If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Larry Dighera wrote in message . ..
That FAAO mentions: "The identification of operational errors and deviations without fear of reprisal is an absolute requirement and is the responsibility of all of us who work within our [NAS] system." Careful of pulling this from context. The word "operational" above applies to both "errors" and "deviations". An operational deviation is NOT the equivilent of a pilot deviation. An operational deviation would be something like a controller letting a pilot enter another controller's airspace without a handoff or other form of coordination. Operational deviations are what are required to be reported under that section, not pilot deviations. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
|
#73
|
|||
|
|||
|
#74
|
|||
|
|||
WAFDOF?
Stan Prevost wrote: "Chip Jones" wrote in message link.net... OK pilots, try this one on for size. As you likely know, there is a wide and growing rift between the career FAA bureaucrats (aka FAA Management) who run the monstrosity called the federal Air Traffic Organization, and the career FAA air traffic controllers who make that monstrosity work in the NAS on a daily basis. Regardless of where you stand on the politics of US air traffic control (funding, privatization, user-fees, labor issues, whatever), the ugly, on-going feud between Management and Labor in air traffic control may finally have reached a point where you as a pilot will be personally affected. Chip, increased emphasis on reporting of pilot deviations seems to lead to a need for increased pilot understanding of what constitutes a deviation from an ATC point of view. I doubt that controllers are required to know the FARs to the depth required to determine if a pilot is operating within the regulations that apply to pilots in all cases, so a large part of it would seem to fall back on reporting deviations from an ATC instruction or clearance. So what constitutes a deviation? As an example, what deviation in altitude constitutes a reportable deviation, if no loss of separation occurs? It has been suggested in this thread that the Instrument PTS standard of +/- 100 ft applies, but I doubt if controllers are familiar with the PTS. So is there an ATC document that defines deviation limits? How far off the centerline of an airway can I be before being reported? How much heading error? How long a delay is allowed before I begin a descent after being instructed to do so? If I am VFR in Class E airspace, and using flight following, will I be reported for flying WAFDOF? Should we expect a report on every student pilot doing T&Gs and landing without clearance, rather than being scolded for a one-time error, if no problem occured? Looks like a big can of worms to me. Sta |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
WAFDOF?
Stan Prevost wrote: "Chip Jones" wrote in message link.net... OK pilots, try this one on for size. As you likely know, there is a wide and growing rift between the career FAA bureaucrats (aka FAA Management) who run the monstrosity called the federal Air Traffic Organization, and the career FAA air traffic controllers who make that monstrosity work in the NAS on a daily basis. Regardless of where you stand on the politics of US air traffic control (funding, privatization, user-fees, labor issues, whatever), the ugly, on-going feud between Management and Labor in air traffic control may finally have reached a point where you as a pilot will be personally affected. Chip, increased emphasis on reporting of pilot deviations seems to lead to a need for increased pilot understanding of what constitutes a deviation from an ATC point of view. I doubt that controllers are required to know the FARs to the depth required to determine if a pilot is operating within the regulations that apply to pilots in all cases, so a large part of it would seem to fall back on reporting deviations from an ATC instruction or clearance. So what constitutes a deviation? As an example, what deviation in altitude constitutes a reportable deviation, if no loss of separation occurs? It has been suggested in this thread that the Instrument PTS standard of +/- 100 ft applies, but I doubt if controllers are familiar with the PTS. So is there an ATC document that defines deviation limits? How far off the centerline of an airway can I be before being reported? How much heading error? How long a delay is allowed before I begin a descent after being instructed to do so? If I am VFR in Class E airspace, and using flight following, will I be reported for flying WAFDOF? Should we expect a report on every student pilot doing T&Gs and landing without clearance, rather than being scolded for a one-time error, if no problem occured? Looks like a big can of worms to me. Sta |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
In article . net,
Matt Young wrote: WAFDOF? Wrong Altitude For Direction Of Flight, flying westbound at 7500 instead of 6500. |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
In article . net,
