Prescott Controller gets Angry with a Cessna Pilot!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ย. 2024
- For context, Drake is the name of he VOR situated 4NM on final for runway 12. N6014V aircraft is based at Prescott so we assume pilots are familiar with Drake. N6014V reports traffic in sight but probably was N402ER since they read back to follow. Possible spatial disorientation caused this incident. Any Prescott pilots over here to give your thoughts?
____________________
Your support is really important and appreciated to keep these videos coming! =)
-- / vasaviation
-- paypal.me/VASA...
Become a VIP member of VASAviation! -- / @vasaviation
Join VASAviation's Discord -- / discord
Twitter/Facebook/Instagram -- @VASAviation
Audio source: www.liveatc.net/
![เปิดใจ พี่ญา คนรุม หลังทัวร์ลง หนักสุดในชีวิต!! l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/2-OJZRtclro/mqdefault.jpg)
For context, Drake is the name of he VOR situated 4NM on final for runway 12. N6014V aircraft is based at Prescott so we assume pilots are familiar with Drake. N6014V reports traffic in sight but probably was N402ER since they read back to follow. Possible spatial disorientation caused this incident. Any Prescott pilots over here to give your thoughts?
Wouldn’t have happened had N6014V flown with ADSB-In
Or misidentified traffic on short final as the Saratoga.
Things tend to get weird when runway 12 is in use. It's not used often so both ATC & pilots aren't super efficient with it. What doesn't help, is that prescott radar is off of phx, leaving about a 12 second delay for what controllers see
Impossible to misidentify tfc when using ADSB-In
Ye runway 12 is hard when it is busy. They cram aircraft that could use two runways into one. It is not the best.
I don't think it was anger, probably frustrated with how many things he had to handle and trying to get all the words out as quickly as possible.
My guess is it was a filler word, like ah, um, but with a little more cowbell
definitely not anger, and don't think frustration (tho perhaps a bit). His voice changed to a different higher tone and not in same serious voice as just prior.
It sounds like ATO used f'in to just say please listen/understand
Agreed, he just sounded stressed to me.
If that’s the case he should reconsider his job
Looking at it from a pilot's perspective, I can see how this pilot made the mistake. Not blaming the controller necessarily, but the traffic to follow callout could have been better. Rather than using an approach fix (DRAKE in this case) to indicate where the traffic to follow was located, I think a standard traffic callout would have been better initially. I.e. "Cessna 14V traffic 11 o'clock ____ miles, 6,500 feet, on final, report them in sight." After acknowledging and reporting the traffic in sight, then the controller could have followed up with something along the lines of "Follow that traffic, number 3, cleared to land 12."
I see this a lot at non-towered airports where people report fixes on the instrument approaches. But usually those position reports mean very little to any non-instrument rated/student pilots who aren't familiar with the approach fixes at that airport.
It’s really dumb on instrument pilot’s part to report fixes. It’s much easier to say, “5 mile final”. Hell everyone has DME’s on the approach chart, let alone all the GPS stuff nowdays.
I was trained to report distance and direction. Instrument fixes mean nothing to pilots who are not familiar with the approaches, instrument trained or not. Also land marks mean nothing to pilots not familiar with the area. Calling out that you are "over the college" means nothing to pilots from out of the local area.
@@annyer262 Exactly this. The airport I flew at for my private pilot license had a Ford factory they always referred to. The first time I literally told ATC I had no clue what they were talking about.
@@VictoryAviation KFZY had a brewery that has been converted to an Ethanol Plant. I bet pilots there still report being over the brewery that closed and was converted about 10 years ago!
@@annyer262 I believe it
I once heard a tower tell an airplane to “fly toward the sun” after exhausting everything else he could think of to get the plane to turn downwind. Sometimes you gotta just get the point across however you can.
Direct SUN, copy that
The FAR says to use any communication required. That seems like a worthy form of communication :)
Then his wings melted and he fell to Earth.
@@isuckatsoldering6554 I looked it up and SUN is an actual VOR! It's the airport VOR for ESNN (in Sweeden.)
Controllers don’t use the FAR. They use the 7110.65
I wouldn't say the ATC was angry, he did a good job.
Its click bait im not staying subscribed if he keeps this up
@@2511jeremy same, that was very anticlimactic
yeah....just seemed like he got slightly flustered for a second.
@@2511jeremy Well given that the ATC used an expletive, live, on air, I'm thinking the description was accurate.
@@LadyLithias he said he was angry using a cus word while trying to find the right word is not angry...
