ATC and you

[redlaser]

Going back a few years I remember meeting with TC because four of my instructors had not complied with air traffic control instructions for different reasons, this happened within a two week period, After meeting with TC all cases were dropped and later a meeting was set up with Nav Canada air traffic controllers to address the situation, Have you ever been written up for a non compliance with an instruction by a controller. Be it Ground or Air. And what was the outcome.

[digits_]

Yup. Got a phone call for a CADOR, related to ATC instruction/vector. Talked on the phone. Our FTU gets a visit from 2 TC inspectors for a regular audit. They ask about the CADOR, I give them a written report. They tell me they consider the matter closed and "ah well, stuff happens". 3 months later we get a fine from enforcement.
Call them, guy was a bit pissed off because "You didn't get back to us, so we fined you". Told them about the meeting with the 2 TC inspectors. "They didn't get back to me with your report, they retired, we can't undo the fine, sorry".

Fun!

[gustind]

We were on approach into Regina. The weather was at least 5SM of visibility at 5,000ft give or take, rain and turbulence. We were vectored direct some fix and the second we rolled out on our heading, we experienced severe turbulence. We were shaking so badly the primary flight display was just a blur of colours on a black screen. Needless to say ,and without a question or doubt, we turned back to our original heading. It was a few seconds before the pilot monitoring could get a word in. ATC's response was a simple, "advise when you are able direct to XXXXX." Intentional non-compliance, nothing happened.

Another time I was flying in the descent and the PM changed the STAR without confirming anything with me. I also did not ask him to confirm anything before inserting it. Needless to say, he closed the STAR onto the ILS approach in the FMS and neither of us caught it. We got to the downwind termination point and the aircraft started turning. We caught it too late into the turn, ATC noticed it and CADOR'd it. I filed a one paragraph SMS with my company and never heard back from it. Complete mistake on our part, CADOR.

[‘Bob’]

The FMS is prone to finger problems but I’ve never had a PM do that to me.

Still, any time I’m coming to a DTW or an IF I always look at the MFD and legs page to see what the plane will do next, ready to disconnect the autopilot if it isn’t as briefed or instructed.

[redlaser]

Strange thing happened to me a couple of months ago, after I was cleared for a landing I decided to land long on the runway to save time in taxxi time because my destination was at the far end of the runway, After clearing the runway the controller advised me that I should have told him if I intended to land long, btw no exit had been mentioned in the initial landing clearance, Did that controller make up a new rule?,

[wordstwice]

Landing long like that without asking first can, at the very least piss off the controller, and at the worst, cause an overshoot behind you.

It would take pages and pages to explain all the issues with doing such a manoeuvre without asking first so I won’t but I will say that you should have asked first.

[redlaser]

When being cleared to land give the pilot the full runway length unless the controller gives additional instructions, such as land short if able, or something else, What would happen if your brakes failed on landing and the controller positioned an aircraft for take off midway down the runway,

[tailgunner]

Wordstwice,
I have to disagree and agree. Once cleared to land, the runway is yours. You can clear at whatever exit works the best.
That being said, ATC has expectations on which exit they plan you to take and they formulate their plans/spacing based on that. But do you need to tell them? Nope.
Don’t let ATC’s spacing or a following traffic spacing to dictate a hurried runway departure. Slow down and make a safe turn. If you end up in the mud, it’s you who will bear the responsibility and not ATC

[wordstwice]

So you guys are giving some extreme examples to make your point which isn’t on fair ground. No one ever expects an aircraft to make an exit that wouldn’t otherwise be safe, we are not talking about this we are taking about INTENTIONALllY using the entire runway length to use the exit that gives you the best taxi.

Runway occupancy times are used to determine the AAR for the runway and it’s based on real world recording of aircraft landing and exiting the runway at the first safe available exit. If pilots just chose the last exit because that’s where their gate or ramp is it would greatly reduce the AAR and reduce the flow rate thus increasing delays into that airport.

