"Refusing to Handle You"

"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

"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

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 =----

"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

"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

"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.

"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

"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?

"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?

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