for proper
spacing. Since he's directed half the traffic to fly an opposing pattern,
spotting the correct plane in the sky is problematic.

That has never been a problem with me. I have just as much difficulty
finding traffic in my pattern as in the opposite one. Sometimes the
opposite pattern is easier to spot. And in any case, when they say
"you're number 4" I look for three airplanes. When they say "You're
number 24" I'm glad we have a controller helping out.

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

Jay Honeck wrote:

This is precisely my point, which may be summed up thusly: Class D is
"pretend" controlled airspace. It should be regarded as "Barely
controlled" or "Semi-controlled"...

But it *is* controlled. Heck, even Class E is controlled airspace!

In class D, IFR flights are vectored. In class D, the controller has the
right to give instructions even to VFR flights, as in "keep out" or
"leave" or "stay west of that river and below 3000 ft".

If you can't tell "controlled" from "separation provided", then this
isn't a flaw in the concept, but rather in the pilot's knowledge.

Stefan

Richard Russell wrote:

My problem with Class D space is that it seems to impart an
inappropriate comfort level to many pilots who don't understand

Exactly. The pilots don't understand. Maybe it wasn't such a good idea
to choose a cheapo ground school and do the written by merely learning
the questions catalogue by heart and hoping for some luck? (I'm
deliberaely exaggerating.)

Stefan

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:52:38 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Richard Russell" wrote in message
.. .

My problem with Class D space is that it seems to impart an
inappropriate comfort level to many pilots who don't understand what
is (and is not) being provided. I have experienced a number of
problems at Class D airports (one in particular) in my short flying
career. I blame those problems on both controller error and pilot
error. I have been told to position and hold and then listened to the
controller clear someone to land on top of me twice.


Cleared someone to land on top of you? How do you know that? A landing
clearance can be issued with aircraft on the runway. The landing aircraft
may have been miles away.

I had heard previous chatter between the other plane and the
controller. At that point, I thought of that possibility. As it
became increasingly clear that I was "forgotten", I called the tower
and in a firm (but not yet panicked) voice stated that I was in
position and holding on 24. I got an immediate response clearing me
for "immediate take-off, no delay. You may not agree, and that is
fine, but I am quite certain that I was forgotten.
Rich Russell