Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 30, 2016, 02:52:05 PM
Home Help Login Register      
News: No coverage in your area? If you are near your local airport contact us to learn about becoming a volunteer


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Air Traffic Monitoring
| |-+  Aviation Audio Clips (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  "Give me a number and your ID please."
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: "Give me a number and your ID please."  (Read 59670 times)
KSYR-pjr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1722



« on: April 26, 2006, 05:03:46 PM »

Appreciation goes to kkjlai for this find:

An Air Canada flight departs Toronto, checks in with a busy departure, and then immediately tries to offer two suggestions to the controller to remove the speed restriction.

The first offer was politely declined by the controller, but the second was met with an "Enough."

The pilot clearly suffered a bruised ego and demanded a phone number and ID multiple times, presumably to complain about the treatment he had just received.

The clip has been edited to remove some non-essential comms.

* GiveMeYourID.mp3 (1575.18 KB - downloaded 6895 times.)
Logged

Regards, Peter
ATC Feed:  Syracuse (KSYR), NY
KSYR-pjr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1722



« Reply #1 on: April 26, 2006, 05:19:40 PM »

Hey, could someone with WinAmp let me know if you are correctly hearing the last 15 seconds or so of the clip, which is the part where the pilot stumbles through his hand-off readback and is corrected by the controller, but still demands the number and ID?

The clip plays fine when I listened to it before uploading it, but now in WinAmp the clips skips over the last 15 seconds to the end.  

I suspect this may be due to having SQRSoft's Crossfader plug-in installed on my version of WinAmp, but I want to make sure the clip isn't corrupted.  The clip plays fine in Windows Media Player, FWIW.
Logged

Regards, Peter
ATC Feed:  Syracuse (KSYR), NY
gfw123
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 40



« Reply #2 on: April 26, 2006, 05:33:27 PM »

Quote from: KSYR-pjr
Hey, could someone with WinAmp let me know if you are correctly hearing the last 15 seconds or so of the clip, which is the part where the pilot stumbles through his hand-off readback and is corrected by the controller, but still demands the number and ID?

The clip plays fine when I listened to it before uploading it, but now in WinAmp the clips skips over the last 15 seconds to the end.  

I suspect this may be due to having SQRSoft's Crossfader plug-in installed on my version of WinAmp, but I want to make sure the clip isn't corrupted.  The clip plays fine in Windows Media Player, FWIW.


Well, I don't use winamp, but it sounds great in QuickTime player.

Nice clip by the way, good find.

--greg.
Logged
ChAsEr911
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #3 on: April 26, 2006, 05:36:38 PM »

Hello,

the last 15 secs of the clip works fine with WinAmp so far.

Thanks for the clip. Smiley

*edit*
hehe first post and 3 minutes late... Wink
Logged
KSYR-pjr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1722



« Reply #4 on: April 26, 2006, 05:39:10 PM »

Quote from: ChAsEr911
Thanks for the clip. Smiley


Thanks, guys, for the report.

Also, for clarification, kkjlai was the one who found it - I was just the workhorse looking to preserve the clip  (recalling that the archives only retain the most recent seven days of audio).  Smiley
Logged

Regards, Peter
ATC Feed:  Syracuse (KSYR), NY
Yegger
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201



« Reply #5 on: April 26, 2006, 06:43:53 PM »

Wow is all I have to say to this, listening to the Toronto feed a couple hours a day and knowing how great the controllers are. What an ignorant pilot.
Logged
digger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 281


« Reply #6 on: April 26, 2006, 06:44:33 PM »

Thanks for compiling that clip--well worth listening to!

I agree that the pilot was being a jerk. Unfortunately, I think the controller should have given him the number. I think the controller was well within bounds in telling the pilot when enough was enough, and I'd expect management to have supported him. (After all, it's not the FAA.)  rolleyes  Stonewalling the pilot about the number is probably contrary to agency policy though....
Logged
Pygmie
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 69


« Reply #7 on: April 26, 2006, 06:55:20 PM »

In this case, I don't at all think the controller was stonewalling the pilot about the number.  If I'm busy controlling traffic, I'm not about to take my mind off controlling to issue phone numbers to pissed off aircraft, and I'm certainly not going to get distracted by engaging the pilot in an argument about what happend (which probably would have followed if the controller had issued the number).

It's not as if the controller thought that by ignoring the pilot he could avoid the situation completely.  Every controller knows that there are multiple ways of checking which controller was working which position for every second of the day, and that all the ACC phone numbers are publicly avaliable from any number of places.

Yes, if the controller had a couple of minutes to spare, and wasn't that busy, he should have gave the pilot the number, but if I'm busy, that's going to be the last thing on my mind, and the last item on a long list of priorities.
Logged
Yegger
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201



« Reply #8 on: April 26, 2006, 07:01:46 PM »

I still can't understand what the pilot was so upset about. This is AIR TRAFFIC.  There are going to be restrictions.  ACA460 is YYZ-YOW, so there is going to be a lot of traffic between the two and there's no sense complaining.  rolleyes
Logged
kkjlai
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 80


« Reply #9 on: April 26, 2006, 07:06:18 PM »

KSYR-pjr, wonder if you can also add the following into the [nice] clip you have produced [for me]..

in the archive, CZYZ-Apr-25-06-1730.mp3   (Toronto Center)

at 5:01 into the clip, I guess (and remembered) AC460 asked the enroute controller for the number and the ID for the previous controller.  (2 seconds)

at 07:58 into the clip, the enroute controller gave out the Number and advice AC460 that "the supervisor was aware of the identity of the controller who worked you"  and a few chats about this from another pilot.  

