Air Traffic Controller

TrevorHN47 said:
I've never had to be cleared. I just call and ask- they usually give me a time and up I go! The only thing they ask everytime is whether or not everyone going up is a US Citizen.
Click to expand...

I'm asked that sometimes.

Generally, I say "private pilot" and they ask if I have ID, and that's all.

I happen to have the same PIV badge the FAA guys do, but it has never been necessary to mention it.
 
rbridges said:
This is a stupid question, but are we allowed to go in the ATC facilities and observe?
Click to expand...

At KAFW and KDTO, both Class D airports, you can ask the Tower or Ground controller if they have time for a visit. Always I get a yes. Then it's just hit the buzzer at the security door and go on up.

For Fort Worth Center, send an email to [email protected] and you can arrange a group to visit.
 
rbridges said:
This is a stupid question, but are we allowed to go in the ATC facilities and observe?
Click to expand...

From the AIM:

4-1-6. Pilot Visits to Air Traffic Facilities

Pilots are encouraged to visit air traffic facilities (Towers, Centers and FSSs) and familiarize themselves with the ATC system. On rare occasions, facilities may not be able to approve a visit because of ATC workload or other reasons. It is, therefore, requested that pilots contact the facility prior to the visit and advise of the number of persons in the group, the time and date of the proposed visit and the primary interest of the group. With this information available, the facility can prepare an itinerary and have someone available to guide the group through the facility.
Click to expand...

Not only are you allowed to, you are encouraged to.
 
Another vote to give clearance to a fix instead of a DME distance.

I would like to get the 7 mile traffic call because I can turn on my landing light to increase the chance that the other pilot will see me.

Another suggestion. If a minor change to a clearance request will allow you to grant the request more readily, please let me know. For example, I was always getting turned down when asking for a westbound Bravo transit clearance at 6500 ft. Then someone told me that 4500 ft was better because it was above the small regionals and below the larger jets. Now I just about always get a clearance at that altitude. It would have saved me a year of going around the Bravo if a controller had said something like, "Unable at 6500, but possible at 4500", instead of saying "Unable, remain clear of the Bravo".
 
bkspero said:
Another suggestion. If a minor change to a clearance request will allow you to grant the request more readily, please let me know. For example, I was always getting turned down when asking for a westbound Bravo transit clearance at 6500 ft. Then someone told me that 4500 ft was better because it was above the small regionals and below the larger jets. Now I just about always get a clearance at that altitude. It would have saved me a year of going around the Bravo if a controller had said something like, "Unable at 6500, but possible at 4500", instead of saying "Unable, remain clear of the Bravo".
Click to expand...

Ditto! I flew a route for awhile where we were constantly getting delays... then the ground guy said one day, 'you know if you just filed FL230 or below you wouldn't get any delays because you would stay in xxx airspace'. :mad2:
 
bkspero said:
Another vote to give clearance to a fix instead of a DME distance.

I would like to get the 7 mile traffic call because I can turn on my landing light to increase the chance that the other pilot will see me.

Another suggestion. If a minor change to a clearance request will allow you to grant the request more readily, please let me know. For example, I was always getting turned down when asking for a westbound Bravo transit clearance at 6500 ft. Then someone told me that 4500 ft was better because it was above the small regionals and below the larger jets. Now I just about always get a clearance at that altitude. It would have saved me a year of going around the Bravo if a controller had said something like, "Unable at 6500, but possible at 4500", instead of saying "Unable, remain clear of the Bravo".
Click to expand...

Nothing stops YOU from asking. BTDT, with acceptable results.
 
MAKG1 said:
Nothing stops YOU from asking. BTDT, with acceptable results.
Click to expand...

The issue is, the LOAs between different ATC facilities are not published, so pilots have no clue what makes sense to ask for.
 
bkspero said:
I would like to get the 7 mile traffic call because I can turn on my landing light to increase the chance that the other pilot will see me.
Click to expand...

Studies have shown that during daytime, turning on the landing light does not increase the chances that the other pilot will see you. In fact, in many cases, it reduces your chance of being seen as the other pilot spots the shadow you make with the sky and turning on the light reduces the contrast. During the day, you can't determine if another aircraft has their landing light on until they are within a half mile or so.
 
