![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Dude" wrote in message ... So long as they are not directing you to do something unsafe, or hard on the equipment or passengers, or otherwise an extreme hassle - why not just go along? For what purpose? Lets say he is not a sharp troop. Why make his job harder. But it doesn't make his job harder. While you are giving the guy fits, someone else is trying to get a clearance or advice. It's not me that's giving him fits, it's his misunderstang of procedures that's giving him fits. Keep it up, and they will just expand the class B, because they NEED to control that space. Why do they NEED to control it? If we go along, we can delay or eliminate the need to expand class B areas. That's got nothing to do with it. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() So long as they are not directing you to do something unsafe, or hard on the equipment or passengers, or otherwise an extreme hassle - why not just go along? For what purpose? Safety! What does he know that you do not? Lets say he is not a sharp troop. Why make his job harder. But it doesn't make his job harder. Every extra statement he makes takes time. Also, you may now be too close to another flight path, making him divert it. What are you thinking? How about the added stress from your denial adding to the rest of his stress. I find it strange that you really don't care about being nice to controllers. While you are giving the guy fits, someone else is trying to get a clearance or advice. It's not me that's giving him fits, it's his misunderstang of procedures that's giving him fits. No, its you. You are at fault. You are being hard headed and stubborn for no reason. You don't know what he is up against. You don't even know what you are up against. You don't have to move out of the way to let a drunk stumble by you in a crowded bar either, but its your dry cleaning bill. Keep it up, and they will just expand the class B, because they NEED to control that space. Why do they NEED to control it? Because they are control freaks, and have ever expanding volumes of traffic. This is how government agencies work. They want control, they need control, they demand control, and then AOPA has to fight them to keep them from grabbing it. The only reason the Class B area around you is not bigger, is that they cannot show they need it. Otherwise, they would expand it. Every time a flight has to get vectored to avoid VFR traffic, is another straw on the proverbial camel's back. If we go along, we can delay or eliminate the need to expand class B areas. That's got nothing to do with it. See above, it has everything to do with it. Why do you think we have Class B areas to start with? ATC wants your airspace, don't give them an excuse to take it! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Dude" wrote in message ... So long as they are not directing you to do something unsafe, or hard on the equipment or passengers, or otherwise an extreme hassle - why not just go along? For what purpose? Safety! A rather broad subject. Do you think you could expand on that a bit? What does he know that you do not? He knows where the other radar targets are. Lets say he is not a sharp troop. Why make his job harder. But it doesn't make his job harder. Every extra statement he makes takes time. The only "extra statement" here is the one where he directed a VFR aircraft operating in Class E airspace to descend. He was wrong to make that statement. Also, you may now be too close to another flight path, making him divert it. What are you thinking? What are you thinking? How could my presence require him to divert another aircraft? I'm operating VFR in Class E airspace, ATC does not provide VFR/IFR or VFR/VFR separation in Class E airspace. How about the added stress from your denial adding to the rest of his stress. I find it strange that you really don't care about being nice to controllers. I'm very nice to controllers, and to pilots too. If the controller finds the issuance of traffic advisories to be stressful he should find another occupation. While you are giving the guy fits, someone else is trying to get a clearance or advice. It's not me that's giving him fits, it's his misunderstang of procedures that's giving him fits. No, its you. You are at fault. How so? What am I at fault for? You are being hard headed and stubborn for no reason. I don't think you understand the situation here. The service the controller is providing in this case is radar traffic advosories. Nothing more. This is not a separation issue. You don't know what he is up against. What is he up against? You don't even know what you are up against. What am I up against? You don't have to move out of the way to let a drunk stumble by you in a crowded bar either, but its your dry cleaning bill. Right, no third party is involved. Just as responsibility for separation rests with me and the other aircraft, not the controller. Keep it up, and they will just expand the class B, because they NEED to control that space. Why do they NEED to control it? Because they are control freaks, and have ever expanding volumes of traffic. This is how government agencies work. They want control, they need control, they demand control, and then AOPA has to fight them to keep them from grabbing it. The only reason the Class B area around you is not bigger, is that they cannot show they need it. Otherwise, they would expand it. Every time a flight has to get vectored to avoid VFR traffic, is another straw on the proverbial camel's back. But no flight NEEDS to be vectored to avoid VFR traffic in Class E airspace. If we go along, we can delay or eliminate the need to expand class B areas. That's got nothing to do with it. See above, it has everything to do with it. Why do you think we have Class B areas to start with? ATC wants your airspace, don't give them an excuse to take it! We're not talking about Class B airspace, we're talking about Class E airspace. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Must the PLANE be IFR-equipped to fly over17,500? | john smith | Home Built | 11 | August 27th 04 02:29 AM |
Ultralight Club Bylaws - Warning Long Post | MrHabilis | Home Built | 0 | June 11th 04 05:07 PM |
Mountain flying instruction: McCall, Idaho, Colorado too! | [email protected] | General Aviation | 0 | March 26th 04 11:24 PM |
Progress on Flying Car | Steve Dufour | General Aviation | 5 | December 19th 03 03:48 PM |
FA: WEATHER FLYING: A PRACTICAL BOOK ON FLYING | The Ink Company | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | November 5th 03 12:07 AM |