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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Silly controller
The other day I was doing a VFR practice approach into Tracy, CA when
the controller told me "reporting canceling IFR this freq, or on ground via land line...". I told him "uh, ok canceling IFR, I didn't believe I was IFR" (because I hadn't asked for or received an IFR clearance). The controller told me that any aircraft on an approach clearance is IFR for the purposes of the approach. I guess even controllers can be students? -Robert |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Silly controller
Robert M. Gary wrote: The other day I was doing a VFR practice approach into Tracy, CA when the controller told me "reporting canceling IFR this freq, or on ground via land line...". I told him "uh, ok canceling IFR, I didn't believe I was IFR" (because I hadn't asked for or received an IFR clearance). The controller told me that any aircraft on an approach clearance is IFR for the purposes of the approach. I guess even controllers can be students? -Robert At least it's better than the controller who told my instrument student as we approached the FAF, (we were on an IFR flight plan) "IFR canceled, squawk VFR, frequency change approved." even though we hadn't canceled. It was VMC, so operationally it wasn't a big deal for us, but I learned from TRACON's QC person that the controller was a trainee and the instructing controller missed it. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Silly controller
Robert M. Gary wrote: The other day I was doing a VFR practice approach into Tracy, CA when the controller told me "reporting canceling IFR this freq, or on ground via land line...". I told him "uh, ok canceling IFR, I didn't believe I was IFR" (because I hadn't asked for or received an IFR clearance). The controller told me that any aircraft on an approach clearance is IFR for the purposes of the approach. I guess even controllers can be students? We are in the middle of that same thing now. Your approach control, like ours, probably has a letter to airmen out there that says they will provide service to the extent possible. What they probably did, like we used to, is to tell you "radar service terminated, squawk VFR, freq change approved." Our region has determined that that does not provide the service the letter to airmen says we will. He probably didn't say report cancelling IFR but rather to report completing the approach, that's the region mandated phraseology. Another unwanted outcome of this policy is at uncontrolled airports you can now only have one aircraft on a practice approach at a time. We used to just terminate the aircraft about 6-8 miles from the airport and then as long as the next approach was at least three miles behind that one everything was good. Now we can no longer have anybody on the approach behind the first guy unless we say "practice approach approved, separation not provided, maintain VFR." When we terminated the first guy that does not relieve ATC from providing the required three miles and since by definition you cannot provide radar service to somebody you terminate, even though you can still see his target, you have to get the report of completing the approach before allowing the next guy to get a clearance. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Silly controller
Brad wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote: At least it's better than the controller who told my instrument student as we approached the FAF, (we were on an IFR flight plan) "IFR canceled, squawk VFR, frequency change approved." even though we hadn't canceled. It was VMC, so operationally it wasn't a big deal for us, but I learned from TRACON's QC person that the controller was a trainee and the instructing controller missed it. I've had that happen a couple times over the years. My stock reply was "I am inside a cloud, unable VFR." |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Silly controller
In article . com,
"Robert M. Gary" wrote: The other day I was doing a VFR practice approach into Tracy, CA when the controller told me "reporting canceling IFR this freq, or on ground via land line...". I told him "uh, ok canceling IFR, I didn't believe I was IFR" (because I hadn't asked for or received an IFR clearance). The controller told me that any aircraft on an approach clearance is IFR for the purposes of the approach. I guess even controllers can be students? I had a similar experience Wednesday evening with the VOR/DME GPS A practice approach into Tracy in good VMC. I explicitly asked for a practice approach, negotiated with the controller for the missed, and got switched to CTAF fairly early on. The approach went fairly normally, then when I came back to him on the (new, improved) missed and asked for flight following back to Hayward, he says "report cancelling IFR". I thought maybe he'd confused us with someone else, so I repeated the request, and got the same terse response. So I cancelled IFR, even though it was a practice approach; there was no mode c code change or any other change after cancelling IFR. It wasn't a big deal or anything, but it hasn't happened to me before with NorCal Approach, and I've done that and surrounding approaches many times as practice approaches. I just thought maybe I'd said something wrong earlier when I'd asked for the approach, especially since I'd cancelled the original clearance (from Hayward) much earlier in the flight when doing a bunch of practice approaches at Stockton with the same controller... Hamish |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Silly controller