I've been in this situation before. Doing pattern work, tower told me I was number 5 behind an aircraft that was still like 3 or 4 miles out on final. When I started counting, I counted an aircraft that had JUST touched down, thinking tower counted him as number 1 (he was still in the air when tower began talking to us). When I counted 4 aircraft, I looked down the approach path of the runway and didn't see any other aircraft. My instructor also didn't see anyone beyond the 4 I counted. We even checked our onboard avionics as a backup since it shows traffic and we were able to count 3 aircraft (not including the aircraft that touched down since we wouldn't pick him up). We turned base to final when another aircraft said someone had cut him off. Tower yelled at us to go around and rejoin the downwind.
Because of this, I am not in favor of controllers giving pilots several aircraft to follow before turning downwind to base in the pattern. Aircraft that are on very short final can create some ambiguity in which aircraft are being counted by the tower. We did everything right in the airplane and genuinely believed we had spotted ALL aircraft to follow - yet we somehow cut someone off anyway and it nearly led to a collision. With a queue of more than 2 aircraft in front, I believe controllers should call base turns. Period. They can see traffic on radar better than pilots can in the air.
When tower says any number beyond 3, my response is "please call base." Trying to find 4 specks on the horizon while simultaneously trying to configure the plane is not a wise usage of my time or focus.
Half of them were student pilots and yes I can imagine his stress. No problem.
The controller was not angry. Or at least not angry over the frequency anyway. He was just mentally running out of ways to describe the non-standard thing he wanted 14V to do. When words are your only weapon in a time-critical situation, it's a truly helpless feeling when the right ones won't come to mind. And THAT is where you get the "f*ck%n....."
C'mon, guys.... He wasn't angry at all!
Great job by the controller to immediately notice that N6014V was turning at the wrong place. He hadn't even completed his turn before the controller was directing him out of the way.
Yeah, good eyes.
There are plenty of student pilots flying in and out of Prescott.
Embry Riddle is based there (all the "Riddle" and ER callsigns).
Not as many as you might think. Its not like a part 61 school where 90% of the students get a PPL and then stop. There's tons of flight training done after the acquisition of a PPL at schools like Riddle, and Instrument, Commercial, CFI and Multi 'students' aren't really students at all. When you hear an Embry Riddle call sign 80% of the time the person at the controls has at least a PPL and 1/2 of the other 20% will be dual flights with a CFI backing the student up.
I fly here every day; if you were in the position 14V was when traffic to follow was called, it places 2ER descending in front of Granite Mountain, which depending on the time of day may make the traffic difficult to see. Either way, 14V reported traffic on final even though 2ER was on base, and nowhere near the described location, so probably just a mistake on 14V's part. In my experience here that controller does very good work up there in the tower.
EXACTLY!! People need to put themselves in this controllers shoes and see how challenging it can get at times for them!!!
Yup agreed. I've never had issues with that controller. He knows what he is doing and his instructions are always clear. At least to me.
The only reason the controller used that expletive was because he was trying to figure things out and avoid a bad situation.
This ATC was clearly working his butt off, with all the tfc. Hats off to him.
Yeah that "F" boom was clearly one of those stumbles of the mind looking for the right wording.. not an angry thing kinda like an oomm ommm oommm f..ing turn NOW hahaha
Tower did say they would call his base. I think it may have been a bit misleading that they would clear 14V to land considering he still needed to extend his downwind.
I agree!!!
He called the traffic to follow, 14v reported traffic in sight. When you're instructed to follow traffic that cancels the call for base turn
Tower did specify when to turn base and that was when they stated number 3 following the Saratoga. You do not want to mix a downwind extension instruction in with that because it would be more confusing. The instructions issued here by the tower were more than appropriate.
@@eltors0 it’s not that, it’s clearing him to land before calling the base turn that was confusing
@@TitanFlare Again, that’s standard here in the USA. I’m an air traffic controller here in the states and what happened here in the playback was nothing unusual or unsafe as far as what the controller instruction.
In the heat of the moment can understand but "fly through final" is a bit strange. A "cancel landing clearance" + "fly heading 210" would have helped!
Thank you for clarifying so this old non-pilot can understand what ATC meant. I was momentarily lost in a bit of spatial disorientation myself there for a minute!
Class D towers are not allowed to give vectors like that since most of them don’t have radar. Even if they do have radar they’re still not allowed to vector. Only give vague directions like “fly north, fly west.”
The problem is because it's a Class D they're not radar control certified so they have to say something like "fly suggested heading 210". All the "vectors" have to be non-vectors in some way. I think that's part of the stumble.
@@ducky2996 didn’t remember that! Must have been watching too much JFK on this channel.. 😅
@@ducky2996 Yes, you are exactly right!
ATC did a good job to recognize the situation but as a pilot, "fly through final" is a very confusing instruction to understand. That could have been handled better.
Extend or continue base would have been better.
