"Refusing to Handle You"

John Clonts wrote:
"expect holding at XXXXX, the next sector is not taking your handoff".
Then before I get to XXXXX the handoff gets accepted.

Now that sounds a lot more reasonable for ATC service.

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.

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?

Something like, "I need to stay south of Camp David to avoid
convective activity north of there. If Potomac won't take me, can you
work me on vectors around the south edge of P-whatever-it-is?". At
least that gives the controller something to decide if he can approve
or not.

Another constructive alternative, "If I hold at Hagarstown, how long
would I expect until Potomac can work me?"

Or, "Would it help if I climbed to xxx?"

Or, here's another one, that's perhaps a little more devious. "If I
changed my destination to Fredrick, could Potomac at least take me
that far?" If the controller says "yes", once you get handed off to
Potomac, you can try wheedling *that* guy for a clearance to York. It
may be gaming the system a bit, but sometimes it works. Sometimes it
doesn't and you might end up having to land at Fredrick, but that's
probably no worse than landing back at Hagarstown.

Any of these alternatives seem better than asking the controller to
try and read your mind.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote

Based on what "good reason"?

Convective activity

thruflight on a whim? Odds are it's because there's a significant amount
of arrival or departure traffic going through that area. What do you
expect ATC to do with them?

Vector planes around. Put some planes in a holding pattern. Vector me
around. Put me in a holding pattern until room becomes available. Take you
pick.

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

www.flyimc.com

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote


So a pilot is under no obligation to accept any change to his clearance?

I never said that. I said a pilot is under no obligation to accept any
change to his clearance which the pilot feels is unsafe.

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

www.flyimc.com

wrote in message

operational restrictions that were being forced on the TRACON by higher
levels of bureaucracy. This may be a reflection of that pressure.

That could well be the case... in which case pilots starting to say "Unable"
and causing controllers to go to their supervisors seeking solutions may
well be the solution to this issue. Certainly "The next sector will not
accept you -- state intention" is blatantly unacceptable ATC service. Let
ATC propose the solution to me. Let the controller sit on the ground with
his supervisor and figure out the solution -- don't leave it up to me while
I am flying with a valid clearance on a route I planned around
thunderstorms.


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

www.flyimc.com

"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

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message

The controller didn't issue a clearance amendment, he informed him that
Potomac approach wouldn't accept him and asked him for his intentions.
This is his opportunity to come up with an alternative acceptable to him.

I guess what I am most saying here is that "Potomac will not accept you"
just does not make sense and therefore I would have little basis upon which
to propose some alternative plan.

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

www.flyimc.com

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:1121648616.ba937d939e05237b4228738fe266ced1@t eranews...

No emergency declaration. "Unable reroute" is all that is necessary.


That's not a particularly useful answer to the controller's request for your
intentions. If you're on a route that takes you through Potomac approach
and you're informed that Potomac approach won't accept your flight it
follows that you will be rerouted in some manner.

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:1121655367.94780c5d45d39e3a9574ee99bb5f5c1b@t eranews...

I suppose anything is possible but that is highly unlikely. In any event,
the proper response is to state "Unable" and then wait to see what the
controller says. Most likely the controller will then offer to work with
you with a hold and/or vectors around traffic that will more or less be
equivalent to the route you need.


One property of the route needed in this case is that it not go through
Potomac approach. The controller demonstrated he was willing to work with
the pilot when he informed him of that requirement and asked him his
intentions. Your suggested response of "unable" isn't helpful at all and
suggests an unwillingness to work with ATC.



Now I agree the controller might
instead come back not with a terse "Potomac will not accept you" but
rather "There has been a major incident and BWI is closed" or something
catastrophic like that, in which case yes, landing might be your only
option.


It doesn't have to be anything catastrophic, it could just be normal
traffic. As I said in an earlier message, there are TRACONs that simply do
not allow thruflights. It's not because they're too good to work
thruflights, it's because they're up to their armpits with arrival and
departure traffic.



I am not at all proposing to declare an emergency. I am proposing the
pilot fly his clearance and not accept any alternate clearance which he
feels is unsafe. There is nothing of an emergency nature here.


The pilot wasn't asked to fly a clearance he felt was unsafe. He was aware
of an area of weather that he wouldn't fly through and he was informed that
he couldn't fly through Potomac approach. He needs an alternative that
avoids both of those, that's why the controller asked him his intentions.



ATC would have to give me a good reason for me to do that -- the reason
would have to be more than "Potomac is not accepting traffic."


Why isn't that good enough? Once the center controller is informed that
Potomac approach won't accept you he has to revise your clearance in some
manner so that you do not enter Potomac approach.



Then ATC would have to contact the relevant military aircraft and make the
airspace cold if weather requires their airspace to be used for traffic
already on an IFR clearance.


No, ATC would have to amend your clearance to avoid SUA.



If you tell the controller you are "Unable" to accept an alternate route,
he may well be able to negotiate for more airspace to become available.


But probably not.



Bottom line: A clearance is a clearance. You must accept an assigned
revised clearance if it is within your capability, but if you judge the
revised clearance to be unsafe there is no reason why you need to accept
it and instead ATC will work with you to find a solution.


Now you're whistling a different tune.

"Dave S" wrote in message
ink.net...

Back to the original point... You dont have to accept what they are
offering. But they dont have to offer you what you want (or NEED). They
also cant offer what the "system" wont provide.


In this case ATC wasn't offering anything, the controller just informed the
pilot that he couldn't go through Potomac approach and asked him for his
intentions. A few somehow got the idea that ATC was requiring the pilot to
fly through nasty weather. The pilot needs to decide on an alternative that
avoids the weather and Potomac approach. His options are diverting to
another airport, flying around the other side of Potomac approach, or cancel
IFR and go VFR clear of Class B airspace.

"Dave S" wrote in message
.net...

Your options are to 1) accept the new instructions 2) cancel IFR 3)
declare an emergency in which case you can disregard just about everything
but the laws of physics.


Well, not quite everything, and declaring an emergency isn't quite enough,
you have to actually have one!