Blindly Trusting ATC

[Cajun_Flyer]

When I went for my medical a few weeks back, the AME - a seasoned pilot of 30+ years - asked which airport I've doing my training. When I told him, he got a funny look on his face and said, "That's the one that tried to kill me." He then followed with, "My best advice - never blindly trust ATC. Not at that airport, not at ANY airport."

I understood his point. ATC is there to guide in and out the planes as safely as possible, but they are still humans prone to do what humans often do - make mistakes.

My airport is pretty busy and has a control tower. I like it, as it's forced me to get the lingo down pretty fast and quickly learn all of the directions they give in pattern. That said, today... they tried to kill me.

I was coming in to land, as I had been cleared to do by ATC. A Cessna just took off, a Challenger was waiting his turn (so I thought) and I was cleared for another touch & go. Just as I was getting really close to the numbers and about to add my last notch of flaps, the jet suddenly pulled out onto the runway in front of me. My CFI cursed and we did a quick go-around. Apparently, as we were coming in to land and my instructor was giving me direction on best practices, they cleared the other plane for takeoff!

There was no misunderstanding on our part. We were definitely given clearance. How the hell that happened is completely beyond me. My CFI said he was going to file a complaint... he was not happy.

I've caught ATC in other mistakes in the past... such as telling me that I was 3rd in line for landing when I could clearly count four planes in front of me (making me 5th in line). "Small things," but, unfortunately, small mistakes can lead to really big results in GA. So, I'm always on the lookout. After today, I'm obviously going to be even more so.

Anyway, I guess the point of this post is just to reiterate my AME's advice. Respect ATC and use them for guidance, but always sanity check their instructions and maintain full situational awareness at all times.

Anyone have their own ATC stories?

 

[frfly172]

Got my ticket at BED many ,many ,many years ago. They can get very busy,your flying the airplane,always verify the information ,then make your own decisions. By the way welcome to the forum.

 

[write-stuff]

Your friend is right. Controllers can make mistakes, too. Always be prepared to ask for a clarification if you're not sure what they want. And if you think ATC is giving you a wrong turn, speak up!

 

[James331]

I trust ATC 80%

Now if they give me a vector or altitude that will put me into the earth, I won't accept.

It's a team effort, if you screw up they'll let you know, if they screw up do the same. Think for yourself, speak up and remember youre PIC.

 

[ollopa]

PIC is always the final authority for the flight. Do what ATC says but never blindly, and always practice uh.. "defensive flying" I guess. They might lose their jobs but you might lose your life.

Your controllers sound really sloppy and deserving of a few complaints. So far that kind of thing has only happened to me at uncontrolled fields on really crowded days.

 

[MikeS]

No stories, it's too common. When I lived in the San Fernando Valley and flying out of Van Nuys in the 70's planes would routinely get vectored into the surrounding mountains when ceilings were low. I'm exagerrating, it wasn't routine, but it happened and was exagerrated by instructors and others just to make the point of how important it is to maintain situational awareness and also to always question, at least in your mind, anything they tell you.

With GPS situational awareness is no longer the art it once was. Intuition and three-dimensional thinking no longer have much value when you are watching a virtual representation of your aircraft geographically in real time. There's a certain part of our brains that we had to use back then that is falling dormant or no longer even developed. One constant that stays the same however is the possibility of them making a mistake so good on you for learning this early.

Peter Garrison wrote a great article on this subject in Flying July or August before last. Very much worth a read.

http://www.flyingmag.com/technique/proficiency/importance-being-lost

**********

Flying in Africa . . . black Africa, not South Africa . . . ATC really will kill you quick if you pay any attention to them. You pretend to comply over there so they feel like they're doing something and then do what is safest or more efficient or convenient. Pilots coordinate among themselves around busy airports and then tell ATC what they're doing. Over here we do comply and in busy airspace I'm often in awe at how well ATC keeps things moving. It's a pleasure and just damn good fun keeping up with them. It's a game with expensive components that's a lot more fun than anything on X-Box or the other static platforms. ATC usually don't put the duds in busy airspace, but your observation is exceedingly valid. Always know where and what you're doing and if there's any confusion clarify immediately. It might identify you as a rookie to ask what you might be afraid is a dumb question but you are paying their salaries. Clarify anything you have a doubt about and don't hesitate to instantly act on your own as you did in this incident.