@@mightyjimbo7681 that’s more confusing. Extend to where? Continue to final? Fly present heading is what ATC ended up saying and it worked perfectly
I was having that thought too when I listened and what that means to me if I were to fly. I am glad it isn't just me that confused
@@DennisCarmody Yeah as a student currently, "maintain present heading x miles" leaves no room for interpretation.
I wouldn’t say “angry” with Cessna… from the looks of it, that was an honest mistake by the Cessna pilot, and a little slip of the tongue by Prescott Tower from the mild frustration 😅. Still well handled by everyone
Legend has it that 25D is still waiting for takeoff clearance since lining up at 1:05
hahahaha broooo
Being from the same area as the controller and being a Captain for 20+ years, I can assure you that this is part of the controllers vocabulary and he wasn’t trying to be rude.
I use the word unintentionally all if the time instead of words such as “like” and “umm.”
Exactly. The controller also clearly wasn't angry. Some Americans use that kind of language all the time as part of their normal speech pattern. It's very culturally specific.
Could be a prior military controller as well. More commonly used even in the professional setting.
@@boriz_ Absolutely.
14V thought the Saratoga was 2ER (on short final) but it was 8RG he was suppose to follow behind.
Exactly!
@@RLTtizME ohh Lord....
Exact situation happened at APA a few months ago.
Yes, and that is a very common and easy mistake. Controller said he was going to call the base, he should have stuck with that.
When controllers just say “follow …” they are creating an error prone situation
PLUS when in downwind it is difficult to judge the approach speed of the aircraft you are following. So even if you turn base when abeam the aircraft you are following, if you have a higher approach speed than they do and it is a long final, it is easy to crowd the aircraft ahead. The controller has a better judge of everyone’s speed and it is better for them to always call the base in a busy pattern.
Not Angry just had a malfunction on his word filter 🙂happens to the best of us. His just happened to be recorded. Otherwise I think he was doing a great job with managing his airspace.
Wordfilter.exe not responding. Error 440
Also love how none of the pilots acknowledged the tower swearing. I think the pilot knew he was in the wrong hence why he wasn't protesting.
I didn't even get the impression that the controller was swearing at the pilot - he was swearing over getting his words tripped up for a moment.
@@smgibb Yeah I think so too! He got straight and base mixed up I think. But it was still funny how just no one commented on it. "What? Tower swearing on frequency? I didn't hear nuthin'!"
What were they supposed to say? “You owe me a dollar”?
@@karlhungus1569 Nothing but pilots sometimes get all huffy about that so it was nice to see everyone just move on.
Tower swearing was about high pace word retrieval -- trying to retrieve the word "base" -- not about any emotion about any other person's actions.
Why do the ATC give landing clearance while planes are still in downwind, let alone base and final? I am not a pilot, but I would think cleared to land means exactly that.
That's why you're not a pilot.
It doesn't mean what you think it means...in the USA! But, most anywhere else, apparently, it means you're NEXT to land (i.e. #1), so you can focus on landing, not identifying and following other traffic, vectors, etc. (See other comments in this thread, in which people explain that only one plane can be "cleared to land" on a given runway at a time, while others can, at best, be told "expect late clearance".)
So, your interpretation of what "cleared to land" means is reasonable, just not what you'd have to learn it means as a pilot here in the USA.
Not the controllers fault but "clear to land" will get a lot of pilots to think it's my turn now, especially student pilots.
Controller - should've restated #3 following, and then clear to land.
Pilot - should've asked, "am I still following and #3?" to clarify.
Also when pilot said, "we'll follow them" that was a hint for the controller that there may have already been confusion and he should've asked pilot to repeat instructions.
Does everyone know what a Saratoga looks like? I think a standard relative bearing, distance and altitude traffic call would have been more appropriate, then an instruction to follow and clearance given once the cessna pilot had called visual.
I think a Saratoga’s a twin right? I think
@@cyppy7473 Nope. PA32 is a six seat single engine low wing. Bigger brother of PA28.
@@cyppy7473 You see, I would have guessed a twin too. I've never come across one. That just proves the point. I'd guess he saw an aircraft and thought it was the one to follow.
@@MikeGranby Now that's just going to make it worse. I'd bet there are fewer people that know what a PA32 is than a Saratoga. :D
@@ma9x795 It’s the same model Kennedy Jr. killed himself in. At least that’s what I tell people when they ask about mine. Always fills the pax with confidence…
I fly to Prescott sometimes and this runway they are using is rarely used. The way the traffic is coming is facing some mountains so he may have not been able to see the traffic. But also the ATC did not make it fairly obvious that there was more traffic. Also DRK (Drake VOR) is not used often for VFR traffic as it is some 4-5 miles away from the airport, almost outside the class D airspace.