I’ll use YUL as an example, if every aircraft landing 24L went to end because they think they “own” the entire runway then there would be multiple unnecessary overshoots.

I’ll ask you this, how would you feel if you were on a two mile final and can see the guy in front taking these liberties with the runway length causing you to go around?


An excerpt out of the FARAIM.....don’t have time to produce the Canadian version;

The following procedures must be followed after landing and reaching taxi speed.
a. Exit the runway without delay at the first available taxiway or on a taxiway as instructed by ATC. Pilots must not exit the landing runway onto another runway unless authorized by ATC. At airports with an operating control tower, pilots should not stop or reverse course on the runway without first obtaining ATC approval

[linecrew]

I’ll ask you this, how would you feel if you were on a two mile final and can see the guy in front taking these liberties with the runway length causing you to go around?

I'll ask you this, if you as a controller are running aircraft "tight" together why would you not be proactive and either tell the landed aircraft where to exit or tell them which taxiway to expect to exit on when giving them their landing clearance? Especially based on your supporting statements, it seems like a prudent move.

I have been told many times which taxiway to plan to exit on by ATC.

[wordstwice]

I absolutely would include that instruction if I thought it was necessary, never said I wouldn’t and I encourage others to do the same.

Also, if someone took the liberty of using the entire runway I also wouldn’t say anything to them.... but that’s just me. We aren’t talking about what I, personally, would or would not do.

[photofly]

It seems straightforward to me. If you’re going to do something ATC might not be expecting, say so, first.

[rookiepilot]

Another tip:

When IMC in a slow bug smasher landing at an unfamiliar (uncontrolled ) airport, with a much faster Learjet in the hold waiting for you to land and cancel IFR, don't cancel IFR with centre too soon on final.....as I did to be helpful -- I landed and had to backtrack quickly as the rapidly approaching lights appeared out of the rain clouds.....guy was cleared in by center and caught up quickly......

[Bede]

Once cleared to land, the runway is yours. You can clear at whatever exit works the best.

I know what you're getting at with the rest of your post, but if we want ATC to move traffic, we have to play our part.
I'm not for rushing, but if you're going into LGA or SFO, you better be ready when it's your turn and when it's time for you to get off the runway, you exit where they're expecting you to. Is that written anywhere? Not that I know of, but that's how the game is played.

[DHC-1 Jockey]

At a tower I used to work at, one particular aircraft's base was at the far end of the usual runway in use (over 8000' long runway).

If we didn't offer it, he always requested the long landing. The rules being that the preceding aircraft must clear the runway before a following aircraft crosses the threshold.

Now, in reality a Cessna 8000 feet down the runway is no risk to a Katana crossing the threshold 8000 feet back, but the rules are the rules.

If the normal expectation is to land in the first third of the runway and make the first available exit (safely) and that's what the controller is banking on with the second aircraft on short final and you decide to roll it all the way to the end, it WILL cause an overshoot. Not because safety is compromised necessarily, but because that's what the rules say to do.

[PilotDAR]

With one memorable exception, I've always had truly excellent service form ATC. I have found ATC to be an important resource for flying safety, and a big help when I needed it. I'm not perfect, and neither are they, but we've always managed.

The only bad experience was not with me, but I was a "hearing" witness to an FSS staff member being really and needlessly terse with a pilot I believed to be a solo cross country student. I reassured her on another frequency, that I though her actions had been fine, and that the FSS person was unfairly harsh with her. Then I called TC and asked them to listen to the tapes from that airport for the day. The TC guy agreed with me that FSS had been out of line with the other pilot. So, I felt the system worked.