Matt Young wrote: WAFDOF? Wrong Altitude For Direction Of Flight, flying westbound at 7500 instead of 6500. |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
"Stan Prevost" wrote in message ... Chip, increased emphasis on reporting of pilot deviations seems to lead to a need for increased pilot understanding of what constitutes a deviation from an ATC point of view. I doubt that controllers are required to know the FARs to the depth required to determine if a pilot is operating within the regulations that apply to pilots in all cases, so a large part of it would seem to fall back on reporting deviations from an ATC instruction or clearance. So what constitutes a deviation? As an example, what deviation in altitude constitutes a reportable deviation, if no loss of separation occurs? It has been suggested in this thread that the Instrument PTS standard of +/- 100 ft applies, but I doubt if controllers are familiar with the PTS. So is there an ATC document that defines deviation limits? We give you 200 feet, plus the change if I remember correctly. When you get to 300 feet above or below assigned altitude, your data block "breaks" and ATC considers that you've busted your altitude. How far off the centerline of an airway can I be before being reported? 4 miles... How much heading error? Good question. As a Center guy, I don't have a ready answer. To me, it depends on whether you are assigned a heading/vector for traffic or if you are navigating airways or point to point own nav. If you're on an assigned vector, say 30 degrees left for traffic, and I never see you make the turn, to me you have deviated your clearance. However, for FSDO you will likely never get stuck with a PD, because I can't prove where the winds are etc. Too many variables in all of these categories for me. How long a delay is allowed before I begin a descent after being instructed to do so? US Airways, Delta and Northwest have all been guilty in my ARTCC of reading back descent clearances and then remaining at the original altitude for over five minutes before staring a descent. To the controllers involved who subsequently were charged with operational errors when USA, DAL and NWA lost vertical separation with traffic, the crews were guilty of PD's for not adhering to clearance. In all three cases, FSDO refused to prosecute PD's, even though the AIM (non-regulatory) was not complied with by the pilots who read back those clearances. Sadky, I have no idea how long a delay is allowed, and neither does anyone else in the system. I know what I think constitutes as PD here, but I'm biased towards you starting a descent as soon as you acknowledge the clearance. FSDO doesn't agree with me in this area of the country. If I am VFR in Class E airspace, and using flight following, will I be reported for flying WAFDOF? Well, according to the ATC QA Order you should be reported if you are violating any FAR's. Should we expect a report on every student pilot doing T&Gs and landing without clearance, rather than being scolded for a one-time error, if no problem occured? Really productive for air safety, ain't it? Looks like a big can of worms to me. It's all a huge can of worms better left unopened, IMO. Chip, ZTL |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
"Stan Prevost" wrote in message ... Chip, increased emphasis on reporting of pilot deviations seems to lead to a need for increased pilot understanding of what constitutes a deviation from an ATC point of view. I doubt that controllers are required to know the FARs to the depth required to determine if a pilot is operating within the regulations that apply to pilots in all cases, so a large part of it would seem to fall back on reporting deviations from an ATC instruction or clearance. So what constitutes a deviation? As an example, what deviation in altitude constitutes a reportable deviation, if no loss of separation occurs? It has been suggested in this thread that the Instrument PTS standard of +/- 100 ft applies, but I doubt if controllers are familiar with the PTS. So is there an ATC document that defines deviation limits? We give you 200 feet, plus the change if I remember correctly. When you get to 300 feet above or below assigned altitude, your data block "breaks" and ATC considers that you've busted your altitude. How far off the centerline of an airway can I be before being reported? 