I did all my flight training from instrument all the way through multi-engine at Prescott through ERAU (Riddle). The controllers are very patient there but every now and then I remember them raising their voice to someone who either wasn't listening/paying attention or not following instructions. Sometimes it is hard to hear your callsign given all the ERAU aircraft constantly flying and having very similar callsigns. It is also not very common where runway 12 is in use as the two parallel runways (21L/R) are used 95% of the time. I have had friends flying in similar situations tell me they have gotten confused on ATC calls from Prescott tower. I always ask for clarification if I am not 100% certain on what they are instructing me to do.
Maybe flight schools should not overwork the controlers... One of the problems with large flight schools... The riddle rats of Daytona made that place a nightmare back in the day.
@@fr8dogpilot Riddle is not the only flight school there... also ATC uses PRC for training for the very same reasons. It can make things challenging for sure but I'll bet it helps figure out who can hack from those that can't. It becomes very obvious on the radios which controllers are on the ball, and I had some great ones there... also have had some get completely lost and go silent. The great ones jumped on and had everyone sorted in a heartbeat, it was impressive to witness.
I never have liked ATC issuing conditional landing clearances with multiple conditions. In this case "cleared to land #3". It would be different if he was already established on final and could clearly see 2 other aircraft in front of him. Or if he was in the same pattern with the other 2 craft, already following the Saratoga. 3 aircraft on 3 traffic patterns converging, all with a landing clearance. Sounds like ATC put too much on the 3rd pilot. ATC should have waited until the Saratoga was well past before calling 14V's base and issuing #3 landing clearance.
I agree, it seems like poor practice to issue "clear to land" instructions to three planes simultaneously and effectively leave those pilots to sort things out for themselves. If it is "too much work" for a human ATC to sequence and explicitly call out each aircraft in order, then maybe a computer should do that job.
I really don’t think he was angry at all. I think he just got a little stressed in the moment while he was clearing the conflict and accidentally used it as a filler word while putting his thoughts together.
I have never heard the instruction to fly through final.
you hear it when flying instrument. controllers use it to buy time
Happens all the time in the IFR world -- usually when being vectored for an ILS approach and either the pattern is full or busy, or for terrain or obstacle avoidance. MVA can also be a factor...
Sounded more like he was just trying to find the right words and filled in with "fckn" ,being frustrated with himself for not finding them🤷♂️
I agree
While it was an error of the pilot to turn base, ATC could have made it easier for himself too by using more basic instructions. Though he solved it well.
Honestly this is just a normal mistake at a training airport that happens every day at these small busy deltas. Seen this shit a million times.
ATC: ...f*cking base!
FCC: Possible ATC callout deviation.
Let us know when you're ready to copy down a number...
Agree controller should have had the Cessna report the Toga as traffic in sight (11 o'clock...) before ever turning them loose to turn base or towards final. The other issue is since the pilot (and controller) were flustered, would have been better to give the pilot a heading, or at least instructed a right turn when he gave the right downwind instruction. Lucky the pilot didn't make another error at that point and turn left into the right traffic on downwind.
Roger that.
I think that's the same controller that made me hold short for 30 in a riddle aircraft, with riddle rental and instructor rates that was around $150
There was no angry tone in his voice, it was more of a slip of the tongue as he was trying to process his thoughts I think.
exactly this
Yeh, if anything, he was struggling to figure out the exact words he wanted to say. Happens to all of us sometimes :P
Where is the angry bit? Where was the **** that was used as ckickbait?
It was here: th-cam.com/video/yfunbcSRI0c/w-d-xo.html
The controller should have instructed 14V to extend downwind. When he told them to follow the aircraft that was number two on final, they mistook the one that was turning from right base onto final and followed them. This mistake can happen easily and the controller should have been more clear.
I'm guessing 14V was a student pilot based on the number of short flights that plane takes. Possibly this would explain not being familiar with or at least not processing where Drake is relative to himself or identifying a low-wing Saratoga vs a high-wing Cessna he had sighted. A slight tweak to the controller call that might have helped would be to instead mention than 8RG was at his 12 o'clock. I wonder, given the controller getting frustrated and later saying "continue on that heading ... straight, f'n base" if 14V was having a hard time converting absolute references to relative-to-himself references, and if the stress of the mess up led to him misunderstanding "fly through the final" call.
Which would be funny, as Embry Riddle Aeronautical University has a campus in Prescott. Those are all of the Riddle flights. He came in from outside the area, but saw one traffic on final but not the other. I agree that he didn't think about his position relative to DRK. That was the cause of the incident.
Why everyone talking about the “fix”? Tower clearly says “Number 3”, as pilot, you should visual check and make sure you have both #1,#2 in sight before you make that turn. Nothing to do with the “fix”.
