One controllers likes and dislikes. Ask about your plane.

[cubonfloats]

Hate to tell ya but the system is there to serve the airplanes, not the other way around...if a RJ100 makes your life a little difficult, guess what, that's the job. I can assure you the pilots aren't climbing slowly just to irritate you. Calling a design "bad" just because it doesn't have the performance of another type is kind of...childish? I would think a professional approach would be to look at it as a challenge, trying to fit together the high and low speed, high and low types. Cause ummm...isn't that what you trained for?

Exactly. Cars don't exist to support the paving industry, and airplanes don't exist to support Air Traffic Controllers. You should get used to airlines doing everything more slowly due to the price of fuel. You'll just have to find a way to fit the M.91 C750's in somehow.

oh common guys. these ATC are helping you out more than you give them credit for. Sure "pilots came first" but aviation would still be in the '30s if we didn't have these guys watching out for us. Especially all you IFR guys.

Remember, ATC can make a pilot's day much worse than a pilot can make the ATC's.

Personally I thing those guys do a very good job and contribute to very little aviation accidents. If they were not there, the accident rates would be much higher, and you could pretty much kiss IFR goodbye

[Rockie]

I never said they didn't help us out and I give them enormous credit for what they do. When they ask me to do something I do it to the best of my ability, and I try and make their life easier by being proactive on visuals and anywhere else I can. But there is only so much a person can do with their airplane. This poster was obviously looking for some sort of reaction and I'd say he got it.

I don't know about the Speedbird pilots (actually I do), but the British Air Traffic Controllers are far and away the best I've ever seen. A pleasure to deal with every time.

[Cat Driver]

If you want to experience ATC you need to fly out of Launda for a while.

[scrambled_legs]

But there is only so much a person can do with their airplane. This poster was obviously looking for some sort of reaction and I'd say he got it.

Wow... how did this jump from annoying planes to incompetent pilots? If you sat behind a screen all day controlling aircraft, you'd understand where this poster is coming from. He's only referring to the annoying characteristics inherant to certain aircraft, nothing to do with the pilots that are stuck flying them. How come some pilots are more prone to slapping you when you insult the plane that they are paid to fly, then if you insult their wife?

Myself, I have a hate on for the CRJ's. I've never seen a plane that I'd be more embarrassed to have to admit that they're made in Canada. Can't accept crosswinds, contaminated runways, short runways, cold, or any of the other conditions prevalent in our winter weather. I don't know how many times I've seen an APU cop out because it's below -15. Or there was the other time when they had to pull fuel off and add an extra stop on a mid range flight because the longer runway was unavailable and they couldn't depart a 6,400' rwy with a 20kt headwind. Oh and don't expect your luggage to be on the same flight... they can't fit both of you. It's no wonder they're ditching life vests in a desperate attempt to be able to operate them. Even the old bach jet seems to be a better quality aircraft and we used to laugh at how many times they got pushed back only to pull ahead to deboard, due to winter conditions. It's only saving grace appears to be the ridiculously low operating costs.

[Duncan Idaho]

wqerqwer

[FamilyGuy]

But anyway, what I wanted to add. I'm a little disappointed that controllers are disgruntled with having to handle an airplane that does not perform the same as all the other airplanes they're handling. The people I work with on a daily basis, which admittedly are pilots, find it really exciting to be booked for a trip into a short grass strip in challenging conditions. They enjoy it, because it takes skill! ....I wish that more controllers shared the same passion for their job and the same excitement at being faced with problems to solve and challenging conditions that they excel at and the opportunity to improve the efficiency and comfort of all those involved.

I think the difference is ATC is almost always a challenging occupation. I think they face enough real challenge everyday that they don't need to go looking for more. An airplane such as the CRJ1/2 that doesn't fit in very well at all is not a challenge - it's a hazard. Can't wait to see what happens once VLJ's become popular . Citations are bad, CRJ 1/2's are worse...but lots of VLJ's

[AuxBatOn]

FG, so if I understand, you'd want all the aircraft to fly the same speed, climb at the same rate and do everything exactly the same?

[FamilyGuy]

NO that's not what I implied at all.

If you want to play with the big boys you've got to keep up (closely)..that's all. Taking half a province to level..well that's just plain unacceptable. The thread's original topic was aircraft that annoy. It's not that the good folks at ATC can't cope - its' that they shouldn't have to. The diff between a RJ-1 and an -9 are so large as to be unimaginable. Although in the "old days" an L1011 was a pig vs. a DC10 or 742...but it wasn't so large.

BTW I personnaly think it's more about company profiles than anything else - but I have no CRJ time so I can't really confirm that.

[complexintentions]

If you want to experience ATC you need to fly out of Launda for a while.

