audio of VFR pilot in IFR condictions

"Cecil E. Chapman" wrote in message
m

I was surprised to learn that one of the controllers at another
airport I've flown to in the past, actually had never been a pilot
NOR ever BEEN IN a G.A. aircraft.

Why was that surprising?

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

"John T" wrote in message ews.com...
"Cecil E. Chapman" wrote in message
m

I was surprised to learn that one of the controllers at another
airport I've flown to in the past, actually had never been a pilot
NOR ever BEEN IN a G.A. aircraft.

Why was that surprising?


Hi, I don't have a pilot's license and nor have I started training for
one, but does the radio chatter usually sound this clear? I was
discouraged a little bit earlier in the week when I was listening in
to some ATC that I couldn't understand! Thanks...

Hi, I don't have a pilot's license and nor have I started training for
one, but does the radio chatter usually sound this clear? I was
discouraged a little bit earlier in the week when I was listening in
to some ATC that I couldn't understand! Thanks...

No, it doesn't usually sound this clear. But the only the first section of
the recording was recorded from the radio. The middle section was between
two different ATC facilities, and was thus took place over a dedicated
telephone line. The final section was recorded when the pilot called in for
a weather briefing later that day.

The radio section did seem remarkably clear. It's possible that it has been
run through some filters to clean it up a bit. Maybe the pilot happened to
be right on top of receiving station for the particular facility.

The radio is almost completely impossible to understand when you first start
to listen. The sound quality isn't great, people talk very quickly,
standard radio procedures are soundly ignored, and many phases are
abbreviated in some way. If you happen to know any pilots, it might help to
have one of them listen in with you and translate a bit, but even that isn't
all that necessary.

The good news is that once you begin to get used to the things that are
commonly said on the radio, it will begin to make much more sense to you.
Then when you begin your training, you will be way ahead of the pack when it
comes to radio work.

You are going to begin flight training, aren't you? You know you want to do
it!

Why was that surprising?


It isn't a surprise, 'now', but when I was a primary student (and learned
that there was no requirement that controllers to be pilots too) I was
surprised, because I had just presumed that they 'must' be pilots, that's
all....

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures complete with pictures and text at:
www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

Why was that surprising?

--
John T

Me again..... I just think that it would be prudent to have controllers
that were also pilots, just as it is prudent for (at least it is required by
law, in parts of California) food service workers to have some training in
handling choking problems.

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures complete with pictures and text at:
www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

"Cecil E. Chapman" wrote:
I just think that it would be prudent to have controllers
that were also pilots,

Do you think it would be practical for the FAA to make it a requirement?
The gov't would have to bear the cost of initial and recurrent training,
insurance, et c. for thousands of controllers, not to mention the
typically bloated federal overhead of administering such a thing. One
shudders to think...
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 17:30:03 -0600, "Dan Luke"
wrote:

Do you think it would be practical for the FAA to make it a requirement?
The gov't would have to bear the cost of initial and recurrent training,
insurance, et c. for thousands of controllers, not to mention the
typically bloated federal overhead of administering such a thing. One
shudders to think...

Where I live (Germany), controllers at least get a significant amount
of training in a simulator and take several jumpseat rides on airline
flights.

Do they have similar requirements in the US, too?

Tobias

"Tobias Schnell" wrote:
Where I live (Germany), controllers at least get a significant amount
of training in a simulator and take several jumpseat rides on airline
flights.

Do they have similar requirements in the US, too?

I believe not. There was a familiarization program whereby controllers
could, at their option, take jumpseat rides on airline flights, but I
don't know if it is still allowed after 9/11.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Dan Luke wrote:

Do they have similar requirements in the US, too?

I believe not. There was a familiarization program whereby controllers
could, at their option, take jumpseat rides on airline flights, but I
don't know if it is still allowed after 9/11.

At an AOPA seminar a while back, they played a recording of someone that had
experienced a vacuum failure in IMC (this recording might too be available
somewhere on the 'net). It included the dialog between the controller to
whom the pilot was speaking and another controller (or perhaps a facility
manager or some such).

The controller to whom the pilot was speaking was obviously completely
unaware of the nature - of the seriousness - of the failure. It was as if
the pilot were unable to keep his aircraft clean because of the lack of a
vacuum.

But the recording's "lesson" was that we as pilots need to be completely
clear with controllers. Don't assume, for example, that they're familiar
with aircraft failure modes. If you've lost instruments, say that you've
lost intruments (and which!). This may still not be completely understood,
but it should at least sound more serious than "vacuum failure" to someone
that thinks a vacuum is only a household appliance.

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon wrote in message gonline.com...

But the recording's "lesson" was that we as pilots need to be completely
clear with controllers. Don't assume, for example, that they're familiar
with aircraft failure modes. If you've lost instruments, say that you've
lost intruments (and which!). This may still not be completely understood,
but it should at least sound more serious than "vacuum failure" to someone
that thinks a vacuum is only a household appliance.


Excellent point. Several years ago I told a controller I was
inbound with a mag failure and the remaining mag was a little rough.
He didn't have a clue about what I was saying, and told me so. When I
told him that one of my engine's ignition systems was dead and the
backup didn't sound too healthy, he got the picture right away.
Cleared the pattern, cleared me for any runway and offered to roll the
fire trucks.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)