Note that pilot earlier read back "#2", which ATC missed (didn't correct), and later didn't read back any #, which ATC also missed (didn't repeat and insist on a readback):
th-cam.com/video/yfunbcSRI0c/w-d-xo.html&lc=UgzmQemYfrbF6qEHxaF4AaABAg.9VFg4y8MV1q9VU0RdVx_ck
He wasn’t angry. He was just dropping a casual F-bomb. Big f@$’n deal 😂
It is if you want to be a professional atc.
When you try to cut in line and get caught...
ATC cleared him in 2nd clear to land, then changed it to 3rd clear to land then didn't specify which plane he was to follow in on visual. That's where the confusion occured.
I thought for sure it would be a Embry student. Super busy little airport, with very chill tower
I got my PPL through KPRC, wonderful atc there, they can be strict at times but are always there to help. Just like all atc!
This is the first time EVER I have heard a controller swear 😳
It was more of a vocalized pause, like "ummm" while he was trying to think of the word rather than "turn fucking base!"
too early to enjoy the comments, i will come back later
Tower just got a hair flustered, blanked on the term, and it slipped out. Not the professional phraseology, but it happens to all of us off of the air.
That said, tower was on the ball preventing a midair and keeping spacing. Pilot’s voice tells me that he recognized his error. All’s well that ends well.
Am I the only one who sees no drama in a majority of theses videos?
I would think that most folks would rather stuff like this video be the height of drama. Better than the alternative of always having on frequencies pissing matches, entitled jerks busting the bravo, and Airbus Accidents. Just a thought.
If the video doesn't grab my attention, I go to the next one.
There is sometimes more drama here in the comment section when the “experts” weigh in.
To be fair, telling a plane to "follow traffic" that is in a completely different direction and position from you could definitely be confusing.
As a pretty new pilot, it seems the controller put the pilot in a bad spot. As a new pilot I struggle with identify planes. I know what a Cessna and a 747 look like…that’s about it. I would not have understood the instruction of fly through final either. I don’t think I’ve ever heard that before.
I kind of put that on the controller. The Saratoga was quite a ways out, and the Cessna wasn’t told to extend his downwind to follow traffic, and wasn’t told the traffic he was to follow was at 11:00, not his 8:00, where he would naturally be looking. Why would he assume the Cessna would know where the eff Drake was?
The controller handled it well. He will unfortunately be in a little trouble for the accidental f-bomb. The way it played out reminds me of the Metroliner vs Cirrus situation at at APA a few months ago. Expect rules to come down to assure pilots are seeing and acknowledging the correct planes in the pattern.
I'd tell the pilot to study more the aircraft types because he probably confused the other C172 with the P32R that he was supposed to follow through final. a high winged aircraft vs a low winged aircraft, I understand the frustration of the controller on this situation.
As a non-pilot my response to that would be: are the rules really adequately safe enough if you have to rely on plane recognition for the sky to remain safe. It would seem to me that you need more clear and concrete instructions. I am a car guy, but if people tell me to 'follow that Toyota' I will get it wrong 10% of the times.
The aircraft type wasn't the issue, it was the location. The Cessna pilot should have been looking further out on final for the aircraft, what it looked like didn't matter.
I've never understood the logic of ATC in the US where more than more 1 aircraft (in this case 3) can be cleared to land all at the same time.
I was fine with it originally, but the more I learn of situations like this, the more I agree that maybe US ATC should stop clearing more than 1 plane at a time to land, and instead tell others something like "expect late clearance".
It allows me more flexibility and I can run tighter traffic. If I have multiple aircraft 3000' apart on the same runway, I can't be waiting to issue a landing clearance. I have the flexibility to clear my whole downwind and deal with traffic and spacing in the meantime.
You do have to issue them a sequence number and traffic to follow. Other than that, just maintain same runway separation, in this case it appears to be a bunch of cessnas, so the first guy only needs to be 3000' down the runway when the next plane crosses the threshold.
PRC is very busy with Embry-Riddle University, local pilots, and CR-J commuter aircraft. Everytime I drive past it there are multiple aircraft in the pattern at all times. Never heard the term "fly through final" before. I assume N6014V hadn't either.
I have but it is more of an IFR thing where they aren't ready for you to join final, especially if you ask for a delay vector (ie to finish briefing or instrument setup after a last moment approach change.) ATC is required to explicitly say fly through final or cross final any time you are vectored cross that extended centerline.But IFR you usually do this like 7 miles out.
Just out of curiosity.....how is fly through final different from go around? Asking because I don't know.
@@lees2347 It is about 90 degrees different. Otherwise a similar idea.