Or pretty much anywhere in Africa. It's the wild west. Kind of makes complaining about RJ's kinda funny! It's like Hedley complaining about the price of tires in Canada...for most of the world it's a bit of a luxury to have such high-level whines! Human nature I guess.

[Tim]

Another avcanada thread spirals into 'you're stupid', 'you're stupider'. The controlled made some valid points about both things he appreciates and thigns that make his job harder. If we use a simply analagy to a traffic cop (no offense to controllers...or traffic cops) imagine what life would be like if every car drove in a compleatly different manner? Now of course from our end we expect the controllers to be able to do in a professional manner regardless of what type of a/c we fly. And I don't think a critical phase of flight should be any time to talk to a pilot even if there are two. Calling a pilot during a take-off or landing roll won't get the required action done any quicker because the plane only has one option (for the most part) on how to fly that particular phase of flight. If you have to wait to a safe speed to exit the runway - not to mention the CARs say you don't need a clearence to exit - how is telling the pilot shortly after touchdown going to get it done any quicker?

[scrambled_legs]

I'm surprised at how much this thread is filled with negativity and misinformation. I'm quite confident that any RJ can depart a 6400' runway with no headwind, and would be probably switching centre by the end of a 6400 footer with a 20 knot headwind.

But anyway, what I wanted to add. I'm a little disappointed that controllers are disgruntled with having to handle an airplane that does not perform the same as all the other airplanes they're handling. The people I work with on a daily basis, which admittedly are pilots, find it really exciting to be booked for a trip into a short grass strip in challenging conditions. They enjoy it, because it takes skill! I'm sure this is the case with many controllers and flight service personnel, but I have to admit, from reading this thread I wish that more controllers shared the same passion for their job and the same excitement at being faced with problems to solve and challenging conditions that they excel at and the opportunity to improve the efficiency and comfort of all those involved.

Again, reading between the lines and jumping to the wrong conclusion. I think that most ATC that hate a paticular plane, do so because on our end even though they're brand new they're being outperformed by the first jets to be made. From our side it just appears to be a hunk of junk. Duncan Idaho, it was an RJ9 fully loaded and after stating they're ready for taxi to the long rwy and I informed them that it was unavailable, they said they'd have to return to the gate. They then pulled a fuel truck up, dumped fuel and had a new flight plan come out with a new intermediate destination. Any RJ9 drivers out there care to comment???

I'm a pilot as well and your right, there's nothing more exciting than a small high altitude lake where you have to spin a few circles to get onto the step and wait for the winds to shift to get airborne and over the ridge at the end. As a controller though, there are certain planes that just suck performance wise or are too good a performer in one aspect and not others. Some suck at climbing, some suck at cruise speeds etc. If you want a comparison, don't compare it to something as thrilling as pushing the limits of an aircraft. Compare it to trying to get to your destination quickly and having a motorhome full of tourists at the front of a huge line up of cars. It's not a challenge or exciting, its just a pain in the ass. Controllers love to have all the aircraft performing at their max speed or running everyone as tightly and efficiently as possible. This is the challenge that we enjoy and get excited over. Having one guy interfering with 20 other planes making them all suffer, is a motorhome on a 2 lane highway... a pain in the ass, boring and frustrating. We're not disgruntled but I for one am miffed when cars get faster and better at manouvering, planes tend to get slower and less manouverable. You'll never see a controller complain over the challenge of having to work an F18 inbetween their regular speed traffic, but having to work all their traffic around one slow guy can be frustrating.

[Rockie]

But there is only so much a person can do with their airplane. This poster was obviously looking for some sort of reaction and I'd say he got it.

Wow... how did this jump from annoying planes to incompetent pilots?

Answer...It didn't. It was a comment on the performance limitations of an aircraft.

The poster made an editorial comment on various aircraft types for a reason. What do you suppose that reason is? Me, I think he was looking for some feedback, in fact he came right out and asked for it. Why is your snot in a knot when he gets it? His comment about Speedbird pilots was a not so subtle provocation as well.

[Old Dog Flying]

I'm probably going to get shot down in flames for this reply but here goes: I've worked both sides as a VFR/IFR controller and as a flying instructor for many years and the whining about performance of aircraft goes right back to the early days of a controllers training. Yapping at a pilot as the aircraft is touching down is a no-no but there are plenty of controllers who do it on a regular basis...and there are left seaters who go out of their way to annoy the controllers..so it works both ways.

