KZLA Complaint

[Jon Wilder 1268033]

This happened to me yesterday coming into KLAS, although I've had this happen with other centers as well and I feel it needs to change.

 

Center was not online at the time at which I entered the GRNPA1 STAR. I had my FMC all set up for ILS rwy 25R and was established in my descent flying the STAR as depicted. I'm making callouts on UNICOM announcing my every move as I do. I'm already established within 5 minutes of touching down when I get the "Please contact me on 125.80" message.

 

So I contact him and I'm thinking he's gonna just continue my approach as I've been calling it out. He gives me my squawk code and wants to change my clearance to 25L right as I'm about to line up on the localizer for 25R!

 

So I did my best. I flew the heading he told me to fly to intercept the localizer, but I honestly didn't have time to fully reconfigure the approach in my FMC as close as I was to touching down so I ended up established on the localizer for rwy 25R. I contacted center to notify them of this, in which they did allow me to come down on 25R.

 

My complaint is that normally when they give and/or change a clearance, first off they're logged on and have been for quite awhile and you're way early on the STAR at a point at which you have time to change your FMC configuration...not within 5 minutes of being on the ground. I feel that if there are aircraft that are already established on an approach and will be on the ground in a very short amount of time at the time that controllers log on they should just wait and give those aircraft a few minutes to get down and out of the way while they work with aircraft that are further out on their arrival.This I feel would make more sense and eliminate the inconvenience of possibly having to hold or go around when you're already established on an otherwise perfect approach. For those of us pilots who like to fly as real world as possible, this sort of thing (i.e. controllers being offline, pilots setting up their own approach flying the STAR's as depicted then all of a sudden having controllers pop up out of nowhere and wanna completely change your arrival in a way that may require a hold and/or go around) NEVER happens in the real world and is a huge convenience to VATSIM pilots and perhaps may be one thing that chases pilots away from introducing themselves to the wonderful experience known as VATSIM.

[Colin Schoen]

I am sorry to hear about your experience in ZLA. In order to address your complaint, will you please submit details at http://laartcc.org/page/feedback so we can respond appropriately. Thank you.

[Bradley Grafelman]

I honestly didn't have time to fully reconfigure the approach in my FMC as close as I was to touching down so I ended up established on the localizer for rwy 25R. I contacted center to notify them of this, in which they did allow me to come down on 25R.

It sounds like you ended with something that you should have started with. ATCs and pilots are a team that work together; expecting only one or the other to be able to do all of the work is simply impossible.

 

If you really were at this stage of an approach, you should immediately advise the controller of this. Some pilots need more time than others to perform tasks like changing routes and approaches. ATC can't know which one you are; best they can do is try from their end and rely on the pilot to advise if (s)he feels it can't be done safely in time.

 

For those of us pilots who like to fly as real world as possible, this sort of thing (i.e. controllers being offline, pilots setting up their own approach flying the STAR's as depicted then all of a sudden having controllers pop up out of nowhere and wanna completely change your arrival in a way that may require a hold and/or go around) NEVER happens in the real world and is a huge convenience to VATSIM pilots and perhaps may be one thing that chases pilots away from introducing themselves to the wonderful experience known as VATSIM.

You forgot one item in your list of things that don't happen in the real-world: pilots planning an ILS runway 25R approach at KLAS (a runway which, if the 25s are in use, is always advertised as a departure runway, with 25L being the arrival runway). I'm not saying you as a pilot should have known the SOP for KLAS (although simply looking at the TYSSN and KEPEC STARs will give you a clue as to which of the 25s is used for approaches), I'm just trying to play devil's advocate here and look at the same argument for controllers who like to mirror real-world procedures as well.

[Scott DeWoody]

A couple of points:

 

1. Bradley is correct, most airports with parallel runways use the inboard for departures, and the outboard for arrivals. Notice I said most, not all.

 

2. Most real world airline pilots like to "fly" their plane, instead of letting the autopilot do everything, so side stepping to 25L shouldn't be a problem. There are exceptions.. ie weather. Personally, at 10 miles, I drop the gear and turn off the A/P and hand fly the rest of the way in, but that's just me.

 

3. From what I have experienced flying into/out of ZLA, the controllers there are very professional, and simulate real world operations to a T. Which, on VATSIM doesn't always provide for the best experience for the pilots if they are not that familiar with that sort of thing. But this is a "learning" environment. I've been doing this for more years than I can count (real world and simulation) and I learn new things constantly.

 

4. We are here to have fun, I like to challenge myself occasionally instead of the fly from point A to point B and let the autopilot do everything, so side stepping, go arounds and such break the routine and present a challenge. Would I enjoy this every time I logged on, absolutely not, but once in a while, I'm good with it.

