AUS_ATC

Here's the situation: It's clear and visability is unlimited. The noon arrival push at MEM is starting to get busy. We are advertising Simultaneous Visual Approaches to Runways 27, 36L and 36R. I'm working the Final sector on 120.92 with everyone reduced to 170 - 180 knots... pointing-out traffic to follow or pointing out the airport... asking everyone to report the traffic or the airport "in sight".

Everything is working just fine, until one pilot refuses to report the airport or the "traffic to follow" in sight. Suddenly, MOST of my attention must be directed to this one aircraft. Other aircraft are checking-in on my frequency from the downwind and base entry points with "traffic in sight" or "the airport" in sight, but this one aircraft is not going to be a player today.

We must maintain standard vertical and lateral separation on the parallel final approach courses until my aircraft is cleared for the visual approach, or until the adjacent Controller has his aircraft cleared for the visual approach. If one or more aircraft refuse to accept the visual approach clearance, then efficiency begins to dwindle.

We realize that it might be your first time here, but we don't know that unless you tell us. If you don't want the visual approach, please let us know ASAP. If you're playing games with us or your company, please don't -- we're just trying to do our job.

What's going on up there when the lone pilot refuses to conduct a visual approach?

Thanks,

MEM_ATC

CRJammin

Usually we don't play games with ATC. Accepting the visuals takes a load of responsibility and dumps it right on us. Now while flying the airplane (manually often times) we're told to start looking outside. Both heads go up; unsafe. And that once we have the field or another aircraft, we're now responsible for keeping our own safe distances, and many times we lose the traffic in front of us. How many times has a pilot said "we lost out traffic--help"? We just suck it up, and hope that our spacing is good enough.

With the way management is cutting corners nowadays, some pilots might not want to take yet another shortcut and hang themselves out to dry. Also, is that pilot group also having contentious labor problems? Or does the pilot have a proficiency check next week and wants a few practice ILSs?

Lots of reasons, but I wouldn't take it personally at all. He or she isn't trying to be difficult towards you.

I do agree with you that it would be respectful if on initial call making you aware that the full ILS is wanted. It's not nice to have to make you call us 3 or 4 times with "have the airport in sight yet? it's at 12 o'clock, 2 miles "

TonyC

It's hard to know exactly what this particular guy is thinking about, but here are some things he might be considering.


He may have multiple airplanes in sight that fit the description of HIS traffic, and he's reluctant to accept responsibility for spacing behind the correct one.


He might like the extra attention he's getting from you with traffic separation, and doesn't want to relinquish it.


The guy talking to you on the radio is NOT the guy that's flying. While he might have plenty of time to look out the windows and pick out the traffic and the airport, the guy flying is busy chasing airpseeds and headings, calling for the checklists, calling out configuration changes, dealing with the turbulence or winds, correcting altitude, etc., etc., etc., and he hasn't had a chance yet to look outside long enough to acquire the same visual cues. Perhaps he's behind the airplane, and placing the responsibility of separation on top of him would not be prudent until he gets caught up. Now, some guys will call visual even before the pilot flying actually sees what he needs to see (perhaps some of the guys "playing along" in your scenario have done that - - peer pressure is strong, you know), but others with better CRM skills will realize that the Pilot Flying, not the pilot talking, needs to acquire the visual before accepting the increased workload and responsibility that goes along it.


Maybe they forgot their glasses?


"It doesn't cost us anything to delay calling visual, right?" With that attitude, and a lack of understanding the problems it causes you, some might not think twice about delaying the call just for the extra feeling of safety and security.



For our edification, could you describe the differences, from your perspective, between handling a guy on a visual and a guy on an ILS? If the visual reduces the workload, who assumes the work that you relinquish? How are the spacing requirements changed, what happens if the spacing is violated, and who is responsible? If I'm on a right dogleg for 36R and I call traffic, and I subsequently realize that I spotted the guy turing on to 36L, and I do NOT see the guy in front of me for 36R, what happens then?


Or, another question that your post alluded to -- what would happen if the guy in question just checked in with a request for the ILS?





- The truth only hurts if it should -

FlyerJosh

I'm the opposite... most places can't give me the visual soon enough. Keep em coming MEMATC... let those that can't fly their planes wait out till it's slower...

TonyC

Oh, I see...


Flying the visual is a macho thing, huh?






- The truth only hurts if it should -

calcapt

The visual approach is a great tool for pilots and ATC. I personally take advantage of visual approaches when available but there are times that it just doesn't work for many of the reasons stated above. I have had the perception on more than one occasion that ATC was handing me their can of worms by wanting me to accept the visual. Most times I accept if it can be done safely but there have been a couple times that I have essentially said to myself "Buddy, you are going to have to work this one out on your own." Most instances that I have seen where a pilot will not call the field or traffic is when there is some compelling reason not to. I wouldn't be too worried about this problem getting out of hand - probably just a new guy learning the ropes.