John Collins said:
Studies have shown that during daytime, turning on the landing light does not increase the chances that the other pilot will see you. In fact, in many cases, it reduces your chance of being seen as the other pilot spots the shadow you make with the sky and turning on the light reduces the contrast. During the day, you can't determine if another aircraft has their landing light on until they are within a half mile or so.
Click to expand...

That doesn't pass the sniff test.

I spot landing lights all the time at greater than 1/2 mile in bright daylight. Do you realize how close that is? I might find 5 miles believable.
 
MAKG1 said:
That doesn't pass the sniff test.

I spot landing lights all the time at greater than 1/2 mile in bright daylight. Do you realize how close that is? I might find 5 miles believable.
Click to expand...

I do realize how close a half mile is, that is my point. I have no way of determining how you obtained super human eyesight, but it may be that you just assume you see the landing lights in the bright of day against the sky.

Next time you are at the airport during a cloudless normal day, try this experiment. Spot an aircraft on final approach. Note when you first see it. Next, note when you can determine that the landing light is on.

If that doesn't convince you, then read about the Yahudi project in WWII where installing landing lights on the leading edge of a B24 was done to make them invisible to a surface U boat until it was too late. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yehudi_lights

Still not convinced, see the following quote from the Australian Government - Australian Transport Safety Bureau, Research Report, Limitations of the See-and Avoid Principle, April 1991, reprinted November 2004. Although strobes are not landing lights, they are brighter and they flash. The eye detects the change in contrast with the rods and that is why the alternating pulsing landing lights are easier to spot than a steady landing light which only remains at a single contrast that diminishes the ability of the eye to spot the aircraft. From the study:

Field trials have generally confirmed the ineffectiveness of strobes in daylight. The following U.S. military trials are outlined in a US Air Force report (Schmidlapp 1977).
1. In 1958 the USAF Air Training Command conducted flight tests to compare strobe anticollision lights with rotating beacons. It was concluded that in daylight conditions, no lighting system could be expected to prevent collisions.
2. Further tests in 1958 at the U.S. Air Force’s Wright-Patterson Base again found that strobe lights were ineffective in daylight.
3. A major U.S. Army study was conducted in 1970 in which observers on a hilltop were required to sight approaching helicopters equipped either with strobes of 1800, 2300 or 3300 effective candela or a standard red rotating beacon. It was found that none of the lights were effective against a background of daytime sky, however strobes were helpful when the aircraft was viewed against the ground.
4. U.S. Air Force tests in 1976 found extremely poor performance of strobe lights on aircraft. In all cases, the aircraft was sighted before the strobe. In addition, it was found that after two years service on aircraft, strobe lights were about half as intense as expected.
5. Extensive trials in 1977 by the US Air Force Aeronautical Systems Division used strobes fitted on a tower and observers at various distances and viewing angles. The results indicated that in daylight, even a strobe of 36000 candelas was not particularly conspicuous. However, strobes were more visible when the background illumination was less than 30 candelas per square metre, equivalent to a very dark day.

FAA studies have also concluded that there is no support for the use of strobes in daylight. A 1989 FAA study of the effectiveness of see-and-avoid concluded that ‘Aircraft colours or lights play no significant role in first directing a pilot’s attention to the other aircraft during daytime’ (Graham 1989).

An earlier FAA study considered that there was ‘little hope that lights can be made bright enough to be of any practical value in daylight’ (Rowland and Silver 1972).

A major FAA review of the aircraft exterior lighting literature concluded that ‘During daytime, the brightest practical light is less conspicuous than the aircraft, unless there is low luminescence of background ...’ (Burnstein and Fisher 1977).

In conclusion, while strobes are not likely to be helpful against bright sky backgrounds, they may make aircraft more visible against terrain or in conditions of low light.
Click to expand...
 
The landing light though has a focused reflector which means it will 'flash' as it moves around. The eye is very adept at catching this stuff, it's not as good as a set of pulse lights, but have some affect. There is also the factor of the direction of the natural light in relationship to the artificial light. At best and worst it's a crapshoot whether to have landing lights on or off.
 