 

[Velocity173]

Same goes for pilots. I wouldn't blindly trust any human.

Controllers occasionally make mistakes. They have procedures in place to handle those mistakes. If an error was made by the controller, they'll file on their end and appropriate re-training for the controller.

 

[Clark1961]

Yup, never trust anyone 100%.

I've had a couple interesting experiences. One time I was told to follow a Cessna on downwind and had to reply that I could see the Cessna but was happy to follow the Mooney that was turning into the downwind about a 1/4 mile in front of me. The controller and Mooney driver had a bit of an exchange on that one since the tower thought the Mooney was headed in a different direction...

Another time the tower tried to turn me onto base when a Cessna was about a mile out from me on final. I thought that one was a little tight and declined the turn...

The one that gets me is when I get a STAR that is going to end in vectors to a reliever airport. Lost comms for that can be ugly so I start asking about what they really want me to do pretty quick. I think the controllers take comms for granted. They've obviously never seen behind the panel on many of these spam cans...

 

[jordane93]

They are humans too and make mistakes. I've been cleared to land on the wrong runway, given incorrect taxi instructions, cleared for the wrong approach, cleared to the wrong IAF. As pilots, we also need to learn to not blindly listen and make sure the ATC instruction makes sense.

 

[BigBadLou]

Controllers are humans and make mistakes. Pilots are humans and make mistakes. Humans are humans and make mistakes. I am a human and make mistakes. You are a human (we hope ) and make mistakes.

As others pointed out: trust but verify. You are the PIC, you have the final authority for safety of flight.

Now, don't overthink it, go out there, go fly and HAVE FUN!

 

[mkosmo]

They've tried to kill me, and I've ****ed them off, too. It's a give and take thing

 

[Kritchlow]

I trust ATC 80%

Now if they give me a vector or altitude that will put me into the earth, I won't accept.

lol!!!! This is one of the funniest snafus I've seen!! Of course I knew what you meant, but I had to read this couple times. Classic!!!

 

[Cajun_Flyer]

You are a human (we hope

Well, according to my CFI, I'm a pain in the @ss, which I think is a breed of human.

Ron - thanks for the welcome!

Anyway, I know I'm preaching to the choir with you guys, but figure good advice can never be overstated.

 

[flyingron]

I learned that early on. I trained at a (then) sleepy towered airport that got the first group of new controllers after the PATCO strike. It was a bit comic for a while.

 

[Kelvin]

This video has most likely been posted here before but it is a reminder that both controllers and pilots make mistakes.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kF_x4IU8Ig4&feature=player_embedded

 

[Dr. O]

Cajun it is called VISUAL flight rules for a reason
And you just had an introduction to one of the reasons

The other point to remember is ATC gives out what they consider to be instructions, except I always consider them suggestions. Now I will say in their defense that they mean well. And so does my dog but that doesn't prevent him from stepping into some fresh steaming doo doo and then wanting back into the house wagging his tail and all happy. It's up to me to decide what happens next, not him.

I have been flying a long time. I like controllers. They are good people. I don't have a bunch of stories about conflict with ATC to tell you; just a few. In every one of those few "I" decided what I would do next and it worked out well for both of us.

Now, this thread has missed the real culprit - the jet that pulled onto the active without raising his eyes from the take-off check list. Had I been in your cockpit I would have been after him with a blow torch for his rear end

 

[Anymouse]

Controllers are humans and make mistakes. Pilots are humans and make mistakes. Humans are humans and make mistakes. I am a human and make mistakes. You are a human (we hope ) and make mistakes.

I know I'm not human because I never make a misteak.

Flying in Africa . . . black Africa, not South Africa . . . ATC really will kill you quick if you pay any attention to them. You pretend to comply over there so they feel like they're doing something and then do what is safest or more efficient or convenient. Pilots coordinate among themselves around busy airports and then tell ATC what they're doing. Over here we do comply and in busy airspace I'm often in awe at how well ATC keeps things moving. It's a pleasure and just damn good fun keeping up with them. It's a game with expensive components that's a lot more fun than anything on X-Box or the other static platforms. ATC usually don't put the duds in busy airspace, but your observation is exceedingly valid. Always know where and what you're doing and if there's any confusion clarify immediately. It might identify you as a rookie to ask what you might be afraid is a dumb question but you are paying their salaries. Clarify anything you have a doubt about and don't hesitate to instantly act on your own as you did in this incident.

