Getting confused with ATC order...Violation?

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
news:2008040405554543658-christophercampbell@hotmailcom...
On 2008-04-03 19:11:38 -0700, "Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net said:


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
RubberWatch writes:

I am a student pilot. I was out flying solo today and was instructed
by ATC to fly a heading of 210. I thought he said 110 and I flew on
that heading.

Did you read back the heading? If you read back 110 and he said
nothing,
you're okay, since he should have corrected you.

Bull****, he's okay anyway.

STFU, you're wrong as usual.

Anthony forgets that people don't die in simulators.

They do die in real airplanes, though, and the FAA has held that a pilot
who reads back an erroneous clearance is still required to fly the one
given him by ATC, even if ATC doesn't correct him. But even if Anthony was
correct from a legal standpoint, flying a misunderstood heading can easily
kill you. Then it doesn't matter who was right --
you are the one who is dead.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor


Difference between ATC and pilot.
When a pilot makes a mistake the pilot dies.
When ATC makes a mistake the pilot dies.

Happy landings,

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 20:22:09 -0700 (PDT), RubberWatch
wrote:


I was in E class airspace.

Technically, ATC has no jurisdiction to "victor" VFR aircraft

I hesitate to nitpick an otherwise excelent post, but for the benefit of the
OP wish to note that the correct spelling should be "vector".
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/vector
[i]
operating within Class E airspace. Controllers often do attempt to do
that, but compliance is at the discretion of the Pilot In Command
(PIC).

believe in E airspace communication is not required but
recommended while VFR

That is correct.

Ask your instructor about Cockpit Resource Management and/or do a web
search. It's always best for the PIC to employ all the tools at his
disposal, and a controller at a radar scope provides an additional
means of spotting and avoiding conflicting air traffic. In congested
urban areas, and indeed other areas, the prudent pilot will request
Radar Traffic Advisory Service (Flight Following) and burn a landing
light to enhance his conspicuity (FAA Operation Light On).

I was talking to a ARTCC (Approach) , not a tower...

Generally Air Route Traffic Control Centers ('Center' in the
vernacular) control the en route phase of flights.

Approach/Departure Control controllers are generally operating from a
Terminal Radar Approach CONtrol facility or TRACON. They typically
coordinate flights climbing to or descending from their en route
altitudes.

typically I depart a non towered airport and fly to a practice area
but stay on norcal approach while in the area....another thing he
mentioned to me was that I had "multiple targets near marysville"
which I take to mean that I was flying to an area that had alot of
air traffic?

So you were receiving Radar Traffic Advisory Service from an Approach
Control facility (NorCal TRACON located in Sacramento), and the
controller "suggested" that you change course to avoid potential
conflicting air traffic. The "targets" refer to the display of
individual aircraft depicted on the controller's radar screen, not
something for you to aim at. :-)


I did announce to him that I was a student pilot about midway into the
communication. I was on a heading of 300 when I was told to "alter
course 90 degrees to the right temporarily."

You were "advised" to alter your course by the controller. As PIC,
you have sole authority (and responsibility) for your flight
operations within Class E (and G) airspace.

It seems many CFIs fail to instill the concept of "command" in their
students.

Here are dictionary definitions of the word 'command':
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/command

The concept of being in command is often new to a flight student. I
can't emphasize strongly enough, that the flight crew member acting as
Pilot In Command must assume command responsibility for his flight
operations, and not abandon his responsibility to others. Because of
this necessity to command, I believe becoming an airman should be a
life changing experience for those unaccustomed to commanding.

Looking back on it I was
confused by his instruction and I did alter towards a heading of 060
and then somehow I heard him say 210. That is when things got thrown
off for me.

Radio communications can be difficult in the noisy environment. If
you haven't yet, consider purchasing an Active Noise Reduction
headset; you'll never go back to a passive headset.

At this stage in your flight training, these sort of errors are
common. But now that you've experienced this one, you'll be vigilant
to see that it isn't repeated. And after you have earned your Airmans
Certificate, you'll continue to make other errors and learn from them,
hence the cliche "license to learn."



