"Refusing to Handle You"

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:1121727600.b3bc3a1423b9b3b0f6d273c7323e0e2a@t eranews...

Overall I think I agree with the points you are making except I just do
not think it is reasonable for ATC to say "Potomac refuses to work you"
when they just issued a clearance through that airspace 10 minutes ago.
If Potomac never works through flights then do not issue clearances -- it
is one thing if the clearance were issued 500 miles away but a flight
departing HGR ought to be processed in a way that knows if Potomac will
accept through clearances.


Okay. Fine. The center controller was wrong to issue the requested
routing. He should have told the pilot the only way he could go IFR was via
the preferential routing. Damn him for trying to do the pilot a favor!

The point you have to understand is that once Potomac approach says they
can't accept your flight the only way you're going through that airspace is
contrary to ATC instructions.



And therein lies the issue here... legal or not, safe or not, is just
seems absolutely poor service for a sector to flat-out "refuse" an
airplane with no explanation right after takeoff. I think at the minimum
some better explanation should be given to the pilot to understand what
his happening and let him propose an alternate plan to ATC.


Well, that's essentially what the controller did when he said "state
intentions", he invited the pilot to propose an alternate plan to ATC.



The fact that ATC said "State intentions" rather than offer a re-route
suggests ATC was surprised by this as well.


Perhaps, but there's still no excuse for your suggested response.



And most important of all, I suspect this may have been a subtle
suggestion to the IFR pilot to cancel and go VFR and I think that is
particularly disappointing and frankly unacceptable.


Canceling IFR and proceeding VFR is one possible solution but is in no way
suggested by "state intentions". The controller just wants to know what you
want to do given that you're not going to be continuing on your current
clearance. So tell him. About half the people participating in this
discussion seem to be under the impression that they must immediately
respond with a route that avoids the weather and Potomac approach. That's
not the case at all. The controller's expecting a response like, "I'd like
routing around Potomac approach clear of the weather", or "I'd like routing
around the weather", etc., etc., etc. Soliciting your input prior to
issuing a new clearance saves time.



"State Intentions" usually occurs only when ATC has no clue what you want
to do


That's exactly how it was used here.

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

www.flyimc.com

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message

Okay. Fine. The center controller was wrong to issue the requested
routing.

Thank you.. we agree.

Damn him for trying to do the pilot a favor!

Favor or not, changing a clearance in this type of weather is serious
business. The controller ought to fix the problem by being more proactive
in proposing solutions to the pilot.


The point you have to understand is that once Potomac approach says they
can't accept your flight the only way you're going through that airspace
is contrary to ATC instructions.

Or by convincing Potomac to work harder to fix their error.

Well, that's essentially what the controller did when he said "state
intentions", he invited the pilot to propose an alternate plan to ATC.

The pilot did not need the extra workload; it would have been better for ATC
to work harder with Potomac or else for ATC to propose a routing to the
pilot.


suggested by "state intentions". The controller just wants to know what
you want to do given that you're not going to be continuing on your
current

That is obvious. The pilot wants to efficiently get to his destination. If
ATC cannot honor their initial clearance then they should propose workable
alternatives. It is obvious this is what the pilot wants.

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:1121823244.3f20b0e8e6c677a1a5f1609735509f17@t eranews...

Favor or not, changing a clearance in this type of weather is serious
business. The controller ought to fix the problem by being more proactive
in proposing solutions to the pilot.


In what type of weather? Nothing in the OP indicated the pilot was in any
significant weather at that point. The pilot wanted to fly from HGR to THV.
Normally such flights are taken north over SCAPE to avoid Camp David but
there was weather affecting that route. So he filed a route to the south to
avoid the weather, HGR..MRB..EMI..THV. The problem with that route is it
goes through Potomac approach.

Hell, am I the only one that ever consults a map in these discussions?



Or by convincing Potomac to work harder to fix their error.


He tried as hard as he could, Potomac approach made no error.



The pilot did not need the extra workload;


There is no extra workload on the pilot.



it would have been better for
ATC to work harder with Potomac


He made a maximum effort.



or else for ATC to propose a routing to
the pilot.


ATC will do that as soon as the pilot decides where he wants to go.



That is obvious.


Then why did I have to explain it?



The pilot wants to efficiently get to his destination.
If ATC cannot honor their initial clearance then they should propose
workable alternatives. It is obvious this is what the pilot wants.


That is not obvious. The pilot may want to divert to another airport. The
pilot has to tell the controller what he wants.

I've explained this many times. Are you even trying to understand it, or
are you just being argumentative?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:
Hell, am I the only one that ever consults a map in these discussions?

Could be. The rest of us look at charts :-)

Roy Smith wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

Hell, am I the only one that ever consults a map in these discussions?


Could be. The rest of us look at charts :-)

Whew. This has been some discussion. If only Roy, Steven, Richard, Jose, Warren
were all inside the same room talking this out, it would make some fascinating
listening. As it is, man, I'm tired of reading. :-)

DGB

That's why they sponsor pilot controller forums.
Have you ever gone to one?
Al


"Dave Butler" x@yy wrote in message
...
Roy Smith wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

Hell, am I the only one that ever consults a map in these discussions?


Could be. The rest of us look at charts :-)

Whew. This has been some discussion. If only Roy, Steven, Richard, Jose,
Warren were all inside the same room talking this out, it would make some
fascinating listening. As it is, man, I'm tired of reading. :-)

DGB