Hamish Reid writes:
I had a similar experience Wednesday evening with the VOR/DME GPS A practice approach into Tracy in good VMC. I explicitly asked for a practice approach, negotiated with the controller for the missed, and got switched to CTAF fairly early on. The approach went fairly normally, then when I came back to him on the (new, improved) missed and asked for flight following back to Hayward, he says "report cancelling IFR". I thought maybe he'd confused us with someone else, so I repeated the request, and got the same terse response. So I cancelled IFR, even though it was a practice approach; there was no mode c code change or any other change after cancelling IFR. When he gave you the clearance for the approach, did he say "Maintain VFR?" If not, you were really IFR. And that makes sense, since he subsequently asked you to report when you were cancelling your IFR clearance. The above exchange sounds to me like he gave you a new pop-up IFR clearance -- what you requested: direct Hayward. The part where you asked for "practice" and "flight following" seems inconsistent with what he was saying back to you. Are you sure it was the same guy who you started the approach with? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Silly controller
"Christopher C. Stacy" wrote in message ... When he gave you the clearance for the approach, did he say "Maintain VFR?" If not, you were really IFR. No. You're really IFR when you hear "Cleared to..." |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Silly controller
Umm, I would like to see this cancellation scenario happen when the IFR
student is on his check ride with either an FAA examiner or DER in the plane... Watching two branches of the federal government duke it out could be highly entertaining... Anyway, if you are not truly VFR or if you need that IFR approach for currency there is that word in the regs, "Unable", for a reason... A single word, unadorned - and no further explanation will be offered by me any more than he did. The controller is then obligated to continue to handle you IFR... Now, having said that, being normally a cooperative cuss, and if I am just shooting the approach to stay sharp, and he is busy, etc., I won't care, I'll simply grunt, "roger that, 57 pop", hit the 1200 button and continue the approach... denny |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Silly controller
Denny wrote:
.. Watching two branches of the federal government duke it out could be highly entertaining... It's all the FAA. They often never talk to each other. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Silly controller
I was once told, just outside the FAF "the approach is APPROVED, radar
services TERMINATED". And yes kiddies I was in a cloud. (He musta been a supervisor :-) Brad wrote: Robert M. Gary wrote: The other day I was doing a VFR practice approach into Tracy, CA when the controller told me "reporting canceling IFR this freq, or on ground via land line...". I told him "uh, ok canceling IFR, I didn't believe I was IFR" (because I hadn't asked for or received an IFR clearance). The controller told me that any aircraft on an approach clearance is IFR for the purposes of the approach. I guess even controllers can be students? -Robert At least it's better than the controller who told my instrument student as we approached the FAF, (we were on an IFR flight plan) "IFR canceled, squawk VFR, frequency change approved." even though we hadn't canceled. It was VMC, so operationally it wasn't a big deal for us, but I learned from TRACON's QC person that the controller was a trainee and the instructing controller missed it. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Air Force One Had to Intercept Some Inadvertent Flyers / How? | Rick Umali | Piloting | 29 | February 15th 06 04:40 AM |
What was controller implying?? | Bill J | Instrument Flight Rules | 65 | September 28th 04 12:32 AM |
Columns by a Canadian centre controller | David Megginson | Instrument Flight Rules | 1 | August 9th 04 10:05 PM |
Skyguide traffic controller killed | HECTOP | Piloting | 39 | March 3rd 04 01:46 AM |
AmeriFlight Crash | C J Campbell | Piloting | 5 | December 1st 03 02:13 PM |