The chat actually was longer when I hear it live on my scanner but was unfourtunly blocked by a open mic an other channel here in the archive..  
 Sad

Thanks again KSYR-pjr!

kkjlai
Logged
Cessna172
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 106


« Reply #10 on: April 26, 2006, 07:32:24 PM »

Nice find!! Thanks!!

Cessna172
Home Airport: West Houston Airport (KIWS)
www.westhoustonairport.com
Logged
digger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 281


« Reply #11 on: April 26, 2006, 07:48:22 PM »

Quote
It's not as if the controller thought that by ignoring the pilot he could avoid the situation completely.


I agree. And now, the tape will be listened to anyway. The reality is though, that if he had time, at any point, (and we don't know how much time he actually had--dealing with that pilot certainly used up some of it), to give the number and didn't, now *he* has given the appearance of being the uncooperative one, as opposed to the pilot who should have quit chipping at him after the first negative response to his request.

As I said earlier, I thought management should have been supportive of his "enough" reply. (Actually, a simple "UNABLE" would probably have been a better choice of phraseology.)

I think it will take some *very* supportive management to agree wholheartedly that ignoring the guy was the best decision. Do you think they'll be that supportive?
Logged
XTSKid
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 46

KSNA Feed


« Reply #12 on: April 26, 2006, 11:01:21 PM »

The controller will hear about it. But that is likely about as far as it will go.
Logged

flyer_d
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 55


ID
« Reply #13 on: April 26, 2006, 11:58:39 PM »

Good clip!

To identify controllers at a facility, controllers are supposed to give their initials upon request.  If the controller thought he was right, the tapes would have proved him right, and he shouldn't have refused to give the ID.  (He could let the pilot look up the phone number however -- that's publicly available.)

So his excuse "I don't have time" is factitious.  He could have given his initials in the time it took to say "don't have time."

(And the prior comment that his comment "enough" should have been "unable" was right on.)
Logged
727driver
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #14 on: April 27, 2006, 12:42:40 AM »

Give the controller a break he is working very busy departure freq. where there are lots of clearances to be issued in a short period of time.  The pilot can call his ops when he gets to destination and file the incident on the flight report if he feels that his ego wasn't stroked just right.  I would hate to have to sit next to a jackass like that. I'm sure it was a very long ride for the F/O to have to listen to this guy the rest of the day.  Also sounds like he should be paying more attention to his ATC clearance than worrying about pulling tapes and getting Id's.  Guy can't even read back the proper heading.  There is a time and place for discussion like that.  On 128.8 is not the time or doing 7 miles/minute in high density airspace is not the place.  This guy needs to pull his head out of his ass.
Logged
KSYR-pjr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1722



« Reply #15 on: April 27, 2006, 08:55:07 AM »

Quote from: kkjlai
KSYR-pjr, wonder if you can also add the following into the [nice] clip you have produced [for me]..


OK, here you go, but unfortunately there were so many other transmissions that blocked the feed scanner from receiving this conversation that a big piece of it is missing (as you alluded to in your post).

--------------  amended clip ------------------------------------

Here is the same clip with some additional Center audio tacked onto the end.  Apparently the pilot did receive a sympathetic ear from the next controller down the line who was only doing her job as well as another pilot on the frequency (who most likely did not hear his initial exchange on the departure frequency).

Unfortunately the first few exchanges are only partial snippets, due to other activity on the feed scanner blocking them.  I have editted out the other, blocking activity as it is not relevant to this exchange.

* GiveMeYourID-2.mp3 (3180.49 KB - downloaded 5436 times.)
Logged

Regards, Peter
ATC Feed:  Syracuse (KSYR), NY
KSYR-pjr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1722



« Reply #16 on: April 27, 2006, 08:58:16 AM »

Quote from: 727driver
I would hate to have to sit next to a jackass like that. I'm sure it was a very long ride for the F/O to have to listen to this guy the rest of the day.  Also sounds like he should be paying more attention to his ATC clearance than worrying about pulling tapes and getting Id's.  Guy can't even read back the proper heading.  There is a time and place for discussion like that.  On 128.8 is not the time or doing 7 miles/minute in high density airspace is not the place.  This guy needs to pull his head out of his ass.


