![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Stan Gosnell" wrote in message ... "Chip Jones" wrote in : long story snipped... Given this traffic scenario, would any of you guys have followed my suggestion to turn to a 180 heading, or was I wasting my breath? I think I would have turned in the direction you gave, since I couldn't see the traffic & presumably you could, at least on radar. You have a much bigger picture than I do. Either he misunderstood you or he's a lot more arrogant than I like to think I am. If he knows he's faster than the converging traffic, a turn away could work, but how could he know that? OTOH, if you really, really want him to turn to a heading, give it as an instruction, not a suggestion. The only problem about issuing the 180 heading as an instruction instead of a suggestion is that I do not have separation responsibility between an IFR and a VFR in this class of airspace. Because of that, I have to follow the 7110.65's provisions regarding safety alerts and traffic alerts, and the 7110.65 requires me to make a suggestion instead of taking control with an instruction in this case. In fact, the 7110.65 even instructs me to use the phraseolgy "immediately" if I offer a suggested course of action. Hence, if your best course of action was to hold your present heading, and I suggested this to you, I would actually have to key up and say something as ridiculous as "N123, traffic alert [insert appropriate information here], suggest you fly your present heading immediately for traffic!" Silly, ain't it? The logic is that during an alert, the FAA doesn't want ATC issuing *instructions* to a controlled aircraft that might cause it to collide with an uncontrolled aircraft. Say I instructed a 180 turn just as the unknown VFR made a radical turn to the west to avoid ( know it's very very unlikely). In such a collision, the ATC instruction would likely be identified as the *cause* of the collision and as the controller I'd be hung for not following the book. This was drilled into me a long long time ago when as a young pup I assigned ATC vectors to a VFR aircraft in distress (IFR pilot in VFR-only airplane stuck on top in winter clag looking for a friendly airport). Eventually I vectored the pilot down into an airport safely and then got reamed by facility management for not *suggesting* the vectors instead of assigning them. My chewing for that event went something like this- "Good job Chip. The pilot called to say thanks- he wants to buy you a beer. HOWEVER, assign ATC headings contrary to the 7110 again, you moron, and you will be decertified...you could have killed that guy." Chip, ZTL ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Dover short pilots since vaccine order | Roman Bystrianyk | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 29th 04 12:47 AM |
[OT] USA - TSA Obstructing Armed Pilots? | No Spam! | Military Aviation | 120 | January 27th 04 10:19 AM |
[OT] USA - TSA Obstructing Armed Pilots? | No Spam! | General Aviation | 3 | December 23rd 03 08:53 PM |
Riddle me this, pilots | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 137 | August 30th 03 04:02 AM |