Class D Sucks

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 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"

Jay Honeck wrote:

entirely separate issue, and ONLY pertains to my perceptions of the
weaknesses of the FAA's concept of Class D airspace.

Unless I'm missing some USA specifics (if so, please correct me):
Class D airspace is not an FAA concept but rather an ICAO definition. It
seems to me that you should sit down and re-read the airspace
definitions. Class D: *No* separation provided for VFR flights.

Stefan

Unless I'm missing some USA specifics (if so, please correct me):
Class D airspace is not an FAA concept but rather an ICAO definition. It
seems to me that you should sit down and re-read the airspace definitions.
Class D: *No* separation provided for VFR flights.

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

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

"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.

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"...

How about "Out of Control"?


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

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"...

How about "Out of Control"?

Better, yet...

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

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 13:04:11 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Unless I'm missing some USA specifics (if so, please correct me):
Class D airspace is not an FAA concept but rather an ICAO definition. It
seems to me that you should sit down and re-read the airspace definitions.
Class D: *No* separation provided for VFR flights.

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

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"...

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. I have also seen
and heard pilots who were unable to accurate convey their position to
the controllers or were doing something contrary to what they reported
to the controller. My unscientific observation is that neither side
is improving much. I am at my highest risk alert level when flying in
D.
Rich Russell

"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.

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

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