@@mytech6779
So I take it you enter "fly through final" from the base leg having never actually turned final. Is that correct?
@@lees2347 Yes and no. There was nothing to enter because they had already turned to base, the plane needed only to fly straight. This is why the full instruction given was "Continue on that heading, fly through final."
"fly through final" is extra information to be certain of the intention.
Sounds like poor ATC was just trying to get all his words out at once. We're all human - lol
There is never a need for cursing, no matter how upset you are. The guy made a mistake, it was quickly corrected and we move on.
If you think this is angry. You got a lot of audio to go through lol. I wouldn't even consider that a stern talking.
Oops Wrong plane in sight.
Corrected.
Didn't add significant delay to the pattern but gave the controller a moment of stress.
Don't use roger for critical responses.
He was expecting them to call his base turn. It's easy to see how the confusion happened. Everyone handled it fine.
The mentioning of Prescott and granite mountain always brings me to the memory of the Granite Mt hot shots. RIP
I used to flight instruct out of PRC (rotorcraft). It’s a busy little airport with several flight schools on the field. I subscribed to this channel a long time ago a knew it was only a matter of time before PRC got a little love 🤣
I see what you did there.
North Americans in the chat, help me out here please - is passing your PPL contingent on being able to identify different plane models? As a Londoner who's never needed to learn to drive, I've always been confused by American cop shows that rely on knowledge of the make and year of a car - to me it's a box on wheels that gets you from A to B when there's no train or bus handy \m/
Wasn't part of any course I took. It's knowledge either passively acquired from flying in high-traffic areas, or from simply being an aviation enthusiast. When it comes to driving, people will at least know the different vehicle categories, such as truck/SUV/sedan. ATC could have instead said "Follow the low-wing on final" to distinguish the Saratoga from the 172.
Even if it is not a LEGAL requirement, you are expected to have a “general working knowledge” of at least the common aircraft types. At the very least be able to differentiate high wing aircraft from low wing aircraft and so on.
It is important at both controlled and uncontrolled fields (even though the typical phraseology will identify using the tail number at uncontrolled fields. Example: _”…Cessna 198ME crossing midfield at 2000 for left downwind Runway 17…”_ ). When you hear a radio transmission like that, you have to have some idea what you’re looking at. Especially at busy airfields, where multiple aircraft might be present in the pattern!
Now if it is a less common aircraft, not everyone might know what a Husky or a Citabria is. In such cases, you could always ask for clarification. For example: _”…Citabria 515KG, are you the red and white taildragger?…”_
So no, not everyone, especially newer pilots can recognize all planes. However it is the only way to really call out specific traffic. It doesn’t add any useless information or length to the radio call, so the common practice helps people that know what to look for, and also helps people learn what to look for. Since pretty much all GA airplanes are identified by type Cessna 757EW, it can certainly help with more SA and is just as fast as saying November 757EW. Good question 👍🏻
I saw a video from a pilot channel suggesting that, even if you're not IFR rated, to still become familiar with various fixes around and near your home airport for situations exactly like this. However, this is, as I understand, not an FAA ground text or checkride test question/scenario, so it is not required, but a good idea. In this case the pilot may not have GPS equipment in the plane to know exactly where DRAKE is relative to their position. I feel like the controller should have given better traffic callouts, like "14V traffic is on final at 11 o'clock, report them in sight". Then, "follow that traffic number three cleared to land"
es notable las diferencias de procedimientos en cada pais, en py por ejemplo a nadie se le autoriza el aterrizaje si no es en final y sin trafico delante
I have to admit I did this once on a PPL stage check of all places. The Chief Pilot just sat there quietly and didn't say a word and waited to see how it would all turn out. I got yelled at by the controller to turn back to the downwind. After we landed the Chief Pilot calmly said something about how I should have been looking further out for that aircraft on a three-mile final.
Why did he clear 14v to land when he was number 3? It's been awhile for me, but I remember doing touch and gos at an airport with like a couple of GA planes and a C130 doing touch and gos as well...tower would extended downwind as needed to keep some speration..wouldn't clear us to land until we were on final..I feel like when he cleared 14V to land he thought oh man I need turn to land not follow the other traffic then land
I think because it was pretty busy, he wanted to get things done asap. Giving him clearance to land after another aircraft is a way to multitask. It was a good plan but the pilot didnt really realize where the saratoga was.
The new display is so small it's difficult to see the planes and the identification block
I wonder if egghead got a writeup, suspension, or termination? FAA & FCC don't usually tolerate something like that, especially from one of their own.
I don't hear frustration but a little urgency given the Saratoga on final was hearing straight for the Cessna that had made the left turn to base. I think the issue was the instruction to follow a Saratoga on final. The Cessna responses with traffic in sight but the traffic he sees is a Cessna on final. Don't assume pilots know what an aircraft looks like. He should have been told the traffic he was to follow was a Saratoga at his 11:00 on final.