Me: Tower, request visual approach.
Tower: Cleared for the XXX approach. Report established on the arc.
Me: Request visual approach. I have the field in sight.
Tower: Roger, cleared for the visual approach. Report established on the arc.

sigh...

 

[EdFred]

I know I'm not human because I never make a misteak.

You're a rare breed. Or is that medium rare?

 

[GMascelli]

...As others pointed out: trust but verify. You are the PIC, you have the final authority for safety of flight.

+1 If someone screws up we pay the price.

On a lighter note......Cajun, Welcome to POA!!

 

[Cajun_Flyer]

On a lighter note......Cajun, Welcome to POA!!

Thanks!

 

[wrbix]

Doveryai no proveryai >> Trust, but verify.
Ronald Reagan

 

[bullwinkle]

The problem is that the FARs are clear that we must obey ATC. I've had to ask them for confirmation a couple of times when I was sure they were making a mistake. Usually they catch the mistake.

Once they repeated the same instruction, which was for a wrong direction turn. There was no danger in obeying, so I made what should have been a 10° turn to the left as a 350° to the right as directed. The controller got peeved and said "Radar track shows you now northbound, say intentions". I replied "My intention is to make a right turn to 180 per instructions". He sheepishly replied "oh sorry, I meant a left turn"...

It happens. Give them the chance to correct the mistake, if they don't and there is no danger, then obey the instruction. If there *is* danger say "unable due to X" and if they still insist and it's not safe declare an emergency.

 

[orange]

Also, when using flight following too many people think they can stop looking for traffic because ATC is watching out for them. WRONG! I almost learned this lesson the hard way over Connecticut earlier this year on one of my cross country solos. I had FF so I figured that I didn't need to scan as usual. Then I see a Cessna at my 10-11 zoon by me a few hundred feet away. I think (hope) he saw me because I sure didn't see him until it was too late to do anything. Not one word from ATC before, during, or after we passed each other. I was going northeast so I was at 5500, I don't know why he was at the same altitude going southwest.

Bottom line: Scan as you normally would, let ATC be a backup that may or may not help.

 

[exncsurfer]

Cajun,
I had the same thing as you last month, ATC cleared a regional jet to pull out in front of me, it was close enough where I instantly said 'what?'(to the CFI), the CFI thought it necessary to deviate and called ATC for new instructions to circle back. We were probably around 200 ft AGL. Maybe they had time to get out, maybe not, but it seemed too close for comfort, then there is wake turbulence to consider.

Maybe they thought the jet would respond quicker?

Anyway, it happens, I got a good lesson that day.

 

[Captain]

My advise is to find a new CFI.

 

[Cajun_Flyer]

My advise is to find a new CFI.

Why would I do something stupid like that? He's awesome.

 

[Captain]

Why would I do something stupid like that? He's awesome.

He wants to file a complaint over a go around? I promise if someone filed a complaint against him every time he made a mistake he'd be more grounded than an anvil on a lightning rod.

A go around is a simple thing and it should have been a teaching moment for you. Instead you learned whenever ATC screws up file a complaint.

That said, I recognize I'm making a bold statement based on one example provided by you and that's not fair either. Still, based on all evidence presented to me I'd find a new CFI.

 

[Cajun_Flyer]

He wants to file a complaint over a go around? I promise if someone filed a complaint against him every time he made a mistake he'd be more grounded than an anvil on a lightning rod.

A go around is a simple thing and it should have been a teaching moment for you. Instead you learned whenever ATC screws up file a complaint.

That said, I recognize I'm making a bold statement based on one example provided by you and that's not fair either. Still, based on all evidence presented to me I'd find a new CFI.

I appreciate your advice, but no thank you. I have a fantastic CFI. And he had a right to be ****ed. As did I. Don't know if he was really going to file a complaint or if he was just venting in the plane, but I wouldn't blame him if he did. Also, he definitely made it a teaching lesson. Talked me through the go-around and all the steps involved. It was a great learning experience - both in how to do go-arounds and how never to fully trust ATC.

