Odd approach clearance...am I an idiot or did ATC screw up?

[Marauder]

7 hours ago, DXB said:

My needle was at full deflection for the FAC. And even if  I were already very close to the FAC,  telling me go direct to the FAF is simply the wrong way to issue the approach clearance - it goes against the most basic rules for controllers giving vectors to final and shouldn't ever happen in Philly or anywhere else.  Last night I had a discussion with my favorite instructor, who reviewed the tape as well.  I wound up agreeing with him - controllers know the rules for how to vector someone onto final very well, and it's unlikely this controller would violate those ingrained rules deliberately.  Instead, she simply brain farted by thinking PACKS was an IAF or IF and not the FAF.   If that was really what she was thinking, then my saying "how about 180 to join the FAC?" as @midlifeflyer suggests might have led her to see her mistake but also might have generated more confusion if she didn't.  My instructor suggested something like "you want me to cross the FAF at 3000 and then start the procedure?"  to make it clear she was sending me direct to the FAF.  Regardless, my brain was poised at that point to hand fly an intercept (basic autopilot) and proved not plastic enough to shift into analyzing what was going on when I got that bizarre instruction.   

Dev - I know you are relatively low time IFR pilot and it is hard to be in an "analysis mode" when you have a heavy workload. When I brief an approach plate, I am telling myself what I should expect coming from the direction I am arriving from. This helps with the mental preparation if things go sideways.

I have seen far stranger things from controllers. They are human. The advice you are being given is correct -- "ask". My favorite Philly story is calling approach control for a clearance on the ground out of New Garden. The controller gave me a circuitous route heading east about 40 miles east before going to the westerly direction I needed to go towards. When I got in the air, the controller asked me if I was on a IFR training flight and why I was flying so far east when I intended to head west. I felt like saying "because you're the knuckleheads that gave me this clearance" but instead graciously accepted a due west waypoint. This stuff happens. With experience you'll learn when it is important to ask for clarification or what you want and also know that there are times, short of declaring an emergency, you ain't going to get it.

[Yooper Rocketman]

16 hours ago, Marauder said:

My favorite Philly story is calling approach control for a clearance on the ground out of New Garden. The controller gave me a circuitous route heading east about 40 miles east before going to the westerly direction I needed to go towards. When I got in the air, the controller asked me if I was on a IFR training flight and why I was flying so far east when I intended to head west. I felt like saying "because you're the knuckleheads that gave me this clearance" but instead graciously accepted a due west waypoint.

I came out of New Garden about 15 years ago, with 1500' ceilings and had filed an IFR clearance........ then direct to KIMT, on a Sunday afternoon (Yep, I know...... I didn't actually think I was going to get it).  SO, the FBO is closed, no payphone (they had them in those days) and no cell coverage.  So... I launch VFR and attempt to pick up the clearance airborne.  The Philly controllers response was priceless.  "You actually think I'm giving you an IFR clearance, DIRECT, AIRBORNE??"   "You should have called me on the ground".  I explained what I just typed above and he came back with "the best I can give you is VFR flight following".  Yippee 100+ miles west before ceilings go up, stuck at VFR  1,000' AGL.  

A few minutes later another controller comes on, clearly a supervisor, and asks if I'm ready to copy an IFR Clearance (I swear I could detect some cynicism in his voice too).  I said yes and he rattled off a really fast clearance with at least 10 way points before getting over mid-Ohio,  then direct to KIMT.   I read it back to him twice as fast as he read it to me and got "read back correct".  At that point he probably realized I knew what I was doing, but just had no clue what to file for routing since I was from the upper Midwest, and totally unfamiliar with that area.  

In less than 15 minutes, the same controller came back with "cleared DIRECT destination".  I guess I had served my suspension in the penalty box.

Tom

[Jerry 5TJ]

The Dick Rochfort guideline for ATC communications:

1. Tell them what you prefer
2. Tell them what you will accept
3. Everything else, tell them 'unable.'

If I am polite and precise with my requests I find ATC will try to do what I want.

 

[PT20J]

Sounds like a simple mistake by the controller. Controllers used to vector to intercept a course. Eventually they caught on that it's easier with GPS for us to fly to a fix and they started doing that more. It's not uncommon to get vectored to begin an approach at an IF. But, on an RNAV approach they are supposed to vector you to a point at least 2 miles outside the approach gate  (see below). 

It's always safest to question any clearance or instruction that doesn't seem right. As long as you have gas, you have all the time in the world. The controller has a lot of airspace to vector you around safely while you get things sorted out between you. 

Skip

[gsxrpilot]

I'm pretty quick to err in favor of the controller and comply if I'm at all able to do so... when in a busy Bravo area. Most of my "busy Bravo" time is with the DFW Bravo. Flying into that Bravo on an IFR clearance and then declining a direction, or even asking for delaying vectors, might just get you one... over Arkansas.

I've accepted some pretty complicated or last minute changes in vectors or clearances, just to get down and get it over with.

Obviously I'm going to pull the "Unable" card if I think I'm in a critically dangerous situation. But otherwise, I'll figure out how to make it happen and comply. 

[donkaye]

If the request doesn't work with one Controller, I just keep asking down the line until it doesn't make any more sense to ask because there's no more  time savings.