[Ross Carlson]

Don't be afraid to use the magic word ... "unable." (But don't abuse it, either!) If you feel that it would be hazardous to switch to the left side at 5 miles out, say you are unable. It's the controller's job to adapt when the situation doesn't unfold as planned.

[Jon Wilder 1268033]

I do handfly most of my approach. However most real world airline pilots are usually lined up 10nm out, not "lined up 10nm out then have to switch runways 5nm out".

 

On my VA forum, someone quoted a C1 controller as saying -

 

"if there is no ATC there is no designated takeoff/landing runway and as such pilots can make their own decisions. UNICOM exists to coordinate arrivals and departures so they have minimal impact on other users irrespective of choice of runway".

 

So going off of this, I had already made my own decision as to which runway I would land on and had set up on one runway prior to ATC being online and I was close enough to touchdown to where they should have just let me continue on, get down and out of the way while they worked with aircraft that were a bit further out on arrival. If I'm not a hazard to any traffic, there should be no reason to switch up my arrival when I'm that close in.

[Bradley Grafelman]

However most real world airline pilots are usually lined up 10nm out, not "lined up 10nm out then have to switch runways 5nm out".

Based on many hours of listening to LiveATC, I'm going to strongly disagree with the 10 NM part. I've heard plenty of PTACs to fixes on the approach (such as SHAND on the ILS 25L at KLAS) that aren't even that far out.

 

Minimum required is 3 NM from the FAF (less if good weather and/or pilot requests).

 

On my VA forum, someone quoted a C1 controller as saying -

 

"if there is no ATC there is no designated takeoff/landing runway and as such pilots can make their own decisions.

There you have it - the pilots can make their own decisions. He didn't say they would be guaranteed to make the best decision - just a decision.

 

If I'm not a hazard to any traffic, there should be no reason to switch up my arrival when I'm that close in.

For the most part, I agree.

 

Out of curiosity.. when you first checked on with LA Center when he .contactme'd you, did you inform him that you were planning/executing ILS 25L? Again, SOP is to use that as a departure runway only, so unless he was aware that you were planning 25L, he probably just [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umed 25R - hence the misunderstanding.

[Kevin Yang]

Out of curiosity.. when you first checked on with LA Center when he .contactme'd you, did you inform him that you were planning/executing ILS 25L? Again, SOP is to use that as a departure runway only, so unless he was aware that you were planning 25L, he probably just [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umed 25R - hence the misunderstanding.

Other way around. He was planning 25 right and the controller asked him to go to 25 left.

[Bradley Grafelman]

Other way around.

Oops. That's what I meant.

[Ernesto Alvarez 818262]

with this airport, changing left or right should not be such an issue, they are right next to each other. side steps or "change to" isnt a rare thing and is a very simple thing to fly.

 

at some airports its even normal to track the ILS for one runway then side step to the one next to it when you get closer.

 

this shouldnt have been a big issue, however not knowing ones own skill set, if it was an issue then simply do as Ross mentioned and use "unable". theyll find a way to work you in even if its keeping you on 25R, thats not that unheard of either to use it for both arrivals and departures, infact the last time i flew to vegas online they threw me for a loop by giving me 25R to land on as traffic infront of me was going for the left side.

 

heck even my first real world flight to Vegas we landed on the right side

 

nothing out of the norm, what i see is you both failed to work with each other

[Kevin Yang]

with this airport, changing left or right should not be such an issue, they are right next to each other. side steps or "change to" isnt a rare thing and is a very simple thing to fly.

 

at some airports its even normal to track the ILS for one runway then side step to the one next to it when you get closer.

 

this shouldnt have been a big issue, however not knowing ones own skill set, if it was an issue then simply do as Ross mentioned and use "unable". theyll find a way to work you in even if its keeping you on 25R, thats not that unheard of either to use it for both arrivals and departures, infact the last time i flew to vegas online they threw me for a loop by giving me 25R to land on as traffic infront of me was going for the left side.

 

heck even my first real world flight to Vegas we landed on the right side

 

nothing out of the norm, what i see is you both failed to work with each other

Yeah, I remember one flight, I was on the ILS for 4 right at JFK, and the controller asked me to side step over to 4 left because there was traffic slow on 4 right. I just clicked off the autopilot and went in for 4 left. That ended up making my life a lot easier since I landed, jumped on the brakes, got off the runway at taxiway J onto A, then went over to my parking spot over by terminal 3.

 

As for real world flying, at Newark, traffic typically takes off from 22 right and lands on 22 left, and there was one instance where we landed on 22 right, albeit it was 1:40 AM and there was probably nobody around.

