"Refusing to Handle You"

I am given the route via SCAPE, but I
"unable" that for weather, and they go away for a few minutes, and then
clear me as filed. I take off, and everything is fine, until I'm headed
southbound from the HGR VOR, when the Washington Center controller
calls me and says "Err, 8096J, Potomac Approach is refusing to handle
you, say intentions."

"I intend to fly my clearance. What are yours?" Hmmph.

Ok, might not put it quite that way, but I have a clearance and the
alternative of flying through thunderstorms is not acceptable. I think
I might ask what they mean "refused to handle me", but in any case a
NASA report is in order.

I would refuse to fly through thunderstorms to make them happy. If I
had spherics I would have more options, but blind and knowing what's
probably out there, I would have solid grounds for saying "unable" and
letting them sort it out later.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
...

"I intend to fly my clearance. What are yours?" Hmmph.


An odd thing to say after you've been told that's not an option.



Ok, might not put it quite that way, but I have a clearance and the
alternative of flying through thunderstorms is not acceptable.


I'm sure the controller understands that. That's why he asked you for your
intentions after informing you that your previous clearance was not
acceptable.



I would refuse to fly through thunderstorms to make them happy.


Why would they find happiness in your flight through a thunderstorm?



If I had
spherics I would have more options, but blind and knowing what's probably
out there, I would have solid grounds for saying "unable" and letting them
sort it out later.


You'd be unable to do anything other than your previous clearance? How
could that be?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote

An odd thing to say after you've been told that's not an option.

Sure it was an option. That was his clearance and the clearance remains
valid until he accepts a new one.

--------------------
Richard Kaplan

www.flyimc.com

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:1121648744.326f39a050170b4a3dc316b048821a11@t eranews...

Sure it was an option. That was his clearance and the clearance remains
valid until he accepts a new one.


So a pilot is under no obligation to accept any change to his clearance?
What do you base that on? What about the traffic that's creating the need
for the amended clearance? They're also operating on a clearance that
remains valid until acceptance of a new one, are they not?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote


So a pilot is under no obligation to accept any change to his clearance?

I never said that. I said a pilot is under no obligation to accept any
change to his clearance which the pilot feels is unsafe.

--------------------
Richard Kaplan

www.flyimc.com

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:1121724013.a978ad36df82d0f25296e0ee95ad9be6@t eranews...

I never said that. I said a pilot is under no obligation to accept any
change to his clearance which the pilot feels is unsafe.


So "unable reroute due to weather" means "unable any reroute that puts me
into weather"?

"I intend to fly my clearance. What are yours?" Hmmph.

An odd thing to say after you've been told that's not an option.

Well, "Potomac is refusing to accept you, what are your intentions" is
also an odd thing to say. It's the equivalent of "get lost kid, you
bother me", which is exactly what Potomac is saying to the controller
who is (presumably) just relaying the message to the pilot. It makes
ATC's coordination problem into the pilot's problem to solve.

I would refuse to fly through thunderstorms to make them happy.

Why would they find happiness in your flight through a thunderstorm?

Because if the thunderstorm is outside of Potomac's airspace, Potomac
doesn't have to deal with you. "It's not my watch". Of course I don't
really believe airborne shredded aluminum makes anybody involved here
happy, my phrasing "make them happy" is metaphorical.

You'd be unable to do anything other than your previous clearance? How
could that be?

The only thing I have is my previous clearance.

I would expect the controllers to work with me to get an acceptable
reroute, not to dump the thing in my lap saying "you can't go here any
more". That is getting close to the controller saying "IFR cancelled,
squawk 1200" while I'm in the soup.

I have my previous clearance. I would fly that unless (and until) I got
something acceptable to both me and the controller. But the controller
saying "Potomac won't handle you, what are your intentions" is
inappropriately confrontational. If Potomac won't accept the clearance
that ATC has already given me, that's ATC's problem to solve, and they
should offer (or at least appear to be prepared to offer) some solutions.

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message

inappropriately confrontational. If Potomac won't accept the clearance
that ATC has already given me, that's ATC's problem to solve, and they
should offer (or at least appear to be prepared to offer) some solutions.

Exactly correct.

--------------------
Richard Kaplan

www.flyimc.com

"Jose" wrote in message
m...

Well, "Potomac is refusing to accept you, what are your intentions" is
also an odd thing to say.


Why's that?



It's the equivalent of "get lost kid, you
bother me", which is exactly what Potomac is saying to the controller who
is (presumably) just relaying the message to the pilot. It makes ATC's
coordination problem into the pilot's problem to solve.


There's no coordination problem. The problem is the pilot has a route he
can't fly. ATC is going to change his route, the problem will be solved at
that time. ATC is just asking the pilot for his input. Isn't that better
than deciding for him?



The only thing I have is my previous clearance.


But you're going to get a new one. That's why the controller is asking for
your intentions. So that your new clearance can be as close as possible to
what you'd like to do. Would you want it any other way?



I would expect the controllers to work with me to get an acceptable
reroute, not to dump the thing in my lap saying "you can't go here any
more".


He's trying to do exactly that. That's why he said "say intentions."



I have my previous clearance. I would fly that unless (and until) I got
something acceptable to both me and the controller. But the controller
saying "Potomac won't handle you, what are your intentions" is
inappropriately confrontational.


Bull****. The guy seems to have been overly accommodating.



If Potomac won't accept the clearance
that ATC has already given me, that's ATC's problem to solve, and they
should offer (or at least appear to be prepared to offer) some solutions.


They're going to solve that problem by directing you away from Potomac
approach. Your choices are to either follow ATC instructions or continue
into Potomac approach contrary to ATC instructions and face the
consequences.

Well, "Potomac is refusing to accept you, what are your intentions" is
also an odd thing to say.
Why's that?

Because ATC is supposed to be helpful, and this is not. The pilot has
no idea what "Potomac" is (from a routing standpoint) or for how long
they will be refusing to honor the clearance the pilot =already= has.
Therefore the pilot has no basis from which to plan a new routing, or to
consider the altenratives. The only alternatives that are clear are to
turn around, hold, or land, but those are likely not the only
alternatives avaliable.

ATC however does know the pilot's destination and equipment, and
probably has a pretty good idea of what the weather and traffic ahead
is. Therefore ATC is in a good position to offer helpful alternatives.
They are refusing to do so.

Empirically, it's an odd thing to say because it is rarely said. That
by itself makes it odd.

The problem is the pilot has a route he
can't fly.

The pilot certainly can fly that route. ATC doesn't want him to.
Specifically Potomac doesn't want him to.

ATC is just asking the pilot for his input.

Meaningful input requires information that ATC has, that the pilot
doesn't, and that ATC is pointedly not giving the pilot.

But the controller
saying "Potomac won't handle you, what are your intentions" is
inappropriately confrontational.
Bull****. The guy seems to have been overly accommodating.


Perhaps we have different definitions of "accomodating".

Let's see if I can learn something, and turn this around. It's =you=
flying up the coast, say to Teterboro. You're directly on the other
side of Potomac Approach's airspace (whatever shape it happens to be at
that time). For argument's sake, you're at 5000 feet in a rental 172RG
with a moving map GPS, no radar, no spherics, and no weather imagery
available to you (except via descriptions on the radio). You have three
and a half hours of gas, and have a clearance through to your
destination, which takes you in between building TCU. There are cells
to your west and northwest somewhere, maybe forty miles off your route.
You're IMC.

"N423YL, Potomac is refusing to handle you. What are your intentions?"

How do you respond?

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.