Again, thanks for the concern regarding my CFI's abilities, but I have zero doubts and full faith in him.

Best to you and safe flying!

 

[Clark1961]

I never agree with "captain" as a matter of principal.

In this case I agree that a simple, correctable ATC screw-up is no reason to make a complaint either formally or informally. So far the worst I've gotten from ATC is "it happens" when I've confessed to a screw-up.

No flight is perfect. Some come close but there's always something that could have gone better.

 

[petrolero]

Like Reagan said... trust but verify.

 

[BigBadLou]

I know I'm not human because I never make a misteak.

You're a rare breed. Or is that medium rare?

Me: Tower, request visual approach.
Tower: Cleared for the XXX approach. Report established on the arc.
Me: Request visual approach. I have the field in sight.
Tower: Roger, cleared for the visual approach. Report established on the arc.

sigh...

"Roger, I am established on the arc from base to final".

 

[Captain]

I appreciate your advice, but no thank you. I have a fantastic CFI. And he had a right to be ****ed. As did I. Don't know if he was really going to file a complaint or if he was just venting in the plane, but I wouldn't blame him if he did. Also, he definitely made it a teaching lesson. Talked me through the go-around and all the steps involved. It was a great learning experience - both in how to do go-arounds and how never to fully trust ATC.

Again, thanks for the concern regarding my CFI's abilities, but I have zero doubts and full faith in him.

Best to you and safe flying!

The bold bit is where we disagree. Heck, I'd be more upset at the Challenger crew that failed to clear final...but I sure wouldn't file complaints over nothing happening except a GA. Reports are for bent metal and doctor visits.

 

[kgruber]

"""""Mt Constance, WA/1975

Date 21 Mar 1975 Cause: Conltrolled Flt into Terrain Condition D/N Night
Wing/Base: 62n MAW/KTCM Location: Mt Constance WA IMC/VMC IMC
Tail #: 64-0641 Fatalities: 10 Crew/6 Passengers Fatigue? Yes
Synopsis: Returning to home station after a long overseas mission, the C-141 was cleared for an enroute descent. During the descent, the air traffic controller confused call signs with another aircraft and cleared the Starlifter for a descent below minimum vectoring altitude. The aircraft crashed into Mt. Constance, with the loss of 10 crew members and 6 passengers.

At 2300 local time, as they approached the coast of Washington State at FL370, in stormy weather, the crew had already had a long duty day. Flying from Clark with stops at Kadena, Yokota, and finally McChord, they had been up for more than 28 hours. The crew was tired and ready to be home. At 90 miles from McChord, they were given a descent clearance to 15,000’, and given a frequency change. On the new frequency, they were given a clearance to 10,000 feet. This Seattle Type Center controller was also controlling a Navy A-6 (Call sign "Navy V 28323") returning to NAS Whidbey. Still 60 miles from McChord, the C-141 reported level at 10,000. The controller directed "…maintain five thousand". The flight responded "Five Thousand. MAC 40641 is out of ten". A couple minutes later, the A-6 pilot requested further descent. The controller, confused why the Navy jet hadn’t yet descended, re-cleared him to 5000 feet. About that time, the controller at Seattle Approach Control noticed that he could not find the C-141 on his radar scope, so contacted the original controller at Seattle Center . Repeated radio calls failed to raise the Starlifter.

No one on the crew of three Pilots and three Navigators, including an Examiner Navigator had noticed the erroneous descent clearance below the sector altitude or the unusually early descent. The C-141 had impacted the near vertical northwest face of Mt. Name Constance , on the east slope of the Olympic Mountains , 150 feet from the top of the 7743’ peak. There were no survivors among the 10 crew members and 6 passengers."""""

 

[Caramon13]

Welcome to POA Cajun! Everyone's got an opinion of course.

I fly out of a very busy class C that's pretty close to a class Bravo shelf. I can't ever get around the pattern without a "extend your base/downwind/upwind/crosswind" or "make a left/right 360" (twice sometimes).

They pack 'em in here and it is a training tower so I get a lot of people chiming in twice (sometimes with conflicting instructions).