[Jon Wilder 1268033]

I think we're missing the point here.

 

This has nothing to do with skill sets or otherwise. What this has to do with is the fact that I was inconvenienced by the controller when I was there first. ATC was not online so I came up with my plan and I was in the process of executing said plan when they decide to log on and change my plan at a point in the flight where there was little to no margin for error due to the amount of time I had left to touchdown.

 

Can I do it? Yes. Do I have the skill sets to pull it off? Absolutely. But that's not the point. The point is that since I was there first and already had a plan execution in place I should not have had to do that unless there was some really good reason such as aircraft stuck on the runway or distance from other aircraft, etc etc. In this case there was absolutely no reason to do that other than the fact that I was landing on a departure runway (which when there's no ATC there are no departure/arrival runways).

 

Had I had say been 100nm out and they decided to log on and change me to a different STAR or even a different runway it would not have been an issue. At that point in the flight I would have plenty of time to reconfigure everything as well as download/print a copy of the STAR chart. I don't mind making changes to a flight plan as long as there's a good reason to do it and I have ample time to make the changes.

[Kevin Yang]

I think we're missing the point here.

 

This has nothing to do with skill sets or otherwise. What this has to do with is the fact that I was inconvenienced by the controller when I was there first. ATC was not online so I came up with my plan and I was in the process of executing said plan when they decide to log on and change my plan at a point in the flight where there was little to no margin for error due to the amount of time I had left to touchdown.

 

Can I do it? Yes. Do I have the skill sets to pull it off? Absolutely. But that's not the point. The point is that since I was there first and already had a plan execution in place I should not have had to do that unless there was some really good reason such as aircraft stuck on the runway or distance from other aircraft, etc etc. In this case there was absolutely no reason to do that other than the fact that I was landing on a departure runway (which when there's no ATC there are no departure/arrival runways).

 

Had I had say been 100nm out and they decided to log on and change me to a different STAR or even a different runway it would not have been an issue. At that point in the flight I would have plenty of time to reconfigure everything as well as download/print a copy of the STAR chart. I don't mind making changes to a flight plan as long as there's a good reason to do it and I have ample time to make the changes.

Did you ever consider the possibility that the controller had no idea you had the intent to shoot for 25 right? Given the close proximity of the runways, it's possible he didn't think much of it and automatically [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umed you were heading in for 25 left, not being aware you had already decided to go for 25 right. Bradley asked in an earlier post if you had informed the controller that you were already shooting for 25 right.

 

I had a somewhat similar situation, similar, but not quite, because I had planned on flying to 4 left at JFK, and as I was turning towards that runway, a controller came on, asked me to contact him, and when I did, he'd informed me that the 31s were active. Of course, since 4 left and 31 are obviously nowhere near parallel, he had asked me what I intended to do. I certainly didn't have a problem with going to the 31s if it really came down to that, I just would have preferred not to if I could reasonably avoid it. I advised the controller as such, and he was able to get me down to 4 left.

[Tim Barber]

Jon...I'm not sure why you think that because "you were there first", that automatically grants to the right to do whatever you want. This argument goes against the entire premise of the Controller-Pilot relationship.

 

If you were upset because you were pinged on short final to your runway of choice and asked to change, I could see your point... but based on your description of the events, I cannot see why you have reason to "complain" about the ZLA controller.

 

Many valid suggestions have been made above about not only how you may have resolved the situation (request to stay with your planned runway being the easiest solution / "unable"), but also how you may plan better in the future.

 

At the end of the day, the key is communication. Explain to the controller what you would like to do, and I bet 9 times or more out of 10, it will be no problem at all...

[Kirk Christie]

The pilot in command always has final say with what happens to his aircraft.

 

Therefore if you don't like what the controller has given you, speak up or forever hold your peace.

[Scott DeWoody]

To the OP:

 

You say: When there is no ATC, there is no designated departure/arrival runway.

 

I say: You are wrong.

 

There is a designated runway, there just is no controller to tell you which one it is. If you go to the ZLC website and click on the hyper link "weather ops" it will show you which runway is the "designated" runway (at least which direction, south or north). Does ZLA have such a feature on their website? Don't know. But whenever I am flying into an airport that doesn't have ATC, I always look for such information, to make sure I am landing on the correct runway. Sure the information may say "south ops", or "east ops" and not specifically designate which runway L or R, but there is a designated departure arrival runway.

