"Refusing to Handle You"

Roy Smith wrote:
someone else wrote
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?

Roy's excellent suggestions snipped.

As usual, an excellent answer, Roy.

Dave

"John Clonts" wrote in message

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.

I agree... except in this case I might well also advise ATC that the current
routing was selected to avoid convective weather.

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

www.flyimc.com

"John Clonts" wrote in message
ps.com...

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"...


ZXX Center: N1234, I'd be happy to do that sir. I need to know if you'd
like routing around Potomac approach, around the weather, or where you'd
like to hold. Or in other words, say intentions, over.

"Dave Butler" x@yy wrote in message
...
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.

This seems reasonable to me and understandable even if one had to hold. At
least as PIC all I have to do is identify the fix, go there and hold at the
appropriate altitude. It's just for this reason we are required to practice
one hold every 6 months .

Howard

Well, one up side of this, apart from the wonderful discussion it's
produced, was that I did get to log a hold........

"Howard Nelson" wrote in message
m...

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"


To what destination would JAL be going that took him through Bay Approach?

In article et,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Howard Nelson" wrote in message
m...

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"


To what destination would JAL be going that took him through Bay Approach?

Erm, 1999? :-)

Hamish

"Hamish Reid" wrote in message
...
In article et,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Howard Nelson" wrote in message
m...

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"


To what destination would JAL be going that took him through Bay
Approach?

Erm, 1999? :-)

Hamish

Got me. 19xx-1999 Bay Approach, 1999-2003 Nor Cal approach (and maybe a
couple of others), 2004- present Sierra Approach, 2006-? Western Approach,
followed by USA approach to be handled by a synthesized voice sounding like
Steven saying "USA approach refusing to handle you. What are your
intentions?".

Howard

"Howard Nelson" wrote in message
news

"Hamish Reid" wrote in message
...
In article et,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Howard Nelson" wrote in message
m...

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"


To what destination would JAL be going that took him through Bay
Approach?

Erm, 1999? :-)

Hamish

Got me. 19xx-1999 Bay Approach, 1999-2003 Nor Cal approach (and maybe a
couple of others), 2004- present Sierra Approach, 2006-? Western Approach,
followed by USA approach to be handled by a synthesized voice sounding
like
Steven saying "USA approach refusing to handle you. What are your
intentions?".

Howard


My bad

The sequence was Bay to Sierra to NorCal. I can't wait to see what the next
consolidation is. Luckily I haven't said Bay Approach (or TCA) in years
probably because the correct answer is printed on my charts.

Howard

In article ,
"Howard Nelson" wrote:

"Howard Nelson" wrote in message
news

"Hamish Reid" wrote in message
...
In article et,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Howard Nelson" wrote in message
m...

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"


To what destination would JAL be going that took him through Bay
Approach?

Erm, 1999? :-)

Hamish

Got me. 19xx-1999 Bay Approach, 1999-2003 Nor Cal approach (and maybe a
couple of others), 2004- present Sierra Approach, 2006-? Western Approach,
followed by USA approach to be handled by a synthesized voice sounding
like
Steven saying "USA approach refusing to handle you. What are your
intentions?".

My bad

The sequence was Bay to Sierra to NorCal. I can't wait to see what the next
consolidation is. Luckily I haven't said Bay Approach (or TCA) in years
probably because the correct answer is printed on my charts.

Just don't call them "Oakland" like I do every now and then...

I'm betting on "Left Coast Approach" by 2020 :-).

Hamish