Instantly fell in love with this ATC. I use f*cking as an adjective, adverb and filler all the time. Never in anger. It is just the best f'ing word to emphasize, dramatize, express, exclaim, etc... I'm pretty good at censoring myself when necessary, but there have been times when I let the f-bomb fly without realizing it. Oops....
Okay, sometimes in anger...
Tower should call their base and not clear 3 planes to land. Controller was not in control and caused the confusion. The F-bomb seemed to just slip out.
That was so mild I actually missed it the first time and had to rewatch lol
Good on him looking out the window and seeing the mistake happening.
Being a pilot in Europe, I still can't really understand giving a landing clearance when it's by far not sure that the runway will be actually clear... I know, this might increase the traffic flow, but as of my opinion, this was a contributing factor in this "incident" where 14V might have understood that he was in fact cleared to land... With the phraseology "continue approach" or continue downwind" and only issuing a landing clearance when the landing is actually imminent, such mistakes could be prevented (my opinion)
SOP here. They space them out enough to make sure they can all get it.
European ATCO here. I can’t understand multiple simultaneous “cleared to land” either. It doesn’t enable more aircraft to land per hour. (Unless they US controllers actually let aircraft land while the previous aircraft still is on the runway.) If something happens to the aircraft in front which causes it to spend more time on the runway than expected the situation can escalate quite rapidly. If the frequency is blocked when the instruction to “go around” is issued, the situation has escalated to the point where the ATCO is no longer able to fully control the situation. It will then depend on the no 2 aircraft to decide on their own to go around.
Don’t say that a runway is CLEARED if there is traffic on the runway or will be traffic on the runway before the CLEARED aircraft gets there, because then the runway isn’t CLEARED.
@@mratc8775 "Cleared to Land" doesn't mean the runway is clear, it means the pilot has permission to land. It would put a lot more stress on everyone if the controller has to issue a clearance at the last possible moment for every arriving airplane. There's nothing about "cleared-to-land" that changes how a pilot is expected to fly the aircraft.
@@nocalsteve I understand that “cleared” is a permission. I just don’t agree that it is the safest way of doing things. Probably more expeditious in terms of delivering clearances. The US way of doing it is fully dependent on a non blocked frequency when the ATCO some day needs to send traffic around (go around) if the runway isn’t vacated in due time. Perhaps there are some criteria in the US that needs to be meet (such as good visibility)? If the succeeding landing gets cleared to land and the traffic in front doesn’t vacate the runway and the frequency gets blocked - what then? Then the separation of aircraft on the runway is 100% depending on the succeeding aircraft seeing the traffic in front. I sure hope the use of multiple simultaneous “cleared to land” is only used in conjunction with perfect visibility.
Still would feel a bit odd to work like that… delegating my job to the pilots. Do the US ATCOs also use “after landing A320 on short final, RWY Xx cleared for takeoff “?😜
@@mratc8775 Do you realize how much more work a controller would have to do if he had to clear every aircraft to land while it was on short final? US airports tend to be much busier than European airports, so it’s necessary to improve the flow of traffic and reduce the radio traffic. Remember that one of the contributing factors of the Asiana 214 crash at SFO was a late landing clearance, giving an early landing clearance eases the workload on the pilots and controllers since the expectation is that the pilot is going to land. If a conflict does arise, it’s not suddenly going to pop up on short final, it’s going to develop over time and both the landing aircraft and controller are going to see the situation develop and take steps to accommodate the situation. If a controller does need an aircraft to go-around then the radio call will be less ambiguous because there’s no other reason for the controller to be talking to the plane - the pilot won’t have to figure out if he’s getting a landing clearance or a go-around. It’ll be pretty obvious. Remember, most airports are pilot controlled anyway.
“Fly thru final” isn’t the best command
its a standard command in IFR, required anytime a plane must cross the extended approach centerline. Usually used for delay vectors or re-sequencing.
@@mytech6779 Yea, for both pilot and controller. xxxab, cross final, or approach xxxab, did you want me to cross final? I think this was born from the many times where crossing final is a major screw up.
@@mytech6779 I can't find "fly thru final" on the ICAO standard phraseology.
@@scottfranco1962 The primary purpose is to be certain that this is not a vector to join final.
@@dermann439 Final is only a specific case of a more general rule. (From FAA documents):
Inform the pilot when a vector will take the aircraft across a previously assigned nonradar route.
PHRASEOLOGY-
EXPECT VECTOR ACROSS (NAVAID radial) (airway/route/course) FOR (purpose).