 

What you imply is that you can land on whatever runway you want, in theory, you are correct, this is VATSIM, no one dies. But if you wanted to simulate real world aviation, (which most pilots/controllers strive to do) you would make every effort to find the correct information. Take cruise altitude for example. (USA/FAA) Flying east you use odd flight levels, west even. Using your logic, if no ATC is on, it doesn't matter what altitude you fly.

 

You say it's the point of the matter, I say you are correct. It is the point. what I know about ZLA controllers is that they would not have told/asked you to land on 25L if they didn't think you had the time to do it. But as others have said, if you feel you couldn't do it then just say "unable", it's not admitting you don't have the skillset, it's actually used by real pilots with years of experience, saying they are not able to comply for whatever reason.

 

I say fly online here, enjoy yourself, take whatever is thrown at you and learn from it. There are lessons to be learned here that everyone can benefit from and even relate to every day life. Enjoy and don't let the little things bother you.

[Kirk Christie]

Scott, I say you are wrong.

 

There is a Preferred/Suggested runway listed on those websites, but that does not make them designated or the correct runway.

 

You should also note that SOP's and LOA's are only there for controller convenience, they are not for pilots, and pilots are not expected to know them.

[Antonio King 1085967]

Frankly, I don't know why the controller even bothered to ping the pilot on final anyway. Regardless of skill set, you don't know if that pilot is hand flying and/or flying via AP. To even bother contacting at the most crucial part of the flight is like a lack of common sense (to me), especially if the point is just to have the pilot side step.

 

As the OP pointed out several times, the proximity of the runways in question, and/or the ease of side stepping isn't the point. It's the principle of the matter of inconvenience during the most crucial part of flight.

 

If I'm on final, and you decide to pop on and try to control the last 20 seconds of my flight, especially if I'm hand flying, I won't answer; plain and simple. I'll communicate with you once I'm on the ground, not when I'm hitting buttons, monitoring my approach, hand flying.

[Don Desfosse]

Antonio, while I agree with you in principle, the OP stated he was within 5 minutes, not 20 seconds. Big difference. Depending on the speed flown, 5 minutes is 15ish miles. Once inside the Final Approach Fix, I also wait until landing unless I can shoot off a real quick "Standby" or "Final Approach, Standby" message.

 

Regardless of all the right/wrong talk and discussion about what runway "should have" been planned for, the reality is that the OP was set up for a particular runway, ATC came on, wanted him to change his plan, and he didn't counteroffer. Many people have suggested the best course of action, which I agree with, could have been to say something like, "Sir, we're set up and established for the ILS 25R, can we have that?" (or more in tune with the pilot-controller glossary, "Request ILS 25R."). I'd wager that eight or nine times out of ten, the request would be immediately approved and he'd get his approach clearance for 25R. If that didn't happen, as has been mentioned here, a good course of action, if he didn't want the challenge, thrill and/or excitement of switching runways, would be to simply say, "Unable." Now the monkey's on the controller's back to either rethink his decision and clear the aircraft for the ILS 25R or to cancel the approach clearance and bring him around for the approach ATC wants/needs him to fly. Finally, if all of that didn't happen and turn out "right" (i.e. common sense), providing feedback to the ARTCC on the ARTCC web page so ARTCC management can investigate and provide corrective action (to the controller, pilot, or both) would be the best course of action.

 

As many people have suggested, this could have probably turned out much better with some better communication. Hopefully some of the suggestions here have now been added to the controller's and or pilot's tool box to make things better for the next time. Continuous improvement is a really good thing. Let's use some common sense and keep this hobby fun.

[William Lewis]

ATC came on, wanted him to change his plan, and he didn't counteroffer. Many people have suggested the best course of action, which I agree with, could have been to say something like, "Sir, we're set up and established for the ILS 25R, can we have that?"

 

Here is what I do not understand, is that he did and the ZLA controller let him.

 

...as close as I was to touching down so I ended up established on the localizer for rwy 25R. I contacted center to notify them of this, in which they did allow me to come down on 25R.

 

I am having trouble understanding this complaint. I do not understand why we are complaining that a controller allowed you to do what you wanted to do. As a ZTL controller ATL (similar to most other airports) lands on the outboards. Most pilots also know this (it is fine if they don't but because in my experience there is a majority that do). Because of this, If I see someone that appears to be tracking the final approach course, I would [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume the outboard runway and would give a simple clearance for that approach.

 

My question is, If the controller let you fly the approach you wanted to fly, what is the complaint about? That they did not have telepathy to know that you were on 25R instead of 25L? maybe I am reading it wrong or there was more to it, but from how I read this.....

 

1. Controller signed on and sent a contact me.

2. Pilot contacted controller and controller provided an approach clearance to 25L.

3. Pilot is upset that he [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned 25L, joined the LOC 25R then informed ATC, of which ATC provided a clearance for 25R.