[midlifeflyer]

On 9/3/2019 at 4:50 AM, donkaye said:

The best Article I've read on assertively interacting with ATC, by Mike Bush is below.  After reading it, now what would you do again in the same circumstance?

Let's Make a Deal.pdf 2.32 MB · 58 downloads

I read that one years ago. Definitely a keeper. 

[donkaye]

3 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

I read that one years ago. Definitely a keeper. 

Yes, as you can see from the bottom of the article it was written in 1994, before he became known as an engine guru.

[cliffy]

I try to teach-  "NO" is always an option. 

[pinerunner]

I'm working on my ticket and not the most experienced here (if fact maybe the least). I think the best response would have been to read back her clearance as you hope she meant it. Some like "turn lift to intercept, then direct FAF, maintain 3000 until established." This is the stuff that scares me about IFR.

[donkaye]

2 minutes ago, pinerunner said:

I'm working on my ticket and not the most experienced here (if fact maybe the least). I think the best response would have been to read back her clearance as you hope she meant it. Some like "turn lift to intercept, then direct FAF, maintain 3000 until established." This is the stuff that scares me about IFR.

I don't think that would be a good idea even if it was well meaning.  We shouldn't try and "interpret" a Controller's meaning.  It is best to straighten it out directly with them before accepting the clearance--and do it with tact.  Not, "That doesn't make any sense,  You're not supposed to vector me directly to a final approach fix. Don't you know the rules?  Get me a supervisor."  Try that and expect a vector to Timbuktu.

[jaylw314]

10 minutes ago, pinerunner said:

I'm working on my ticket and not the most experienced here (if fact maybe the least). I think the best response would have been to read back her clearance as you hope she meant it. Some like "turn lift to intercept, then direct FAF, maintain 3000 until established." This is the stuff that scares me about IFR.

Don't do it that way.  Reading back a clearance or instruction is an acceptance of that clearance or instruction.  You'd want to ask for clarification or ask to verify those instructions.

Edit:  @donkaye beat me.  Listen to that guy instead  

[PT20J]

NASA did a study on “hearback” error years ago. The conclusion was that if you read back something different than what was said, much of the time the controller won’t catch it. Expectation bias causes them to hear what they expect to hear. 

Skip

[midlifeflyer]

4 hours ago, cliffy said:

I try to teach-  "NO" is always an option. 

This also applies to VFR. Some years ago at my former home base, a student pilot was soloing. Upon landing, the pilot received, "turn left next taxiway." Unfortunately the location of the ground roll and the pilot's inexperience made that difficult. More unfortunately, the pilot's inexperience led to trying instead of "unable."  Airplane ended up in the median weeds and the runway was closed until it could be towed out.

[midlifeflyer]

4 hours ago, pinerunner said:

I'm working on my ticket and not the most experienced here (if fact maybe the least). I think the best response would have been to read back her clearance as you hope she meant it. Some like "turn lift to intercept, then direct FAF, maintain 3000 until established." This is the stuff that scares me about IFR.

I have almost the same take on this as the others. But I also have a different problem with it.

If you think about it, it's unclear. I'm not sure it really says anything to alert the controller what you want to do and that it is different .  "Turn left to intercept, then direct to the FAF" doesn't compute.  It's either turn left direct to the FAF or turn to intercept the FAC. Controller would probably take it as a poor read-back if she noticed anything at all.  "Turn left to intercept the final approach course and maintain 3000 until established" would be clearer and is in aviation-speak too.

I'm personally a fan of the read-back-what-I-think-it-meant idea but one has to be careful about its use. Most common place is after a vector for traffic being told to "proceed on course." You can see discussions galore on the subject of whether that means direct to the next waypoint or intercept the original courseline you deviated from. I don't get into that. I just read back the one which seems most appropriate.  So far I have't been corrected or yelled at.

On this one, I'm a little more hesitant to take the risk the controller did not notice my change. What if the controller actually wanted me to remain high - for other traffic. So I would offer the alternative, but make it clear it is an alternative. In an earlier post, I used "How about we...?" as an intro. You might find other phrases just as useful. "Unable 3000 until the FAF. How about..." would be a pretty good quick one to makes sure the controller is paying attention (and right in line with Bush's article).

 

 

[whiskytango]

One thing to be aware of is a tendency for some controllers to blindly accept whatever clearance their computer spits out.  Computers make mistakes too.  I was once departing Martha's Vineyard and was given a clearance that had me fly to a fix, make a 180 and fly back to the airport, and then make another 180 to get established on course.  I read the clearance back as given and was told "readback correct".   After looking at the course on the Foreflight map page I called ATC again, and told them that I wanted to confirm that they wanted me to make a series of 180 degree turns before getting established on course.  The controller that gave me the clearance said "that is correct".  Moments later, another controller called me, cancelled the first clearance, and gave me a completely different clearance that made sense.   The old saying "trust but verify" applies to ATC. 

[n961jk]

On 9/3/2019 at 3:50 AM, donkaye said:

The best Article I've read on assertively interacting with ATC, by Mike Bush is below.  After reading it, now what would you do again in the same circumstance?

Let's Make a Deal.pdf 2.32 MB · 79 downloads

That was truly an amazing article. I have saved this in my notebook for future use.

[larrynimmo]

All I can say is that I wish I had read this article before doing this trip..