A good many of the newer controllers have no experience in the cockpit and they are generally the first to complain about pilots and their dumb slow airplanes. As a tower controller trying to train these types, it was very frustrating to hear their comments, off air, about how the old slow tail-draggers should not be allowed into controlled airports because they can't keep up with the flow. They frequently snap at the tail-draggers to expedite your taxiing and clear at ( ) and my responce was "Don't do it dummy or you'll be closing the runway for an hour to clean upo the mess" and yet they still thought that they were doing a cool job of moving metal. Try explaining the situation where a Sea-Bee closed the runway after a ground loop and gear collapse because the newby was constantly telling the driver to taxi faster because of following traffic.

And now these same guys/gals are the "experts" in the IFR world who are complaing about the CRJs and will be complaining about the VLJs...and they are the same "experts" who are sitting on a panel of "Experts" who will be setting the rules for the VFR folks...which they hate with a passion.

We had the same whining in the military system as we have in the civil side and all I can say is "Live with it and get on with the job"...and learn something about the pilots side of the equation.

[SierraPoppa]

I'm probably going to get shot down in flames for this reply but here goes: I've worked both sides as a VFR/IFR controller and as a flying instructor for many years and the whining about performance of aircraft goes right back to the early days of a controllers training. Yapping at a pilot as the aircraft is touching down is a no-no but there are plenty of controllers who do it on a regular basis...and there are left seaters who go out of their way to annoy the controllers..so it works both ways.

A good many of the newer controllers have no experience in the cockpit and they are generally the first to complain about pilots and their dumb slow airplanes. As a tower controller trying to train these types, it was very frustrating to hear their comments, off air, about how the old slow tail-draggers should not be allowed into controlled airports because they can't keep up with the flow. They frequently snap at the tail-draggers to expedite your taxiing and clear at ( ) and my responce was "Don't do it dummy or you'll be closing the runway for an hour to clean upo the mess" and yet they still thought that they were doing a cool job of moving metal. Try explaining the situation where a Sea-Bee closed the runway after a ground loop and gear collapse because the newby was constantly telling the driver to taxi faster because of following traffic.

And now these same guys/gals are the "experts" in the IFR world who are complaing about the CRJs and will be complaining about the VLJs...and they are the same "experts" who are sitting on a panel of "Experts" who will be setting the rules for the VFR folks...which they hate with a passion.

We had the same whining in the military system as we have in the civil side and all I can say is "Live with it and get on with the job"...and learn something about the pilots side of the equation.

I never worked IFR but spent 30 years in a tower and couldn't agree more with the above.

When we old farts had just about had enough of the constant whining of the younger crew we used to say "If it wasn't for these dumb slow aircraft you wouldn't have a job!!!" it was usually enough to quiet them down at least for a little while.

Glad I'm retired now and don't have to put up with it anymore.

[AuxBatOn]

Well I fly a Sukhoi SU 29.... My views on what you like about it --> I really do not care about what you like about it !!!!

I'm sure you mean Mikoyan MiG-29 Fulcrum

[Scuba_Steve]

king air at 350 eh? Been that guy a few times

I recal coming back from portland a year or so ago and YVR centre asking us " Cariboo 341 say your mach"

After a moment looking it up on our MFD we replied with " ahh .48 ... "

There was a pause on the frequency then my co worker responds with " yeah I'm know everyone on the frequency is laughin now"

and I think one guy driving a heavy responded with " thats just cruel"

thats one of my "king air at 350 stories"

Cheers

[complexintentions]

To Old Dog Flying and SierraPoppa,

THANK YOU for your posts! It's a relief to hear comments like that from credible sources (actual controllers, with actual experience). When I hear someone who's supposed to be a "colleague" in my aviation profession actually trying to justify their whining about the performance of an aircraft by comparing it to a motorhome on a highway, well...it kind of blows my mind, because it seems to show a pretty shocking lack of experience and knowledge of aviation as a whole.

scrambled_legs,

Did you miss the day at training where they explained that not every one of the aircraft you would be handling would be an F18? You may be a pilot, but I highly doubt you've flown the range of aircraft performance you describe. "Outperformed by the first jets made?" By what criteria? Fuel efficiency? I think not. Speed and acceleration are not the primary drivers of aircraft design anymore. But you knew that, right?

I've seen and been a part of some incredible controlling. Where I've been in a bizjet and they push us hard and fast above one of those "slow-movers" you malign to overtake and re-sequence ahead of them. A turboprop where they hang us high on the approach because they know we can use those big disks and get down in a hurry. In a B777 where they know we can't, and they manage the a/c's energy like they're on the flightdeck themselves. It's beautiful. Small delay vectors and speed controlling to have ALL of us "performing at our max speed and running as tightly and efficiently as possible". Even the DC3 we blew by with about 260 knots overtake! The art of controlling to me, seems in just that: finding a way for for dissimilar types to coexist efficiently. If one plane is making 20 others suffer then maybe the controller should DO something about it, not whine. Isn't that the job: controling? Sorry if that frustrates you, but it just seems like such a weird complaint for the occupation.