It's interesting that the studies all consider locating an aircraft at a higher altitude than the observer. This skews the result. An aircraft silhouette is substantially easier to spot from below than from above.

Where an landing light really helps is when the aircraft is at a lower altitude against a cityscape -- the usual case for looking for traffic on final from downwind or on the opposite base, generally from a lot further than 1/2 mile -- or against the horizon.
 
MAKG1 said:
It's interesting that the studies all consider locating an aircraft at a higher altitude than the observer. This skews the result. An aircraft silhouette is substantially easier to spot from below than from above.

Where an landing light really helps is when the aircraft is at a lower altitude against a cityscape -- the usual case for looking for traffic on final from downwind or on the opposite base, generally from a lot further than 1/2 mile -- or against the horizon.
Click to expand...

True, but traffic at your altitude will be above the horizon.
 
rbridges said:
This is a stupid question, but are we allowed to go in the ATC facilities and observe?
Click to expand...

I was grounded one day due to weather and called up my tower (Class D - KLZU) and asked if I could have a tour. I went up there and stayed for about 45 minutes making sure to keep quiet while they were busy. It was a good experience and I'd recommend it to any other pilots.

Now if I can figure out how to get a tour of the tower at KATL...:wink2:
 
Geico266 said:
Calling all controllers!

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=75891
Click to expand...

Jason W already answered it. 14 CFR 105 requires the PIC of the jump plane to maintain contact with ATC during jump operations. You should've heard ATC on that freq say something like "attention all aircraft jump operations are in progress over XZY at or below 13,000, utilize caution." The pilot of thè jump plane normally transmits the same over CTAF.

If your airport has no parachute symbol, there should've been a NOTAM on it at least 1 hr prior.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
Hi, there used to be a 'Fly a Controller' program that I thought was worthwhile, I flew a few of the LGB controllers 20+ years ago. Your position seems to be a not uncommon one for controllers.

I'm sure there are people that will offer you up a ride in the Philly area, but if not, PM me and I'll hook you up with a CFI that has the world's nicest Comanche based out of North Philly (PNE?) that would be glad to take you up.
Click to expand...

I make it a point to give all new tower guys/ gals here in Jackson Hole a lap around the valley so they can see the area from our point of view.... 100% of them loved the flight and a few ask for rides often.....:yes:
 
evapilotaz said:
One Quick question to a person in ATC. Why did you choose the profession?

I would think a person in ATC has a love for Aviation or something.
Click to expand...


I got lost on the way to pilot school. (Kinda joking)

I was attending an aviation program. Got to tour an ATC facility as part of a class. Saw what the controllers did. Thought it was cool and challenging. Liked the idea of being able to go home after work, and not having to take my work home with me. Haven't regretted a day since.

N801BH said:
I make it a point to give all new tower guys/ gals here in Jackson Hole a lap around the valley so they can see the area from our point of view.... 100% of them loved the flight and a few ask for rides often.....:yes:
Click to expand...


I firmly believe FAM trips and flying is some of the best ways to learn how to become a more efficient and better rounded controller.

Good on you Ben, for helping in that regard.
 
Velocity173 said:
Jason W already answered it. 14 CFR 105 requires the PIC of the jump plane to maintain contact with ATC during jump operations. You should've heard ATC on that freq say something like "attention all aircraft jump operations are in progress over XZY at or below 13,000, utilize caution." The pilot of thè jump plane normally transmits the same over CTAF.

If your airport has no parachute symbol, there should've been a NOTAM on it at least 1 hr prior.
Click to expand...

The problem is a monitored freq gets stepped on when someone transmits on the primary freq. Yes, the radio traffic was that busy. I was no itoring both and had no clue (other than the parachutes) that jumpers were in the air. Why can't jump planes transmit on 2 freqs?
 
It's too bad Levi hasn't been back. It seemed like he had a good attitude.
 
Marauder said:
Gary never bought the Bo?!
Click to expand...

No, We decided to keep the Sundowner despite a very good offer. Instead, we dumped all the money into a second home at the beach. Now if we sell the house up north Wilmington I'll retire and get more flying time.

We gave notice at N57, we're out the end of this month. Moving the plane to her new hangar at KOXB this weekend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top