--
There's an old saying that every pilot starts with a full bag of
luck, and empty bag of experience - the trick being to fill the
bag of experience before you empty the bag of luck"
-- Colin Southern

Clark writes:
It's pretty clear that most of the controllers are really doing their best
to make the airspace safe while helping folks get where they want to be. An
airport with lots of training activity might give you the best "earful" of
comms. Saturdays are also a real opportunity. :-)

If you are looking for a bunch of traffic and ATC instructions, ask
your instructor if you can fly down to KPAO or one of the other
bay-area airports on a weekend afternoon (since it sounds like you are
not too far from there). That should give you lots of experience with
busy airspace...

Chris

Larry Dighera writes:

The Pilot In Command is solely responsible for operation of his
flight. The change was questioned at the time it was implemented.
There is little question in my mind that the FAA seeks to minimize
their liability exposure.

It sounds grossly unfair. I'm surprised that the agency can make this type of
unilateral change. What legal recourse do pilots have?

Actually, I have issues with any agency that can enact and enforce regulations
unilaterally with force of law (the IRS springs to mind, but such agencies are
legion). It seems improper that any such agency can extend or withhold
something like a license based solely on its own discretion, without some sort
of due process or oversight--or am I missing some sort of procedure of this
nature that applies in the case of the FAA?

Larry Dighera writes:

So it seems. The FAA issued an interpretive rule:

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/regulat...retiverule.pdf
Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 62 / Thursday, April 1, 1999
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91
Pilot Responsibility for Compliance With Air Traffic Control
Clearances and Instructions

SUMMARY: Pilots operating in areas in
which air traffic control is exercised are
required by regulation to comply with
the clearances and instructions of air
traffic controllers except in very narrow
circumstances. The FAA has
consistently construed and enforced this
requirement as ascribing to pilots a high
level of responsibility to monitor air
traffic control communications
attentively. Under normal
circumstances, the FAA has expected
pilots to understand and to comply with
clearly transmitted and reasonably
phrased clearances and instructions that
govern their operations. Nevertheless, a
series of recent National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB) enforcement
decisions has raised a question
regarding the regulatory responsibility
of pilots to hear and to comply with air
traffic control clearances and
instructions. This interpretive rule
confirms the FAA’s historical
construction of its regulations that
require compliance with air traffic
control clearances and instructions.

That just reasserts the need for pilots to obey ATC (exclusive of emergencies,
which is not stated here but is in the regulations). However, it doesn't say
anything about readback. If the pilot reads back instructions, and the
readback is incorrect, and ATC says nothing, how is the pilot to possibly know
that he is doing the wrong thing? Simple noise on the radio could cause him
to hear something incorrectly, no matter how "attentive" he might be.

Nomen Nescio writes:

You've never done a readback in your life, Dip****.

I've done endless readbacks on VATSIM, and they are just like the real thing.
I know more about ATC than many VFR private pilots know.

C J Campbell writes:

They do die in real airplanes, though, and the FAA has held that a
pilot who reads back an erroneous clearance is still required to fly
the one given him by ATC, even if ATC doesn't correct him.

But that is a physical impossibility. If the pilot heard 110 instead of 210
because of static, and he reads back and flies 110, and ATC doesn't correct
him, how is the pilot to magically know what ATC really said and magically fly
that?

Where did the FAA hold this?

BT writes:

excellent.. more advice from a simulator operator..

Which part do you disagree with?

Do you think VFR pilots should not read back instructions from ATC?

Do you think VFR pilots should fly what ATC wants instead of what they heard
in ATC's instructions? If so, how are they to know what ATC really wants if
they misheard the instructions and they don't read them back, or if they read
them back and ATC fails to correct them? How do you do that?

"Private" wrote in message
...

Difference between ATC and pilot.
When a pilot makes a mistake the pilot dies.
When ATC makes a mistake the pilot dies.

Happy landings,



Excepting ATC Peter Nielsen who was murdered for his mistake...

On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 19:14:23 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

If the pilot heard 110 instead of 210
because of static, and he reads back and flies 110, and ATC doesn't correct
him, how is the pilot to magically know what ATC really said and magically fly
that?

Ask, "Say again."