Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 29, 2016, 07:43:08 PM
Home Help Login Register      
News: Check out: Air Race Classic 2016


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Air Traffic Monitoring
| |-+  Aviation Audio Clips (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  AFR6419 not happy with Boston Center
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: AFR6419 not happy with Boston Center  (Read 14038 times)
Dan CZQM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 123



WWW
« on: June 11, 2009, 08:43:30 PM »

Eastbound AFR6419 upon entering Moncton airspace is told to change his FL.  He had just climbed to FL350 and is now told to either go FL330 or FL370.  ATC tells him he is but one going east with 180 aircrafts going west.


* AFR6419 not happy with Boston Center.mp3 (98.08 KB - downloaded 7756 times.)
Logged

Dan
CZQM-CYQM Feeder
sykocus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 349



« Reply #1 on: June 12, 2009, 09:38:18 AM »

some times you're the windshield sometimes you're the bug...c'est la vie
Logged

Yesterday I couldn't spell air traffic controller. Today I R one.
djmodifyd
Guest
« Reply #2 on: June 12, 2009, 09:44:01 AM »

would he rather descend or hit another aircraft?

i'd pick descend

nice catch though
Logged
kea001
Guest
« Reply #3 on: June 12, 2009, 10:17:17 AM »

some times you're the windshield sometimes you're the bug...c'est la vie

Bwahahahaha!!! Gotta remember that one.




'Allo..Moncton Centre."
« Last Edit: June 12, 2009, 10:29:20 AM by kea001 » Logged
Dan CZQM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 123



WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 12, 2009, 04:26:30 PM »

yep, you can't please everyone all the time, but it sure makes for some nice liveatc postings lately!!
Logged

Dan
CZQM-CYQM Feeder
philip
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #5 on: June 13, 2009, 03:16:21 PM »

Shouldn't it be ODD's one way and even's the other...
If so...then 350, 330, 370 should be ok...
Logged
sykocus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 349



« Reply #6 on: June 13, 2009, 03:30:44 PM »

Shouldn't it be ODD's one way and even's the other...
If so...then 350, 330, 370 should be ok...

Sounds like they had a lot of traffic and they had someone westbound that they had to put at 350.
Logged

Yesterday I couldn't spell air traffic controller. Today I R one.
DaytonaAirport
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #7 on: June 17, 2009, 02:39:21 AM »

would he rather descend or hit another aircraft?

i'd pick descend

nice catch though
i'd pick a mid-air collision grin
Logged
DaytonaAirport
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #8 on: June 17, 2009, 02:41:34 AM »

Shouldn't it be ODD's one way and even's the other...
If so...then 350, 330, 370 should be ok...
I'l go with a 350 (unless there's another jet, then it's 330)
Logged
Braun
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #9 on: June 17, 2009, 07:21:12 PM »

Shouldn't it be ODD's one way and even's the other...
If so...then 350, 330, 370 should be ok...
Depends if on of the aircrafts are RVSM or not, if not 2000' separation so 330 and 340 wont work with two aircraft opposite direction!
Logged
Dan CZQM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 123



WWW
« Reply #10 on: June 17, 2009, 07:46:09 PM »


[/quote]Depends if on of the aircrafts are RVSM or not, if not 2000' separation so 330 and 340 wont work with two aircraft opposite direction!
[/quote]

Yes RVSM is in operation.  The problem is that coming off oceanic, or for that matter going to Oceanic,  the traffic is so heavy that the neodd/sweven does not always apply over Gander and Moncton FIR for overflights.  If you listen to the feed after1pmEST and again in the evening (locally) after 7pmEST you will hear all sort of pilot requests as they "jockey" for the best ride at the best altitudes.
In this case, the pilot requested and got FL350 from Boston, but when he got to Moncton 20 minutes later they needed him out of the way.  He was just pissed that Boston allowed his request.  But ATC always tries to accomodate the pilots if it is safe to do so.

Dan
CZQM/CYQM Feeder
Logged

Dan
CZQM-CYQM Feeder
sykocus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 349



« Reply #11 on: June 17, 2009, 11:38:31 PM »

Shouldn't it be ODD's one way and even's the other...
If so...then 350, 330, 370 should be ok...
Depends if on of the aircrafts are RVSM or not, if not 2000' separation so 330 and 340 wont work with two aircraft opposite direction!

if there was any kind of traffic it's hard to imagine them letting anyone that's not RVSM certified above 280.
Logged

Yesterday I couldn't spell air traffic controller. Today I R one.
B777ER
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #12 on: July 11, 2009, 03:04:12 AM »

Eastbound AFR6419 upon entering Moncton airspace is told to change his FL.  He had just climbed to FL350 and is now told to either go FL330 or FL370.  ATC tells him he is but one going east with 180 aircrafts going west.



That French pilot was totally unprofessional.  Just do what you're told.  It's not Boston Center's fault - surely there was a reason for climbing him to FL350.  I wouldn't want to be a passenger in the back if the guy up front is questioning the controller's instructions.  Don't ask why - just do it.

