good example of controller forgetting little guys pay taxes to

[aaronk25]

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N201AD

Use this link and Zoom in on KBMI (Baltimore/washington approach. So I flew from the chicago area tonight to KBMI for a business trip. They assigned me the visual for 33R and vectored me around the north the the east side of the airport. They brought me to almost the final approach fix at a 90 degree, but becuase I couldn't see the runway vectored me back east for 10 miles because he said he had other traffic closing behind. I should have declined the visual in the first place but, didnt want to because I thought I'd have to go to Miami first

Then they quickly gave me a VOR approach to 28. Which isn't what I wanted, I wanted a ILS! I understand we have small planes that have to be at a slow 132KTS at the FAF to get the legs out, but sure pisses me off that instead of give a jet a vector with 2 crew and lots more equipment and better able to recongfigure than the single IFR pilot they decided to give the plane with 1/2 the crew and 1/2 the equipment the opportunity to dink around in and our of IMC at night while trying to quickly load another approach and reconfigure for a runway that wasn't the active (meaning I didn't brief for the 28vor) who the heck would at KBWI.

I will always be curtioius to controllers but I am done not getting what I want, (when in challenging weather conditions). I see how a pilot could easy get distracted and have a accident when there is that much going on in the cockpit. From now on if its boarder line visual conditions at a big airport. I'm demanding the ILS. Oh ya and they updated ATIS 4 times in 20 mins, because of the fog.....why the heck were they doing visual approaches.

Aaron-----always learning.

[201er]

Nice flight. A keyword to keep in your back pocket that helps get you what you need is "unable."

[AndyFromCB]

Best one ever I got in Chicago was: maintain 160 until FAF.

[John Pleisse]

I have found BWI controllers to be the most accomdating on the planet. In bad weather, I have heard the frequencies close-in so jammed and busy, that the controller required everyone to stop saying "Potomac Approach" and only address with "Edgar". I am certain you were aware that 33R is the "GA side" on the airport and the "hump and dump" visual approach was what was expected. Bee-Dub is real hard to pick out of ground clutter in wx or at night. Always ask for the localizer and always know the GA prefered sides of airports. Thinking out loud here.

Oh...and I love the title of the thread. But it should be ammended to change "taxes" to "user fees". Look out, here it comes.

A shame too. A crying shame. Time to "pay our fair share".

[Cruiser]

from the track it looks like you made an approach and then went missed?

I think the big guys use the approach guidance even when they are on visual approaches.

[RJBrown]

My favorite here in Denver landing KAPA. Coming in from the southwest on the LARKS arrival min crossing altitude is 14400. From there to PAYDD the min drops only to 13800. At that point they COULD start you down and vector for CASSE (NDB,LOM) and 8000 but they never do. The LARKS arrival crosses inside CASSE and they usually keep you high until they hand you off 5000' high and close to CASSE. They should just say "decend and maintain 11000 expect the slam dunk to the ILS 35 right" and be honest about what you are going to get. Sometimes it is easier and safer to simply call the miss soon after being cleared way high and fast for the approach. Once cleared you can desend to 9000 cross the inner marker then call the miss and turn right direct CASSE. At that point you can fly a stabilized approach. It seems the problem here is center holds on to you too long and too high. That then makes a mess for you and approach. Center acts like you are headed for the Falcon VOR and the DEN airport but approach doesn't want you anywhere near there.

[1964-M20E]

When inbound I'll ask ATC for lower when I feel I need it and providing the terrain allows for it. However, I’m a flatlander and I do not have mountain issues to deal with. Generally MSL and AGL are not that far apart where I fly.

[bnicolette]

Aaron,

BWI is obviously a busy airport and like John said they are some of the most accommodating controllers on the east coast. (unlike PHL)

Tracking around to the north of BWI is perfectly normal and is what they always do when landing northwest.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N211RN/history/20121109/2000Z/KAFJ/KBWI

But wow, they sure did run you all over the place trying to keep you clear of the other arrivals. Did you have the ILS 33R tuned in and ready to go when you were initially being vectored in?

[Joe Zuffoletto]

My favorite here in Denver landing KAPA. Coming in from the southwest on the LARKS arrival min crossing altitude is 14400. From there to PAYDD the min drops only to 13800. At that point they COULD start you down and vector for CASSE (NDB,LOM) and 8000 but they never do. The LARKS arrival crosses inside CASSE and they usually keep you high until they hand you off 5000' high and close to CASSE. They should just say "decend and maintain 11000 expect the slam dunk to the ILS 35 right" and be honest about what you are going to get. Sometimes it is easier and safer to simply call the miss soon after being cleared way high and fast for the approach. Once cleared you can desend to 9000 cross the inner marker then call the miss and turn right direct CASSE. At that point you can fly a stabilized approach. It seems the problem here is center holds on to you too long and too high. That then makes a mess for you and approach. Center acts like you are headed for the Falcon VOR and the DEN airport but approach doesn't want you anywhere near there.

Hear, hear! The IFR arrival you mention into KAPA is absolutely ridiculous and terrifying to passengers. If conditions permit I simply cancel IFR over the foothills and descend gradually over the plains, then come back and land runway 28.

