"Refusing to Handle You"

When the originating controller puts your flight plan into the HOST
computer, I think that the computer checks it against stuff that is in its
memory to insure that the proposed flight is doable and meets regulatory
requirements. I do not believe that the HOST computer polls facilities along
the route to ask if they can handle the flight.

Bob Gardner

"Mike Granby" wrote in message
oups.com...

That sounds like get-home-itis. Landing
at Hagarstown was a possibility.

Quite. I said as much in a post above.

Sure, it would have sucked to go right back to where you
took off from 10 minutes ago, but it was a possibility. If
you're not happy with the weather, don't go there. You
make it sound like it was a choice between heading
to SCAPE and running out of fuel.

Not at all. I would rather have landed than taken a route into weather,
but it was odd that I'd been given the clearance not ten minutes ago,
and then told that it couldn't be implemented. It puzzled me, as it
seems to have puzzled others. Get-home-itis has nothing to do with it.

wrote in message
...
When the originating controller puts your flight plan into the HOST
computer, I think that the computer checks it against stuff that is in its
memory to insure that the proposed flight is doable and meets regulatory
requirements. I do not believe that the HOST computer polls facilities
along
the route to ask if they can handle the flight.

Bob Gardner

This thread just gets more interesting. I can just imagine a tape where the
following was said:

"JAL xxx heavy, Bay Approach refusing to accept you. Say intentions"

I am on the west coast and have never heard of an aircraft on an IFR flight
plan being refused by the next sector. Is that something common in the NE?
Does it just happen to GA aircraft? Amended clearance happens regularly but
sector refusal (at least relayed to the pilot) is a new one to me.

Howard

"Howard Nelson" wrote in message

I am on the west coast and have never heard of an aircraft on an IFR
flight
plan being refused by the next sector. Is that something common in the NE?

In 10 years of IFR flying in the Northeast I have never heard of it
before -- that is why this seems so odd to me and a situation where I would
query the controller back.


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

www.flyimc.com

At the recent NATCA conference, a controller from Potomac Approach spent all
of his allotted time complaining (justifiably, as far as I know) about
operational restrictions that were being forced on the TRACON by higher
levels of bureaucracy. This may be a reflection of that pressure.

Bob Gardner

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:1121713800.47a553973db569e0ceec3e25ba14442c@t eranews...
"Howard Nelson" wrote in message

I am on the west coast and have never heard of an aircraft on an IFR
flight
plan being refused by the next sector. Is that something common in the
NE?

In 10 years of IFR flying in the Northeast I have never heard of it
before -- that is why this seems so odd to me and a situation where I
would query the controller back.


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

www.flyimc.com

wrote in message

operational restrictions that were being forced on the TRACON by higher
levels of bureaucracy. This may be a reflection of that pressure.

That could well be the case... in which case pilots starting to say "Unable"
and causing controllers to go to their supervisors seeking solutions may
well be the solution to this issue. Certainly "The next sector will not
accept you -- state intention" is blatantly unacceptable ATC service. Let
ATC propose the solution to me. Let the controller sit on the ground with
his supervisor and figure out the solution -- don't leave it up to me while
I am flying with a valid clearance on a route I planned around
thunderstorms.


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

www.flyimc.com

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:1121724161.992cd53544baad482b9de4d39a1591dc@t eranews...

That could well be the case... in which case pilots starting to say
"Unable" and causing controllers to go to their supervisors seeking
solutions may well be the solution to this issue.


The "higher levels of bureaucracy" referred to are probably outside the FAA.



Certainly "The next
sector will not accept you -- state intention" is blatantly unacceptable
ATC service.


It happens. It isn't all that unusual in high density airspace.



Let ATC propose the solution to me.


Then when asked for your intentions don't respond with something completely
unworkable.



Let the controller sit
on the ground with his supervisor and figure out the solution -- don't
leave it up to me while I am flying with a valid clearance on a route I
planned around thunderstorms.


Right. Put ATC in charge of your flight.

Howard Nelson wrote:

I am on the west coast and have never heard of an aircraft on an IFR flight
plan being refused by the next sector. Is that something common in the NE?
Does it just happen to GA aircraft? Amended clearance happens regularly but
sector refusal (at least relayed to the pilot) is a new one to me.

I've never had it happen to me, either, but I have had several conversations
along the lines of:

"expect holding at XXXXX, the next sector is not taking your handoff".

Then before I get to XXXXX the handoff gets accepted.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Dave Butler" x@yy wrote in message

"expect holding at XXXXX, the next sector is not taking your handoff".
Then before I get to XXXXX the handoff gets accepted.

Now that sounds a lot more reasonable for ATC service.

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

www.flyimc.com

"expect holding at XXXXX, the next sector is not taking your handoff".
Then before I get to XXXXX the handoff gets accepted.

Now that sounds a lot more reasonable for ATC service.

Yes, I agree. And it also suggests that in the original scenario, a
good tack might be along these lines:

ZXX Center: N1234, Potomac Approach is refusing to handle you, say
intentions.

N1234: ZXX Center, If you'd like to offer me an amended clearance or
holding instructions, I'd be happy to consider them, N1234, over.

Note the trailing "over" which in this context means "the ball's back
in your court"...

--
Cheers,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ

John Clonts wrote:
"expect holding at XXXXX, the next sector is not taking your handoff".
Then before I get to XXXXX the handoff gets accepted.

Now that sounds a lot more reasonable for ATC service.

Yes, I agree. And it also suggests that in the original scenario, a
good tack might be along these lines:

ZXX Center: N1234, Potomac Approach is refusing to handle you, say
intentions.

N1234: ZXX Center, If you'd like to offer me an amended clearance or
holding instructions, I'd be happy to consider them, N1234, over.

What possible good comes from this? He's asked you what you would
like to do, within the constraints of what he's already told you he's
unable to give you. How could the controller possibly know what makes
sense for you to do at that point? Are you the PIC, or are you just
along for the ride?

Something like, "I need to stay south of Camp David to avoid
convective activity north of there. If Potomac won't take me, can you
work me on vectors around the south edge of P-whatever-it-is?". At
least that gives the controller something to decide if he can approve
or not.

Another constructive alternative, "If I hold at Hagarstown, how long
would I expect until Potomac can work me?"

Or, "Would it help if I climbed to xxx?"

Or, here's another one, that's perhaps a little more devious. "If I
changed my destination to Fredrick, could Potomac at least take me
that far?" If the controller says "yes", once you get handed off to
Potomac, you can try wheedling *that* guy for a clearance to York. It
may be gaming the system a bit, but sometimes it works. Sometimes it
doesn't and you might end up having to land at Fredrick, but that's
probably no worse than landing back at Hagarstown.

Any of these alternatives seem better than asking the controller to
try and read your mind.