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 |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
"Jose" wrote in message
inappropriately confrontational. If Potomac won't accept the clearance that ATC has already given me, that's ATC's problem to solve, and they should offer (or at least appear to be prepared to offer) some solutions. Exactly correct. -------------------- Richard Kaplan www.flyimc.com |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
"Howard Nelson" wrote in message
I am on the west coast and have never heard of an aircraft on an IFR flight plan being refused by the next sector. Is that something common in the NE? In 10 years of IFR flying in the Northeast I have never heard of it before -- that is why this seems so odd to me and a situation where I would query the controller back. -------------------- Richard Kaplan www.flyimc.com |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Howard Nelson wrote:
I am on the west coast and have never heard of an aircraft on an IFR flight plan being refused by the next sector. Is that something common in the NE? Does it just happen to GA aircraft? Amended clearance happens regularly but sector refusal (at least relayed to the pilot) is a new one to me. I've never had it happen to me, either, but I have had several conversations along the lines of: "expect holding at XXXXX, the next sector is not taking your handoff". Then before I get to XXXXX the handoff gets accepted. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave Butler" x@yy wrote in message "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. -------------------- Richard Kaplan www.flyimc.com |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave Butler" x@yy wrote in message ... Howard Nelson wrote: I am on the west coast and have never heard of an aircraft on an IFR flight plan being refused by the next sector. Is that something common in the NE? Does it just happen to GA aircraft? Amended clearance happens regularly but sector refusal (at least relayed to the pilot) is a new one to me. I've never had it happen to me, either, but I have had several conversations along the lines of: "expect holding at XXXXX, the next sector is not taking your handoff". Then before I get to XXXXX the handoff gets accepted. This seems reasonable to me and understandable even if one had to hold. At least as PIC all I have to do is identify the fix, go there and hold at the appropriate altitude. It's just for this reason we are required to practice one hold every 6 months . Howard |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message news:1121648175.acd3b6ead8dfe42fe8c79e5a6ebcabde@t eranews... The response to that is just what you gave in your original description: "Unable Reroute due to weather" The ball is then in their court. You would be quite justified given the weather you described. Does your response mean that you'd like to hold at a fix along your present route until such time that Potomac approach can allow you to continue on it? Do you understand that you cannot simply continue as previously cleared? Why would you refuse any reroute due to weather? You already had an IFR clearance... period. Yes, you are required to accept ATC clearance amendments that are reasonable but you are not required to accept such a clearance if it will in your reasonable judgment endanger the safety of your flight. 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. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
"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. Note the trailing "over" which in this context means "the ball's back in your court"... -- Cheers, John Clonts Temple, Texas N7NZ |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message news:1121648410.b2786fdd685115fb6a5d55851079def3@t eranews... Sure you get re-routes all the time. However, you are under no obligation to accept them if you have good reason. In this case I would have declined the re-route and stood my ground --- end of story. Based on what "good reason"? I have encountered similar situations flying to Long Island where I have been assigned overwater re-routes -- no matter how unhappy or insistent ATC may be I will not accept an overwate route nor am I required to do so. The same logic applies here. There can be nor would there be any adverse consequences for the pilot to exert PIC authority in the interest of flight safety. Whose flight safety? Do you think Potomac approach is denying the 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? |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message news:1121648744.326f39a050170b4a3dc316b048821a11@t eranews... Sure it was an option. That was his clearance and the clearance remains valid until he accepts a new one. So a pilot is under no obligation to accept any change to his clearance? What do you base that on? What about the traffic that's creating the need for the amended clearance? They're also operating on a clearance that remains valid until acceptance of a new one, are they not? |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
At the recent NATCA conference, a controller from Potomac Approach spent all
of his allotted time complaining (justifiably, as far as I know) about operational restrictions that were being forced on the TRACON by higher levels of bureaucracy. This may be a reflection of that pressure. Bob Gardner "Richard Kaplan" wrote in message news:1121713800.47a553973db569e0ceec3e25ba14442c@t eranews... "Howard Nelson" wrote in message I am on the west coast and have never heard of an aircraft on an IFR flight plan being refused by the next sector. Is that something common in the NE? In 10 years of IFR flying in the Northeast I have never heard of it before -- that is why this seems so odd to me and a situation where I would query the controller back. -------------------- Richard Kaplan www.flyimc.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Flap handle activated Climb/Cruise switching | Andy Smielkiewicz | Soaring | 5 | March 14th 05 04:54 AM |
You Want Control? You Can't Handle Control! -- Was 140 dead | ArtKramr | Military Aviation | 0 | March 2nd 04 08:48 PM |
G103 Acro airbrake handle | Andy Durbin | Soaring | 12 | January 18th 04 11:51 PM |
How do you handle your EFB in the cockpit? | greg | Instrument Flight Rules | 5 | November 17th 03 03:47 AM |
Need door handle for 1959 Cessna 175 | Paul Millner | Owning | 0 | July 4th 03 07:36 PM |