[ATC_Anstey]

I work at an airport with a runway of significantly more length than what a Cessna will reasonably need where the flight school based at the airport is connected to the taxiway at the end of the runway. Exiting on a reasonable taxiway often will cause a long wait to taxi in because of the long taxi out and the fact it's quite busy on a good weather day so there's usually someone taxiing out. This does result in a decent amount of long landing requests. The current rules allow for "landing distance available" runway separation where if 1 aircraft is 6000 feet down the runway about to exit when another 172 crosses the threshold to land full stop we can give them a landing clearance(as long as we point out the traffic) because the guy 6000 feet down the runway won't interfere with their landing roll. However the expectation is that you'll setup for a normal landing and exit as soon as you safely can. This can be for multiple reasons, the guy behind you might be a touch and go so we would have to send them around if you're still on the runway. The guy behind might be something that takes more distance to stop. I'm not clearing a Citation to land when you're still 1000 feet from exiting at the end. Perhaps there's a hole for 3 departures built in and you taking your sweet time getting off the runway means I can only get 1 guy airborne now. I'm sure the 2 guys who are now further delayed aren't happy about it. If someone asks for a long landing we always do what we can to accommodate, sometimes the circuit is stretched out to a 5 mile final and you're going to be told you can't accommodate. Asking short final is probably a bit late as well(still better than not asking at all of course). Also if you ask to exit at the end and then land normally and plan to taxi 4000 feet down the runway that's not happening either unless there's very little going on.

Doing it without asking is definitely annoying. I haven't read the applicable pilot books on the subject recently but I thought when going through training saw that the pilot is expect to land and exit at a reasonable distance that is safe rather than float it down the runway for a preferred exit. When cleared to land the pilot is given the entire length of the runway to safely land so that's probably more of an expectation than a solid rule but we're all working together towards the same goal. We're trying to be as efficient as safely possible so knowing what you want to do helps us figure out how to achieve that goal around your request. You probably won't be told about it unless it causes the controller significant grief, or if they're already in a bad mood from someone else not following instructions.

[A346Dude]

When being cleared to land give the pilot the full runway length unless the controller gives additional instructions, such as land short if able, or something else, What would happen if your brakes failed on landing and the controller positioned an aircraft for take off midway down the runway,

Landing long is not a safety issue. If the required spacing does not exist, the aircraft behind you will be instructed to go around. An aircraft will never be positioned ahead of you on the runway on the assumption you will make an exit.

It is an efficiency issue. If you land long and I'm not expecting it, it can destroy a departure hole I specifically created. Now some poor shmuck holding short might have to wait another 5 minutes, all so you can save a minute of taxi time. Worst case, I'm running things tight (because it's busy) so I lined someone up when you passed the threshold, based on the expectation you would make a safe and reasonable exit for your type. You don't even try to make that exit, now I have to pull up the aircraft behind you, and I still might not have a gap behind the go around for the guy I lined up. Then it's time for vectors and delays for everyone. It can really kill what was an efficient plan during a bash.

[Mayor_McCheese]

At a tower I used to work at, one particular aircraft's base was at the far end of the usual runway in use (over 8000' long runway).

If we didn't offer it, he always requested the long landing. The rules being that the preceding aircraft must clear the runway before a following aircraft crosses the threshold.

Now, in reality a Cessna 8000 feet down the runway is no risk to a Katana crossing the threshold 8000 feet back, but the rules are the rules.

If the normal expectation is to land in the first third of the runway and make the first available exit (safely) and that's what the controller is banking on with the second aircraft on short final and you decide to roll it all the way to the end, it WILL cause an overshoot. Not because safety is compromised necessarily, but because that's what the rules say to do.

Actually, that is not exactly the rule, you can absolutely have 2 arrivals on or over the runway at the same time. Before the 2nd crosses the threshold, the first either has to have exited the runway, OR the first is on or over the runway and at a sufficient distance to allow the 2nd to complete it's landing roll, the first will not backtrack or stop on the runway, and the 2nd aircraft is told the 1st aircrafts position and intentions.

So in your example, saying to the Katana: "the cessna on the runway will exit at X taxiway, cleared to land runway XX" is completely acceptable.