I am in complete agreement with you.  A true professional would have the skill to dial down his emotions for the safety of those in the back.  When he jumbled the readback it was apparent that he could not do that.
Logged

Regards, Peter
ATC Feed:  Syracuse (KSYR), NY
flyer_d
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 55


« Reply #17 on: April 27, 2006, 03:27:53 PM »

I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.  When I listen to the clip, I hear a professional pilot, making appropriate requests, being polite ("I don't see the whole picture"), and in a mutual effort to find a solution (the controller says "appreciate the offer though").  And then in the middle of this, the controller comes back with "ok that's enough," which is both rude and nonstandard.  Admittedly, a big factor in whether the pilot was being reasonable is how long he has held with the speed restriction.
Logged
MarkInSavannah
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6



« Reply #18 on: April 27, 2006, 04:22:47 PM »

I liked the rather sarcastic comment by ACA1006 towards the end of the tape when after receiving his frequency change instructions, told the controller, "good luck".

Personally, there was nothing that pissed me off more than a pilot who wanted to provide helpful hints for the sole reason of getting him higher, faster, or shorter, not having a clue as to what was going on around him.  After receiving the reason for the first restriction, he should have just left it alone.  Oh, and asking the controller to "pull the tapes" made him sound like an idiot.  Supervisory personnel might "mark" the tape with a time stamp for review at a later time but they're not going to remove a tape from service (hell, not sure anyone even uses them anymore) simply because of a non-safety related issue like a controller-pilot pissing contest.  As was previously suggested, I would have given him my initials and told him my number was in the book!

Even though we all knew it wasn't!
Logged
KSYR-pjr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1722



« Reply #19 on: April 27, 2006, 08:26:56 PM »

Quote from: flyer_d
Admittedly, a big factor in whether the pilot was being reasonable is how long he has held with the speed restriction.


The aircraft had just checked in with departure and the controller had issued the speed restriction as part of the check-in, literally 10 seconds before the "ENOUGH."  

While I agree with you that the controller's comment was non-standard and perhaps unprofessional, the issue I have is with the pilot's continued querying  of the controller.   That served no purpose other than to tie up a busy frequency and distract the controller.  A distracted controller in a busy sector can be a dangerous controller.

For proof of this, look to the mid-air accident over Germany between the DHL 757 and the Russian passenger aircraft a few years ago.
Logged

Regards, Peter
ATC Feed:  Syracuse (KSYR), NY
Fra
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


« Reply #20 on: April 28, 2006, 07:41:57 AM »

Quote from: KSYR-pjr

For proof of this, look to the mid-air accident over Germany between the DHL 757 and the Russian passenger aircraft a few years ago.


Well he was working on two different radars (busy EU route and app on a small german airport) didn't have a phone line and the radar didn't function properly (the collision vector warning). So If he had the phone and the radar, I don't think that would have happen.
Logged
canuck101
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 42


« Reply #21 on: April 28, 2006, 07:46:36 AM »

Just another day at YYZ...this one is kinda pale compared to much of the crap pilots have to suffer. Although I will say it isn't entirely NavCan's fault - the GTAA is just as ludicrous.

Perhaps this was the same ZYZ controller who missed a Cargojet 727 because he was busy chatting on freq about coffee.....at 1AM?
Maybe NC can take some lessons from any other major airport outside Canada and see how real ATC works.
Logged
flyer_d
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 55


« Reply #22 on: April 28, 2006, 12:17:21 PM »

Quote
Well he was working on two different radars (busy EU route and app on a small german airport) didn't have a phone line and the radar didn't function properly (the collision vector warning). So If he had the phone and the radar, I don't think that would have happen.


FYI, a great write up of the factors in that accident, from a controller's perspective, is here:

http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/191072-1.html
Logged
RatOmeter
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 27



« Reply #23 on: April 28, 2006, 07:56:17 PM »

IMO, the both the controller and the pilot were a bit more pissy to each other than necessary.   As an outsider, it sounded like a little ego battle going on 'twixt the two.  From my perspective, I can't fathom any harm done by the pilot following that controller's instructions.  I absolutely see the value of questioning a controller if you believe there may be a true (and potentially dangerous) error in the their instructions, but that was obviously not the case here.  Further, a battle of wills should not be played out over the air between a controller who should be controlling and a pilot who should be piloting.

I bet the pilot, though he probably wouldn't admit it, would have agreed with me... as soon as he sobered up.  That little mix-up on the air regarding the heading instructions were (IMO) because he (a) has difficulty controlling his temper on a regular basis or (b) he was at least a wee bit drunk.  If (b), then (a) often follows like a bad smell.
Logged
Tomato
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 277


« Reply #24 on: April 29, 2006, 12:12:37 AM »

It sounds like to me that both sides were at fault.  The Controller could have given his ID/initials without problem.  Somebody mentioned earlier that the pilot could have looked up the phone number himself.  As for pulling the tapes, etc... that was unncessary.  Likewise, the controller can't be blamed - CYYZ is a very busy airport and controllers don't have time to deal with small things like that.

The pilot, I think was just trying to be nice... and then after whether it's ego or not I don't know.  It's frustrating to be ignored on frequency and was probably rightful to ask for his ID... but at the same time, sometimes it's better just to walk away.

I think if the two met in person, they'd shake hands and just walk away.  It's easy to get caught up in the moment when things are busy/etc... just hope they don't hold any grudges!  Smiley
Logged

Serving you with CYVR... =)
Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!