You will never be a pax on an AF flight with a number of 6419. Those are AF's cargo flight numbers. Either a 744F or one of their new 777F's.
Logged
mikenftsmith
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 23


« Reply #13 on: July 11, 2009, 09:12:42 PM »

That French pilot was totally unprofessional.  Just do what you're told.  It's not Boston Center's fault - surely there was a reason for climbing him to FL350.  I wouldn't want to be a passenger in the back if the guy up front is questioning the controller's instructions.  Don't ask why - just do it.
[/

Its the responsibility of the pilot to question any atc command that he or she is unsure about the reason or it might put the safety of his aircraft in question.Yes,pilots and controllers must work together but  the pilot has the final authority over his aircraft. I wouldnt want to be a passenger in the back if "the guy up front"didnt ask why,just did it.   
Logged
wlewis06
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #14 on: July 13, 2009, 10:38:36 AM »

That French pilot was totally unprofessional.  Just do what you're told.  It's not Boston Center's fault - surely there was a reason for climbing him to FL350.  I wouldn't want to be a passenger in the back if the guy up front is questioning the controller's instructions.  Don't ask why - just do it.
[/

Its the responsibility of the pilot to question any atc command that he or she is unsure about the reason or it might put the safety of his aircraft in question.Yes,pilots and controllers must work together but  the pilot has the final authority over his aircraft. I wouldnt want to be a passenger in the back if "the guy up front"didnt ask why,just did it.   
The pilot's questioning of the controller wasn't necessary.  Maybe the climb then descent was inconvenient but I didn't hear anything indicating it would be unsafe to comply with the instruction.  If there was an impending collision and the AFR pilot decided to question the descent instruction the results could have been castastrophic.  What if AFR didn't have a visual on the other traffic or on TCAS?  If there's no reason not to comply, then the pilot should comply with the controller's instructions.
Logged
mikenftsmith
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 23


« Reply #15 on: July 13, 2009, 08:59:50 PM »

I went back and listened to the clip again,the controller could have said descend to fl330 for opposite direction traffic.The AF pilot had every right to question atc,since he was not initially given a reason for the decent after the climb.In my flying and listening on here you hear controllers give reasons all the time,position and hold,traffic crossing down field,fly heading 085 short vector through the loc for spacing are just a couple.
Logged
sykocus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 349



« Reply #16 on: July 14, 2009, 12:48:33 AM »

Since we're all adding our two cents. I'll throw mine in there as a controller. I don't the AF pilot was out of line. Having to descend after already being given a climb is probably big money in fuel especially when it comes to tran-oceanic flights. From the controllers perspective: I know from personal experience controlling flights from all different language backgrounds that I will often "chunk" my transmissions when I know I'm dealing with a non-native English speaker. Transmissions that I would normally combine. This helps get the important information across with less opportunity for confusion and misunderstanding. Also while I find it to be beneficial to keep give pilots reasons when doing things out of the ordinary a reason for climb/decent is not required.
Logged

Yesterday I couldn't spell air traffic controller. Today I R one.
klkm
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #17 on: July 16, 2009, 10:07:16 PM »

This happens all the time with trans atlantic flights.  The Boston controllers in this case are separating just for basic radar, they may try to set up Moncton with some sort of help for the non-radar separation that will be required but their setup may not fit into the the full scheme of things down the line.  Transitioning from radar separation to non-radar means going from 5 miles to 10 minutes of separation at altitude.  So the Boston controllers likely climbed the Air France flight, then Moncton got them, went to coordinate them into non-radar, found out their altitude was not going to work, and had to descend them for traffic.  This happens every night for a lot of planes going out over the ocean.  Not everyone can get their altitudes and they need to descend or climb to an altitude that may not be optimal for fuel consumption. 

Many of times pilots complain about it, delay their descents and start asking questions as if "XXXX descend and maintain FL330" is not an ATC clearance.  It is, do it, then ask questions.  They can get all pissy about it but we controllers don't make the rules we just separate traffic using them, and he was apparently a little late to the show and missed out on getting his altitude.  Typically as the bunch that is using up the higher altitude goes across they will all ask for higher and by the end of the flight everyone will gain 3-4,000ft on the way across. 
Logged
Silly Sod
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5



« Reply #18 on: July 17, 2009, 01:18:04 PM »

Giving D-sense is part of the game.  Just easier to do when it's AF.  grin
Logged
seagull
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


« Reply #19 on: July 19, 2009, 11:12:08 AM »

Moncton centre is mostly a radar environment. 

For RVSM airspace:

Evening Moncton centre structures airspace for the eastbound flow, thus FL340 & FL360 are actually used for eastbound flights. (Allowing FL300, 320, 380, & 400 the only west bound levels)

Daytime Moncton centre structures the other way for aircraft coming off the ocean (westbound flow).  This was the case with AFR in this recording.  FL350 & FL390 are used as westbound levels.  (Allowing FL290, 310, 330, 370 & 410 as eastbound levels)

All this to accommodate the large volume of easterly or westerly traffic at these peak times. 

Boston centre is aware of this structure however sometimes they will move an aircraft into a level against the structure to separate traffic within their airspace.  Unfortunately when this happens close to the Moncton boundary they have to be moved again once in Moncton airspace.  It was the one move shortly after the other that caused the AFR reaction.  The Moncton controller reacted as such because they structure airspace every day.  It's nothing new & unsafe for the AFR to be there. 

It's all a bit unusual but interesting.  Thanks. 
Logged
Dan CZQM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 123



WWW
« Reply #20 on: July 19, 2009, 05:18:48 PM »

Thanks for the great explanation.  Listening to the feed on a regular basis, you can really get a sense for this.
Please feel free to enlighten us some more when you have a chance.


Dan CZQM/CYQM Feeder
Logged

Dan
CZQM-CYQM Feeder
Pages: [1] 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!