[gregwatts]

http://flightaware.c...e/flight/N201AD

Use this link and Zoom in on KBMI (Baltimore/washington approach. So I flew from the chicago area tonight to KBMI for a business trip. They assigned me the visual for 33R and vectored me around the north the the east side of the airport. They brought me to almost the final approach fix at a 90 degree, but becuase I couldn't see the runway vectored me back east for 10 miles because he said he had other traffic closing behind. I should have declined the visual in the first place but, didnt want to because I thought I'd have to go to Miami first

Then they quickly gave me a VOR approach to 28. Which isn't what I wanted, I wanted a ILS! I understand we have small planes that have to be at a slow 132KTS at the FAF to get the legs out, but sure pisses me off that instead of give a jet a vector with 2 crew and lots more equipment and better able to recongfigure than the single IFR pilot they decided to give the plane with 1/2 the crew and 1/2 the equipment the opportunity to dink around in and our of IMC at night while trying to quickly load another approach and reconfigure for a runway that wasn't the active (meaning I didn't brief for the 28vor) who the heck would at KBWI.

I will always be curtioius to controllers but I am done not getting what I want, (when in challenging weather conditions). I see how a pilot could easy get distracted and have a accident when there is that much going on in the cockpit. From now on if its boarder line visual conditions at a big airport. I'm demanding the ILS. Oh ya and they updated ATIS 4 times in 20 mins, because of the fog.....why the heck were they doing visual approaches.

Aaron-----always learning.

A Mooney will never get priority over Pt 135 bizjet. I have the upmost respect for the respect for the ATC......and in the northeast, I believe they are among the best. My guess is that you should have requested the full approach. Without knowing what equipment you have onboard, I have my Garmin 430 as well as a Garmin 696, I think I would have proceeded on the visual and if you had 33R dialed in, you would have probably landed with no issues.

ATC is group that I don't mind paying taxes for.

Next time will be better......I'm sure.

[201er]

My guess is that you should have requested the full approach. Without knowing what equipment you have onboard, I have my Garmin 430 as well as a Garmin 696, I think I would have proceeded on the visual and if you had 33R dialed in, you would have probably landed with no issues.

Are you saying that you would have lied to ATC that you saw the runway and then continued on an instrument approach that you weren't cleared for? This sure seems like an issue to me... please tell me I misunderstood.

[aaronk25]

from the track it looks like you made an approach and then went missed?

I

I think the big guys use the approach guidance even when they are on visual approaches.

A Mooney will never get priority over Pt 135 bizjet. I have the upmost respect for the respect for the ATC......and in the northeast, I believe they are among the best. My guess is that you should have requested the full approach. Without knowing what equipment you have onboard, I have my Garmin 430 as well as a Garmin 696, I think I would have proceeded on the visual and if you had 33R dialed in, you would have probably landed with no issues.

ATC is group that I don't mind paying taxes for.

Next time will be better......I'm sure.

I had the 33R all dialed in the problems was they brought me to the FAF at 90degrees or close to it and then went the turned me in bound i had just a few seconds to spot it and didn't see it. If I was on the 33 ILS I would have seen it. It was one of those nights where it was clear and low clouds. It was close to 10PM after a long day work and I'm sure my eyes werent as sharp as normal.

I have a 650, GPSS steer and a 3 axis autopilot, which certainly helps but for my second apprach I barley had everything loaded in before the vector they gave me got me to the FAF. The runway lights were alot lower, and I couldn't quite be sure it was 28 ahead of me, because it looked like I had traffic on the runway, being a big running light. It is quite possible they had the lights on the lowest intensity and forgot to bring them up since that wasn't the active. Anyway that was my second approach and when I got to minimums and saw what I thought was traffic on the runway, and a runway that I couldn't really make out, I said "1AD going missed" I could tell they were scrambling when they said immediate turn to 030 climb 3000.

[bnicolette]

There are many times when I might not have the runway in sight but I do have the airport environment in sight. If you are already set up for the approach (visual or instrument) and ATC is vectoring you around for a particular runway, there is nothing wrong once cleared for the visual approach to keep tracking to intercept the localizer and then ride the GS down. It doesn't have to be an instrument approach. However, if there is ever any question about situational awareness this is probably not a good option.

Aaron I'm sure you were tired that time of night. You did the right thing by letting them know it wasn't in sight. It's too bad that they had that much traffic that you got all twisted and turned around. Please don't let ATC rush you or lead you into something you're not ready for or don't want to do.

I don't think "unable" would have worked for you in that situation as you would have probably just been vectored even further away.

When I am approaching an airport, Mooney or corporate jet, I generally have the same set up. If I was planning on landing 33R and being vectored around I would have had the ILS dialed in and course set, I would have had my 396 set direct to the FAF so that I had a course line from the FAF to the runway. If it were VMC and near the FAF and they asked me if I had the runway in sight I would have come back with I have the airport in sight and plan on intercepting the localizer and riding the GS down. At night time I will always ride the GS down if available especially if I'm tired. Doesn't mean I do a full instrument approach, it just means that I am doing a visual approach backed up with the ILS. However, if there is ANY question of situational awareness then by all means ask to be vectored around for the full approach (outside the FAF).

Again, you were probably tired so best not to try anything silly and to do exactly what you did! It's just too bad it took them so long to get you back around. In any event, Good job!

[gregwatts]

Are you saying that you would have lied to ATC that you saw the runway and then continued on an instrument approach that you weren't cleared for? This sure seems like an issue to me... please tell me I misunderstood.

Please re-read the original post. He was cleared for a visual approach........I would have proceeded on the visual approach.....using whatever instrumentation I had dialed in........and waited a few more seconds to identify the runway. ATC usually doesn't ask if you can see the runway when you're on a visual.

[201er]

Please re-read the original post. He was cleared for a visual approach........I would have proceeded on the visual approach.....using whatever instrumentation I had dialed in........and waited a few more seconds to identify the runway. ATC usually doesn't ask if you can see the runway when you're on a visual.

Ah ok. Now I see that there is a difference between seeing the airport and seeing the runway. I was kind of thinking them as one and the same until I reread the details above and in the AIM.