@Rockie,

Agreed on the British controllers. London Control working the approaches into LHR is incredible, hour after hour, each a/c getting their landing clearance within 1 mile final as the previous a/c is exiting. They do quite a job with a system that simply was never intended to handle the volume.

Having said that...a special salute to my old buds at YVR ACC...you know who you are!

[squibbler]

Well actually I think most British accidents (Opps I mean accents) sound quite stupid; even if they are saying something that is actually quite intelligent.

Really? Most people I meet over here say "I just lurrrrrve your accent". Hmmm, actually it's just the ladies who say that. Maybe that's why you think it "sounds quite stupid", you know - the fact a Brit could drop your wife's / girlfriends panties just by looking her in the eye and saying "Good evening".

For what it's worth we don't have an accent. You do!

As for the thread, well formerly as a dual rated VFR/IFR controller in EGGP and now as a VFR controller in CYQT I maintain the same philosophy: I take what comes along and make it work. No point in getting irritated in doing what I'm paid for!

[sky's the limit]

Actually,

There was a program on a while back 20/20 or something, that did a study as to how British accents and marketing ploys are linked. It was rather interesting. While I can't remember specifics, it was something like 70% of men, and 80% of women are more likely to take as true, any given statement if it is delivered in a male British accent...

Explains all those Infomercials if nothing else...

stl

[NJ]

Those Brits do something that I think should be essential for controllers-in-training. NATS gives all college students 15 hours or so of pilot training. Even that much training would give a great impression of the workload involved in flying and how transmission timeliness = usefulness. Trainees now come through and can get their license without ever flying in an aircraft, or flying in their control zone and seeing the pilot's point of view.

Back to the subject: I like AT43's. They can keep up to the Boeings inside 20 if needed, or they can slow up to whatever you need them to do. But we get paid to handle whatever is thrown at us. So that's what I do.

[Rockie]

On the other side of the coin, it wouldn't hurt pilots to spend some quality time beside a controller at their station either.

[Old Dog Flying]

Nj and Rockie: you both have the same thoughts that I put into practice in the military. New controllers were given the opportunity to fly in whatever aircraft used at their first base posting. In Europe as a GCA controller, I made certain that I got plenty of back seat time in the CF-104D, Bug Smasher, Bell 47, and anything else I could whine and snivel my way into. As Tower Chief ay YMJ, I got PPC'd on the Tutor and the newbies to Tower and Terminal were also "encouraged" to get fam flights so that they too could appreciate the pilots point of view.

As a civilian tower controller, I have given talks to the pilots' side of the equation and encouraged them to come and sit with me for a couple of hours to "learn from the mistakes of other"...and it worked. How often is it done today? Probably not very often. I also flew the new trainees around the Fraser Valley in my own aircraft to give them a feel for what their job was all about...at my own expense.

And as has been said earlier, take the traffic and deal with it! I can think of running Cf-104s, C-47s, C-45s and Mirages as well as a host of other types, mixing things up and enjoying the challenge.

Thankfully I'm now retired and still flying the little Yellow Monster.

[Rockie]

See now I'm jealous. I never got to fly in the 104.

[Jaques Strappe]

It amazes me how this bitching is contained to Canada and in particular, YYZ. I have no problems with ATC anywhere in the world but over the past decade, the bitching and over controlling going on here has been in a steady decline. I am now hearing terms like "Air Canada, "hurry" or "hustle" to the next exit, sorry dude, those two words are not and should never be in a pilots vocabulary and they certainly are not used anywhere else in the world.

Airplanes, whatever make, model, size or performance, were not, are not and never will be, designed and built to accommodate controllers.

I personally don't think that was what the original poster was eluding to but I do have serious suspicions that new controllers are not taught much about various aircraft performance characteristics. The concept of 100,000 kgs of metal having enormous potential energy and inertia is apparently lost by the constant expectation that it can slow on a dime because the CRJ ahead was able to.

[Old Dog Flying]

J-S: You've made a good point about the lack of training of controllers in aircraft performance. I spent 17 years at ZBB and I was constantly frustrated at the lack of understanding by the trainees...and I tried to do something about it. With the Managers approval, I photographed nearly every type of aircraft on the field, then using Photoshop, altered the photos for aircraft recognition purposes and then added performance data to each one in the hope that the trainee would understand how to handle the different types. The Pitts M-12 vs the Tiger Moth while borh biplanes were worlds apart in how they were dealt with.

Added to the photos were short clips on special handling requirements and these were all put together in a Powerpoint slide show that the new trainees were supposed to view as part of their check-out...but the disc was given to another individual who promptly made it disappear as he did not thimk about it first. Petty politics at its worst.

This type of training should have been handled at NICTI.