One situation that came up for me when I was still in training for my PPL, I was about maybe 3 miles from the field on final, cleared for landing told to continue. Then tower came on and said "Bugsmasher XXX you are still cleared to land, #3". I thought, that can't be right, I'm on short final and I'm #3 for landing?

They were trying to shove an airplane and a helicopter in front of me. I kept looking for the traffic with one hand on the throttle ready for a go-around or expecting a 360 (which I ultimately got).

I do trust ATC where I am based, but I also think that sometimes they are a bit "optimistic".

We had a really bad accident here a decade or so.

EDIT: It was two planes on takeoff, not one landing one taking off..NTSB article here.

Glad it worked out in your case, definitely one to remember when you are out there flying on your own.

 

[Cajun_Flyer]

The bold bit is where we disagree. Heck, I'd be more upset at the Challenger crew that failed to clear final...but I sure wouldn't file complaints over nothing happening except a GA. Reports are for bent metal and doctor visits.

Honestly, if it had been the only ATC screw up of that morning, I think he would have been calmer about it. But that was the last (and biggest) in a series. It was a very frustrating morning. Again, I don't know if he was really serious about filing a complaint or not, but after all that had been going on that morning with them, I certainly don't blame him for being mad.

Oh, and trust me, we were both equally as annoyed at the jet. I don't know about others, but I always check the sky before I taxi out. We look both ways when we drive through intersections, why don't people do the same in their planes?!

 

[Captain]

Honestly, if it had been the only ATC screw up of that morning, I think he would have been calmer about it. But that was the last (and biggest) in a series. It was a very frustrating morning. Again, I don't know if he was really serious about filing a complaint or not, but after all that had been going on that morning with them, I certainly don't blame him for being mad.

Oh, and trust me, we were both equally as annoyed at the jet. I don't know about others, but I always check the sky before I taxi out. We look both ways when we drive through intersections, why don't people do the same in their planes?!

Well, that does change things.

Okay, you have my permission to keep your CFI.

 

[Anymouse]

I know I'm not human because I never make a misteak.

You're a rare breed. Or is that medium rare?

Me: Tower, request visual approach.
Tower: Cleared for the XXX approach. Report established on the arc.
Me: Request visual approach. I have the field in sight.
Tower: Roger, cleared for the visual approach. Report established on the arc.

sigh...

"Roger, I am established on the arc from base to final".

That statement is so close that you've gone from cold to hot and you're now well done!

 

[Cajun_Flyer]

Well, that does change things.

Okay, you have my permission to keep your CFI.

Honestly, if I was going to fire him for anything, it would be for being a Patriots fan. (...he was also in a sour mood because they lost the night before! lol)

 

[Ravioli]

I've had the occasional departure cleared for takeoff when I was on a 2-mile final. When I see a plane moving toward the hold short line I just key the mike and say "Cessna123 short final" and the tower promptly cancels their take off clearance and instructs them to hold short. Never have had them send me around or change to the parallel runway.

I'm wondering what the rest of the story is. Was there weather and they were getting expedited for a void time? How far out did the CFI see the traffic on the ground moving to the line?

 

[Velocity173]

Honestly, if it had been the only ATC screw up of that morning, I think he would have been calmer about it. But that was the last (and biggest) in a series. It was a very frustrating morning. Again, I don't know if he was really serious about filing a complaint or not, but after all that had been going on that morning with them, I certainly don't blame him for being mad.

Oh, and trust me, we were both equally as annoyed at the jet. I don't know about others, but I always check the sky before I taxi out. We look both ways when we drive through intersections, why don't people do the same in their planes?!

If this facility has a history of errors then your CFI needs to schedule an appointment with facility management and discuss these errors. This could be a misunderstanding on the part of your CFI about required ATC separation. We get a lot of POA ATC stories on here that have nothing to do with an ATC error, such as the popular misconception of needing a clear runway for take off / landing clearance. 3,000, 4,500 and even 6,000 ft runway sep can seem awfully close to the uninitiated.

So, talk to management, not the Twr sup and bring up specific gripes that you might have. If they can't explain their actions for these suspected mistakes or they actually admit to a series of mistakes, then I'd take it up with the local FSDO.