4 miles... How much heading error? Good question. As a Center guy, I don't have a ready answer. To me, it depends on whether you are assigned a heading/vector for traffic or if you are navigating airways or point to point own nav. If you're on an assigned vector, say 30 degrees left for traffic, and I never see you make the turn, to me you have deviated your clearance. However, for FSDO you will likely never get stuck with a PD, because I can't prove where the winds are etc. Too many variables in all of these categories for me. How long a delay is allowed before I begin a descent after being instructed to do so? US Airways, Delta and Northwest have all been guilty in my ARTCC of reading back descent clearances and then remaining at the original altitude for over five minutes before staring a descent. To the controllers involved who subsequently were charged with operational errors when USA, DAL and NWA lost vertical separation with traffic, the crews were guilty of PD's for not adhering to clearance. In all three cases, FSDO refused to prosecute PD's, even though the AIM (non-regulatory) was not complied with by the pilots who read back those clearances. Sadky, I have no idea how long a delay is allowed, and neither does anyone else in the system. I know what I think constitutes as PD here, but I'm biased towards you starting a descent as soon as you acknowledge the clearance. FSDO doesn't agree with me in this area of the country. If I am VFR in Class E airspace, and using flight following, will I be reported for flying WAFDOF? Well, according to the ATC QA Order you should be reported if you are violating any FAR's. Should we expect a report on every student pilot doing T&Gs and landing without clearance, rather than being scolded for a one-time error, if no problem occured? Really productive for air safety, ain't it? Looks like a big can of worms to me. It's all a huge can of worms better left unopened, IMO. Chip, ZTL |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
C Kingsbury wrote: "Larry Dighera" wrote in message ... On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 18:39:39 GMT, "C Kingsbury" wrote in nk.net:: In most states you can get ticketed for "failure to stop at a stop sign" for something as simple as not coming to a complete stop. You slow to less than Actually, there is a rational reason for making a complete stop at a boulevard stop sign. There is no rational reason when you can clearly see there is no conflicting traffic within a mile, unless you count the slippery-slope theory, and I don't. Yeah, the guy that ran into my bike with his van as I went through the intersection thought he slowed enough to see all traffic, too. If he had stopped completely, he would have seen me. Unfortunately, he rolled through, and did not see me because I was hidden from his sight by his "A" pillar, which was keeping me hidden from his view (in his blind spot) because he kept moving through the stop sign. This is one good reason why you should come to a stop at a stop sign. Of course the few seconds he might have saved ended up being an expensive proposition for him, and a painful visit to the hospital for me. Now, perhaps when management gets deluged with reports of 50' altitude deviations and other trivial mistakes, Because mode c transponders only report altitude in even hundreds, that isn't very likely. OK, 51' then. You get my point. There are deviations that clearly require reporting and others that can be pretty effectively addressed by an ATC tonguelashing. Unless someone shows me evidence that safety is being degraded by failure to report every possible PD I'm going to say that the way things work today are fine. Actually, as a controller, I never considered or questioned an enroute altitude deviation unless it exceeded 300' or was a threat to another aircraft. At that point a controller has to determine if the pilots mode C is incorrect or if he has just deviated from the assigned altitude. The increased workload may be sufficient to stimulate demand for additional ATC personnel hiring. No, it will stimulate demand for more desk-bound paper-pushing "inspectors" whose biggest concern is a loss of separation between them and their lunch break. No government bureaucracy has ever responded to added workload by becoming more efficient. Until we know the language of the regulations governing ATC reporting PDs, it is difficult to form an opinion as to the appropriateness of the change in policy. Well, I wouldn't say so. There is a perfectly good argument to (a) have a regulation that requires reporting every PD and (b) routinely ignore it. Basically, you need to have the rule, so that you can go after a controller who reports nobody no matter what because he's lazy. OTOH, reporting every single incident when not necessary in the controller's view is just paper-chasing and serves no end. I will abort this line of argument if someone can show me that there is a real safety issue here backed by something more than a gut instinct. The example Chip gave was something that should have been reported without a second thought. The example included another pilot having to take evasive action because an aircraft entered the runway without approval. Whether the pilot initiated the go-around or it was directed by ATC is irrelevant, plus runway incursions are a hot topic in the FAA these days, generating their own special reporting. JPH -cwk. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pilot deviations and a new FAA reality | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 36 | October 14th 04 06:10 PM |
Moving violation..NASA form? | Nasir | Piloting | 47 | November 5th 03 07:56 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |