SWA Wants Tower’s Number

Velocity173

Touchdown! Greaser!
PoA Supporter
Joined
Jul 3, 2012
Messages
15,113
Display Name

Display name:
Velocity173
Too much extraneous verbiage. Just concentrate on separating your traffic.

 
She sounds like she's auditioning for something. The voices in my head are hearing 'Welcome Kmart Shoppers'
 
Too much extraneous verbiage. Just concentrate on separating your traffic.

From the audio, it sounds to me like the "line up and wait" flight crew was dicking around too much. She asked them to speed it up, it wasn't enough, so she ordered the go-around to keep things safe.

From the tone of the Southwest crew, I think they were annoyed that they were told to go-around. I suspect they had a visual on the conflicting traffic, determined there would be no conflict, and weren't happy the chick sent them on the go-around. Why do I think this? Because they wanted to know "why". The "why" was pretty ****ing obvious unless they thought it was a non-issue.

Anyhow this whole thing is a huge yawn. There is not enough information with the audio alone to determine who is at fault. Blaming it on the controller because she was friendly is laughable.
 
Last edited:
From the audio, it sounds to me like the "line up and wait" flight crew was dicking around too much. She asked them to speed it up, it wasn't enough, so she ordered the go-around to keep things safe.

From the tone of the Southwest crew, I think they were annoyed that they were told to go-around. I suspect they had a visual on the conflicting traffic, determined there would be no conflict, and weren't happy the chick sent them on the go-around. Why do I think this? Because they wanted to know "why". The "why" was pretty ****ing obvious unless they thought it was a non-issue.

Anyhow this whole thing is a huge yawn. There is not enough information with the audio alone to determine who is at fault. Blaming it on the controller because she was friendly is laughable.

I never blamed the controller. Just an observation. The SWA pilot might want to use visual but tower requires the departure to be past the intersection by the time SWA crosses landing threshold.
 
Its like everyday life. Sometimes you get chicken salad and sometimes chicken excrement and sometimes u have to make chicken salad with the excrement. I have had to go around for much dummer things. She did her job with a smile heard through her voice. I have always experienced landing planes being given priority at towered airports Sincerely
 
I couldn’t work with her eight hours a day. Fingernails on a chalkboard. I used to work with a woman who used a fake British accent on the radio. I’ve worked with several controllers who had a social voice and a “controlling” voice; both were equally annoying
 
Nah, she's just being friendly. Some of us prefer those friendly controllers.
Yeah. I like friendly Controllers, especially ones with a little wit. They’re fun to work with. I find her a little over the top though. The word cloying comes to mind.
 
It’s like everyday life. Sometimes you get chicken salad and sometimes chicken excrement and sometimes u have to make chicken salad with the excrement. I have had to go around for much dummer things. She did her job with a smile heard through her voice. I have always experienced landing planes being given priority at towered airports Sincerely
I think I was getting the shivers listening to it. I ain’t doing it again to make sure
 
Yeah. I like friendly Controllers, especially ones with a little wit. They’re fun to work with. I find her a little over the top though. The word cloying comes to mind.
Yep, it’s like a controller I used to work with doing GCAs. Phraseology was so extraneous. “You’re left of course but correcting nicely now and you’re going above, just a shade above glide path.”

There’s friendly but then there’s friendly with so much information added that something critical could get missed.
 
In my little single engine airplane I could go around 10 times and it's not a big deal. But in those airliners, probably a little more stressful watching that fuel go up in smoke after the second go around. I'm sure it was a cordial call...
 
I asked for the tower's number once. I was transiting above their airspace and thought I was being courteous by talking to them. Shortly before I crossed over runway centerline I was told to stay north of centerline, after a few minutes was then told to make a right 360. I was 2000' above their airspace at a class D. They asked why I wanted the number, I said "I'm not even in your airspace, I am not required to talk to you, I was trying to be nice to let you know my intentions, and all you are doing is jacking me around". They gave me the number, when I got on the ground at a nearby airport, I called them. It was a trainee in the tower, but the trainER said that he would do it again. They had traffic departing that could be a conflict, I asked why the jet was more important than me, why not let me pass for 3 minutes and then launch the jet. It went on for over an hour.

I can say that next time, I won't be courteous.
 
When she sent them back to Approach she said "I'm sorry", and I'm pretty sure she knew she screwed up the timing enough to call the go around.

I like friendly, but I'm used to flying in very busy airspace where there isn't much, if any, time for anything beyond what is strictly needed. I'd probably find this annoying if more than occasionally. When she said "keep it rolling" she probably should have said "No delay". The pilot-controller glossary doesn't specify precise phrasing for this situation (that I could find), but I'm much more used to hearing this as "no delay".
 
There is no point in attempting to escalate things over the air. All you need do is write down the frequency and time and call the facility (the numbers aren't secret) during the next business day. I've had tapes pulled in the past due to unprofessional behavior by controllers at IAD.
 
When I was a kid, my friend's and I all referred to one of our friend's mom as "plastic mom"...she was always smiling, and talking super-sweet / super-friendly...A L W A Y S! She sometimes would be quite obviously not happy: she would have huge tears welling up in her eyes but all the while still smiling and talking all friendly. This controller is "plastic mom" reincarnated. I'm with @Timbeck2 ... no way for 8 hours a day, no way.
 
I asked for the tower's number once. I was transiting above their airspace and thought I was being courteous by talking to them. Shortly before I crossed over runway centerline I was told to stay north of centerline, after a few minutes was then told to make a right 360. I was 2000' above their airspace at a class D. They asked why I wanted the number, I said "I'm not even in your airspace, I am not required to talk to you, I was trying to be nice to let you know my intentions, and all you are doing is jacking me around". They gave me the number, when I got on the ground at a nearby airport, I called them. It was a trainee in the tower, but the trainER said that he would do it again. They had traffic departing that could be a conflict, I asked why the jet was more important than me, why not let me pass for 3 minutes and then launch the jet. It went on for over an hour.

I can say that next time, I won't be courteous.

Interesting. I called a Class D recently because I was 700 ft above their airspace just crossing over about midway though a 2 hr VFR flight. (I’ll get to why in a moment). Tower sounded flustered and told me to stay outside Class D and call Approach freq. I told him it was just a courtesy call. Told me sternly to switch to approach freq. I thought about just ignoring it, but then I thought “I started this BS, shoulda left well enough alone”. Switched to Approach after about 60 seconds of consideration. Approach was blind calling me when I tuned in. Gave me a squawk code and altimeter setting. They gave me a “squawk vfr, freq change approved” a few miles later.

Why did I do that? I did this because I was practicing localizer tracking over a Class D once with a CFI. Weren’t taking to tower because we were 1k ft above airspace. We were monitoring local approach, not talking, 1200 squawk. Approach controller blind called us by tail number. Said tower wanted to talk to us. Called up tower on the radio and they were upset. They had a tiny business jet that took off and was climbing like gangbusters, and we were almost in the way. We said we were not in Class D, but they said we should have been talking to them.

So should I have not learned the lesson to talk the first time? Should I have unlearned it based on my second experience? Sometimes can’t win when you expect the ATC system to be consistent, but it’s run by humans.
 
There was an interesting exchange at KGYR on Sept 28 at around 1815-1825 Zulu.

Tower gave a jet a go-around due to conflicting traffic on the ground; jet pilot unhappy that tower made a call that pilot thought was too conservative. Wanted a number to call.

I tried to find it on LiveATC but I’m a dinosaur.
 
Interesting. I called a Class D recently because I was 700 ft above their airspace just crossing over about midway though a 2 hr VFR flight. (I’ll get to why in a moment). Tower sounded flustered and told me to stay outside Class D and call Approach freq. I told him it was just a courtesy call. Told me sternly to switch to approach freq. I thought about just ignoring it, but then I thought “I started this BS, shoulda left well enough alone”. Switched to Approach after about 60 seconds of consideration. Approach was blind calling me when I tuned in. Gave me a squawk code and altimeter setting. They gave me a “squawk vfr, freq change approved” a few miles later.

Why did I do that? I did this because I was practicing localizer tracking over a Class D once with a CFI. Weren’t taking to tower because we were 1k ft above airspace. We were monitoring local approach, not talking, 1200 squawk. Approach controller blind called us by tail number. Said tower wanted to talk to us. Called up tower on the radio and they were upset. They had a tiny business jet that took off and was climbing like gangbusters, and we were almost in the way. We said we were not in Class D, but they said we should have been talking to them.

So should I have not learned the lesson to talk the first time? Should I have unlearned it based on my second experience? Sometimes can’t win when you expect the ATC system to be consistent, but it’s run by humans.
Some may view this as heresy, but when they call you in the blind, there's no rule that says you have to answer.
 
Some may view this as heresy, but when they call you in the blind, there's no rule that says you have to answer.
They don’t call people in the blind because they’re lonely. They call because it’s possible you could prang into something else and as controllers, they kinda want to prevent that
 
They don’t call people in the blind because they’re lonely. They call because it’s possible you could prang into something else and as controllers, they kinda want to prevent that

In the case mentioned though, they should have just told the small business jet to cool their heels and hold altitude for one minute and they would be past the bug smasher.

Tim
 
They don’t call people in the blind because they’re lonely. They call because it’s possible you could prang into something else and as controllers, they kinda want to prevent that
Or they think you may have gone missing.
 
There was an interesting exchange at KGYR on Sept 28 at around 1815-1825 Zulu.

Tower gave a jet a go-around due to conflicting traffic on the ground; jet pilot unhappy that tower made a call that pilot thought was too conservative. Wanted a number to call.

I tried to find it on LiveATC but I’m a dinosaur.
Kelsey from 74 Gear on YouTube recently did a video about a situation in San Diego where it seems like the controller lost the SA bubble. They cleared a Citation to land, then cleared a SWA plane to lineup and wait followed by passing clearance changes to #4 in sequence. Citation had to go around and then the SWA had to taxi clear to land another plane in line for landing.
 
They don’t call people in the blind because they’re lonely. They call because it’s possible you could prang into something else and as controllers, they kinda want to prevent that
Whether it's advisable to ignore the call is a different issue.
 
Some may view this as heresy, but when they call you in the blind, there's no rule that says you have to answer.
Nope. Never seen no rule explicitly about that. But there is a rule. It’s a law actually. 91.123 b. That don’t say nuthin’ ‘bout ya had to have already established two way radio communications first. They give an instruction to you, ya gotsta to do it, according to the letter of that law. So if ya gets like into like a trial, for gawds sake don’t say ya heard the instruction but in your opinion it doesn’t count because you hadn’t already been chatting with the Controller first.
 
Nope. Never seen no rule explicitly about that. But there is a rule. It’s a law actually. 91.123 b. That don’t say nuthin’ ‘bout ya had to have already established two way radio communications first. They give an instruction to you, ya gotsta to do it, according to the letter of that law. So if ya gets like into like a trial, for gawds sake don’t say ya heard the instruction but in your opinion it doesn’t count because you hadn’t already been chatting with the Controller first.

Hmmmm..... Not even an exception for NORDO aircraft. And there's no req't that, even having a radio, you must be on their frequency. So are instructions given by telepathy? Maybe the controller hollers out the tower window to the guy in a NORDO Cub.

The rule reads:
(b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.

So if you're not in an airport delta but that airport's controller gives you an instruction, are you obliged to follow? You're in an area where control by ARTCC (for example) is excercised, but NOT control by the tower guy who's trying to give you an instruction.
 
Nope. Never seen no rule explicitly about that. But there is a rule. It’s a law actually. 91.123 b. That don’t say nuthin’ ‘bout ya had to have already established two way radio communications first. They give an instruction to you, ya gotsta to do it, according to the letter of that law. So if ya gets like into like a trial, for gawds sake don’t say ya heard the instruction but in your opinion it doesn’t count because you hadn’t already been chatting with the Controller first.
In my experience, they don't give you an instruction until you answer. (I haven't tried not answering, however.)
 
Hmmmm..... Not even an exception for NORDO aircraft. And there's no req't that, even having a radio, you must be on their frequency. So are instructions given by telepathy? Maybe the controller hollers out the tower window to the guy in a NORDO Cub.

The rule reads:
(b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.

So if you're not in an airport delta but that airport's controller gives you an instruction, are you obliged to follow? You're in an area where control by ARTCC (for example) is excercised, but NOT control by the tower guy who's trying to give you an instruction.
My understanding is that once you exit a class D area, changing frequencies without any further conversation is a normal procedure. If they have time, Tower may say "frequency change approved," but it's not required.
 
There's a difference between stopping listening to a frequency that no longer applies to you and ignoring an instruction to do something.

If ATC says "contact Atlanta Center on 125.15," I assume that ZTL is expecting me and even if I want to decline further services, I need to call them and tell them (or tell the guy who handed me off). Just disappearing is likely to have them hunting you down.

If ATC says "For further advisories, contact..." Then that's just a hint to me what the facility that will help me is, and I'm free to take it or leave it.
 
In my experience, they don't give you an instruction until you answer. (I haven't tried not answering, however.)
I agree it would probably be unusual for them to give you an instruction in the cold call.
 
Last edited:
Hmmmm..... Not even an exception for NORDO aircraft. And there's no req't that, even having a radio, you must be on their frequency. So are instructions given by telepathy? Maybe the controller hollers out the tower window to the guy in a NORDO Cub.

The rule reads:
(b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.

So if you're not in an airport delta but that airport's controller gives you an instruction, are you obliged to follow? You're in an area where control by ARTCC (for example) is excercised, but NOT control by the tower guy who's trying to give you an instruction.
For a NORDO plane the whole discussion is not pertinent. As far as the Cub goes, maybe by carrier pigeon?:goofy:
 
There's a difference between stopping listening to a frequency that no longer applies to you and ignoring an instruction to do something.

If ATC says "contact Atlanta Center on 125.15," I assume that ZTL is expecting me and even if I want to decline further services, I need to call them and tell them (or tell the guy who handed me off). Just disappearing is likely to have them hunting you down.

If ATC says "For further advisories, contact..." Then that's just a hint to me what the facility that will help me is, and I'm free to take it or leave it.
There's also a difference between being handed off to another frequency and ATC cold-calling you when you haven't previously been in contact with anyone.
 
There's also a difference between being handed off to another frequency and ATC cold-calling you when you haven't previously been in contact with anyone.
But if they cold call you in class E airspace and give you an instruction, do you have to comply?
 
If ATC gives me an instruction, I'm gonna follow it. I'll think about the details and participate in a ten page PoA thread about it later. ;)
 
Back
Top