REFERENCE-
FAA Order JO 7110.65, Para 7-6-1, Application.
This is a common mistake, at least from what I've seen so far. ATC issues a clearance and the pilot enters some kind of oblivion state where he forgets all previous instructions and goes straight for it. I don't now if it is related to the pilot's experience, to some kind of condition or what, but is a very common mistake, and it happens not only during the approach.
Sensory overload
It’s very easy to misidentify traffic you’re supposed to follow when there’s a lot of traffic. Experience says to confirm w ATC if you’re even a little bit unsure.
It's hard to spot other planes sometimes, and sometimes the position they give of other aircraft is not accurate.
@@DennisCarmody Agreed. Also having some sort of adsb in helps confirm which traffic you're looking at when in doubt, especially in a busy pattern.
@@DennisCarmody Agreed. Also having some sort of adsb in helps confirm which traffic you're looking at when in doubt, especially in a busy pattern.
Surprised 402ER didn't use the Riddle callsign.
Some of us just use f'ing as a filler word like "uh"
Controller was not angry and handled the pilot's error just fine. Plus, Controller did not use an expletive, he very quickly said "correction" to modify an instruction. VASAviation should correct the title of this video.
The Cessna obviously mistook the Cessna for the piper they were supposed to follow. Had the controller told him the traffic was ahead and to their left or 11:00 it probably wouldn’t have happened. The controller did a good job resolving the situation once recognized. How a pilot can mistake a high wing for a low wing?
Small aircraft miles away can be tricky to identify.
The text on the video thumbnail gives the wrong impression. I was expecting atc to curse at the pilot, but once I heard it, it is clear that it was more some frustration or stress for the controller. I do not think it was directed at the pilot.
No one one was angry.
Now I know that "Fly through final" means to fly across the extended runway centerline, and "Join right downwind runway 12" means to turn to 300 degrees and fly away from the runway along the runway's downwind leg.
Eh, I think that was a slip of the tongue.
FCKN was a new waypoint the FAA just uploaded.
Gotta love these realtime updates.
Can someone clarify what fly through final means? I've never heard that not even ifr. Cleared low approach I'm assuming?
No; a better phrase (to most peoples' ears), I think, would have been "fly ACROSS final". I think that's closer to standard (FAA, if not ICAO) terminology, too. ("Continue on course" was also given, but that's a tad dangerous if the pilot has already initiated a turn that the tower hasn't yet observed.)
My ego can take a controller, speaking harshly. My body probably couldn't handle a collision. Just a Guess
Do places like Embry Riddle train ATC too? Seems like it doesn't get much tougher than this - maybe good training for the big leagues
I’ve flown in and out of Prescott twice in the last two years. While this incident doesn’t reflect poorly on that controller, I have to say that I don’t fly in there if I can help it. The controllers that I unfortunately encountered there were particularly rude, bossy, and unhelpful. I have never been to a Class C airport with a clearance delivery frequency where the controller admonishes you for requesting a clearance for VFR flight following using that freq. Also, given Clearance for VFR landing, but then getting admonished for leaving my IFR altitude without permission after the clearance was given. Well I simply don’t go there anymore. Also there’s high terrain all around the airport and too much student traffic. I recommend St George Regional. You get a nice ride over the Grand Canyon to boot.
I think the particular ATC here made a few key mistakes, and hope he's gotten some instruction/clarity on how to avoid them in the future:
th-cam.com/video/yfunbcSRI0c/w-d-xo.html&lc=UgzmQemYfrbF6qEHxaF4AaABAg.9VFg4y8MV1q9VU0RdVx_ck
Otherwise, I think he handled the overall situation well and professionally; in that sense, he sounds like he's a cut above the other controllers you've encountered there!
Cessna F up. He called traffic in sight and acknowledged he was 3rd behind it for landing. Then, ATC kept calling him to remain on "final" when he meant "base", which didn't make thing easier.
I don't think he was angry. He sounded stressed and maybe upset with himself for not being able to spit out what he wanted to say. Otherwise the pilot and controller handled it well.
I really hope that wasn’t the first time someone cut off their sequence haha. Sort of happens pretty regularly at a VFR tower.
If I was the Cessna pilot the urge to say “will continue on the fucking base, Cessna 14V” would be strong lmao
I find it more informative, if you are looking for traffic in a pattern, to hear something like "red high wing cessna" or "yellow low wing" I can't see their number and I don't always know what a particular plane looks like. And in this case traffic was sequencing from 3 directions into final, the guy was told to follow someone and cleared to land, so understandable that he understood that to be the plane he just saw turn to final in front of him. ATC did just fine getting it un-messed up though.
He didn't get angry with him, he just scrambled a bit to tell him what to do and let out an f bomb by accident.