FlyerJosh

The visual is a tool for pilots and controllers alike. Are you telling me that you can't sequence and separate yourself using your Mark I eyeballs like you did when you were flight training? Has all of that fancy FMS whizbang EFIS stuff made you complacent?

I'm not saying that you have to accept the visual 40 miles out or when you are #27 in line for the runway, but come on- I've seen guys that need to be handheld the whole way to the marker.

Visual approaches aren't rocket science. Particularly at major airports where the traffic is predictable and there isn't VFR traffic to worry about. We all fly the same speeds on final. We can all anticipate each others moves most of the time. 99% of us have TCAS or ADS-B to use to help facilitate this.

I don't know about you, but with my eyes, TCAS and an FMS overlay, I could probably vector and sequence myself better than most controllers out there anyway. How many times have you made minor airspeed corrections on final because the guy in front of you is slowing up? If you tell me never, you must be going around a lot...

Simply put, a visual allows things to move quicker. Pilots can make modified patterns (such as intercepts inside the marker). ATC can waive separation standards for parallel approaches. If you don't feel comfortable with it, fine. But don't delay calling the airport or traffic "just for the sake of delaying" unless you have good reason.

On the flip side... to those controllers out at podunk airports. When its dead quiet (as in no other traffic in range) and we tell you "field in sight"... that's a big clue that we're willing to take the visual... you don't have to vector us on that 5-50 mile downwind... if there is other traffic out there (say on 10-15 mile final), I'm more than willing to make a short approach and get my butt out of the way. Promise.

TonyC

Gee, I don't know if there's anything else I need to say...


I'll have to look harder tonight for the "fancy FMS whizbang EFIS stuff" in my 727. (I'll tell my buddies to look for it on their DC-10s tonight, too.) Oh, and I'll let the Airbus guys know they need to be flying the same speeds as the rest of us... With your encouragement, we'll get this thing all figured out.


Careful MEM_ATC, you're about to be out of a job - - Josh has got it.












- The truth only hurts if it should -

Nightflyer

I can't call the field until the Captain tells me too.

I won't call the field until we both see the runway, not just the beacon, and we are sure we have any aircraft that may become a conflict.

Lessoning your workload at the risk of losing my certificate is not my priority.

I have been in two circumstances where "calling the field or traffic" bit me.

1) In Kingsville, I called that I had the traffic while in the GCA box. The only problem was, it wasn't the correct traffic. I nearly mid-aired with a C-172, and the controlled watched it happen, without saying a word, because I had accepted responsibility for separation. It nearly cost me my life. (No TCAS in a T-2C.) The controller's explanation was that the C-172 was VFR, and I had called it, so he did not have to provide any warning when we nearly merged.

2) I was pressed by a controller in SLC to call the field and the traffic. After several calls, I finally said "I have the field, but I want to stay with you for a while longer". He promptly simultaneously cleared me for the visual and dumped me off to tower. That is the last time I will do any favors for SLC ATC.

Peoria approach is also on my list. They are famous for giving you vectors to the vicinity of the field, then expecting you to find it on your own. Easy with an Airbus and an FMS, not so easy with a 727 and a VOR. IIRC, there is no VOR on the field (if I am wrong, I am thinking of the wrong airport, they all look the same at 0300).

We are really busy during those last 20 miles. You are talking your head off, and we are trying to listen and get our checklists done as well. There is nothing worse than when you have to call us twice because we were busy with a checklist, and you think we are idiots for not paying attention to the radio.

One more thing, sometimes the visibility is not as good as you think it is.

Listen to Tony. We try to do our best to help you out, but I won't sacrifice my career for your convenience.

The bottom line is, if I think it is safe, I'll take the visual, if not, I won't. No offense intended.

FlyerJosh

Truce, okay? Perhaps my sarcasm came across as a bit rougher than I originally intended.

I've flown with enough guys that are afraid of the visual because they don't understand it. Guys that sit there like bumps on a log right up until 3 mile final. Then they forget to call the tower, or screw up the speed and end up going around because they can't fly their plane.

I am saying that under most circumstances, most pilots are capable of helping out the flow and the controller (and often other company aircraft), by accepting a visual. I'm not saying to blow safety out the window, and I'm certainly not a perfect pilot. However, I am willing to try and meet ATC halfway on this one. Smoother is always beneficial to both parties (Of course it's a moot point if you get run into a mountain or other traffic- we both know that).

I'm just say that the guys that see the field and are in a good position to accept a visual, then refuse to call it until approach vectors them to the approach, kind of miss the whole point. And they often slow things down in the process "all in the name of safety" which wouldn't have been compromised if they had taken the visual.

On the other hand, if you get cleared for the visual and you can't accept it, just say unable. It isn't going to be the end of the world for the controller.

As for you jurassic jet pilots, I'll understand if you want some better vectors or want to delay calling the field. Heck my Mark I's probably would be crosseyed from looking at all the stuff on that panel...