Now, if the 2nd aircraft isn't a full stop (touch and go or stop and go), then yes, the first needs to be clear of the runway before the 2nd crosses the threshold.

[JasonE]

I thought I was going to have my first reaming/ CADORS by ATC a few weeks ago....I was cleared into a zone for "right downwind" and I could have sworn I heard "Cleared right base" which made more sense for my current location and active runway. I even read back "cleared right base". Upon entering the zone I got yelled at by a busy control dealing with too many flight school planes. They sent me to the opposite corner of the zone before fitting me in. All they had to do was ask me to slow down a few kts and could have fit me right in as I thought they were going to do! I guess it was my error...

[DHC-1 Jockey]

At a tower I used to work at, one particular aircraft's base was at the far end of the usual runway in use (over 8000' long runway).

If we didn't offer it, he always requested the long landing. The rules being that the preceding aircraft must clear the runway before a following aircraft crosses the threshold.

Now, in reality a Cessna 8000 feet down the runway is no risk to a Katana crossing the threshold 8000 feet back, but the rules are the rules.

If the normal expectation is to land in the first third of the runway and make the first available exit (safely) and that's what the controller is banking on with the second aircraft on short final and you decide to roll it all the way to the end, it WILL cause an overshoot. Not because safety is compromised necessarily, but because that's what the rules say to do.

Actually, that is not exactly the rule, you can absolutely have 2 arrivals on or over the runway at the same time. Before the 2nd crosses the threshold, the first either has to have exited the runway, OR the first is on or over the runway and at a sufficient distance to allow the 2nd to complete it's landing roll, the first will not backtrack or stop on the runway, and the 2nd aircraft is told the 1st aircrafts position and intentions.

So in your example, saying to the Katana: "the cessna on the runway will exit at X taxiway, cleared to land runway XX" is completely acceptable.

Now, if the 2nd aircraft isn't a full stop (touch and go or stop and go), then yes, the first needs to be clear of the runway before the 2nd crosses the threshold.

Yes, you're right. In the majority of our cases, the traffic was heavy on the flight schools who often were doing circuits, stop and go's, options, etc so MOST of the time, we had to build in space for the second aircraft to accommodate the long landing of the first one. You're right though that if the second/following aircraft was a full stop as well, we could have the preceding aircraft still on the runway while the second crossed the threshold.

Long story short, that particular pilot always requested the long landing even if he was the only aircraft in the control zone. He was aware that there could be faster traffic behind him as #2 and if we couldn't accommodate his request, we'd instruct him to exit at a more suitable point.

[beaverbob]

I was raised in north west BC. In 1970 I bought an Aeronca Chief for 2000 bucks. It had no electrics or radios so I flew all over the place around Terrace and a couple of trips to Langley and Pitt Meadows. In those days nordo was well accepted and I stopped to call the PK tower from Chilliwak.

Anyway, I was at PK getting my instructor license from Altair aviation in September 1970 all was going well. I phoned tower one day for clearance for a local flight and tower said "take off will be 25left so taxi to the hold and face tower when ready to go.

I turned to tower and received a green light; two long ones to be exact. I turned to the runway, checked final was clear, and took off.

When I returned, correctly, I landed after the green light and taxied in. Tower gave me a light signal as I parked indicating to me I should phone them.

They had written me up for take off without a clearance, explaining that there was a runway change. Problem is that the wind was light and variable and I had no way to know about the runway change. I waited after that until the official letter came for me from down town headquarters on Hastings St. I replied that the green lights was too long to be flashing and I should have recieved a red or white light to taxi back to alert me to phone them.

With intervention by Les, my instructor explaining my case I was absolved of any wrong doing and a letter was sent to the tower with a simple explanation of how they were wrong.

After that everything went without a hitch in my BC wide nordo flying

Amazing changes from those time to now.

Bob

[DadoBlade]

Sounds like Fredericton. Bienvenue à Moncton.