4. Pilot writes complaint about first [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igning 25L even though they got the approach they wanted.

 

Mr. Wilder,

 

I am not trying to jump your case and maybe there was more to it than this. I know that text can be easily misinterpreted with emotion so I will inform you that I write this from a curious, not a finger pointing, state. Can you expand a bit more why we are complaining that a controller initial provided one clearance than changed it to the one that you requested? Was there a drawn out argument on freq about the runway [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ignment before he gave in and then gave you the clearance for 25R, or that the complaint is intended to have ATC ask the pilot before they give any instructions?

 

Enjoy the start of your week.

[Luke Kolin]

I am having trouble understanding this complaint.

 

Me too. He's asked to move over 40 feet when a few miles out (something he swears up and down he can do without issue), indicates he is unable to and is allowed to proceed on the original approach and landing.

 

And that's worth several paragraphs of complaint? Switch to decaf.

 

If you got re-routed to the 19s that's one thing, but 25R to 25L? Really?

 

Luke

[William Lewis]

but 25R to 25L? Really?

 

But according to his complaint, he did not even change. he stayed on the approach he wanted and got a clearance for it. This is where my confusion is.

[Charan Kumar]

I am curious now, Jon, what were you expecting for an answer here on the forum?

[Nick Warren]

So two admittedly superficial statements really make it hard to see a solid basis for an arguement ahead of time so really, I had my opinions established by prejudice.

 

I had my FMC all set up for ILS rwy 25R

 

I'm making callouts on UNICOM announcing my every move as I do.

 

Anyway, really? At 5min out at what 140-150kts, you are what 12-15nm out? Removing your [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umptions that there was no reason for the switch, would you have even been prepared for it if there was a reasonable explanation? Did you have charts for the other runway? Did you have a chart even for the runway you were landing on? Did you have the missed approach procedures versed in your head? Do you have the skillset to disconnect the autopilot and say, oh I don't know, a visual approach? Is this the real world flying that you speak of? Wheels up autopilot engaged all the way through to the plane flying itself to the runway? I'm sorry that your post taps into a personal rant of mine but it just never ceases to amaze me that soo many people become masters of the FMS and can program a heavy Boeing to set down on the numbers but couldn't fly a Cessna around a standard pattern if their life depended on it. So your plan got altered. Request your original plan, say unable, or just comply and dial up the other side and hand fly it, or forbid fly a visual approach. You had the time to do any one of those things except reprogram your FMC which inconvenienced you. Issuances of side steps and go arounds happen all the time in real life. Be a part of the reality, or live in the fantacy perception of reality. Up to you, but the complaint doesn't hold water.

 

Nick

[Brad Littlejohn]

I'm going to be a bit pedantic here. From the OP:

 

This happened to me yesterday coming into KLAS, although I've had this happen with other centers as well and I feel it needs to change.

 

Center was not online at the time at which I entered the GRNPA1 STAR. I had my FMC all set up for ILS rwy 25R and was established in my descent flying the STAR as depicted. I'm making callouts on UNICOM announcing my every move as I do. I'm already established within 5 minutes of touching down when I get the "Please contact me on 125.80" message.

 

First, you do realize that if you were indeed flying the GRNPA1, the only way you could line up for either of the 25s is to fly a 160 - 180 heading to take you to either CROWE (40nm final) or FLYES (20nm final) for 25R, or CROWE or PRINO (20nm final) for 25L, forcing you to effectively cancel the STAR after you p[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ed LUXOR. The GRNPA1 drops you off to turn final for the 19s. So you couldn't have flown that as depicted.

 

Secondly, there is a reason why it is a rarity to see a 25R arrival; that rarity is that it would have to be coordinated with Tower, as there are simultaneous approaches to crossing runways there (arrivals land and depart both 19L/R), and there is no LAHSO on 25R. So without knowing what else the controller had in mind, you could have not only caused a deal (controller error) by landing and rolling out on a runway that intersects with a potential departure or arrival, or caused go-arounds or worse to happen. That is one of the main reasons why 25R is closed when in Config #3, where the 1s are in use.

 

Third. If you look at any other RNAV STAR heading into KLAS, you'll notice this in their description:

 

Rwy 25L, intercept the Rwy 25L localizer. All other runways expect RADAR vectors to final approach course.

 

Yes, the GRNPA1 doesn't have this listed on its chart, but it doesn't serve the 25s; it goes to the 19s.

 

Finally, If you're about to join the 25R localizer as mentioned in the OP, you would have to be at least 15 - 20 miles out to decently line up with it, putting you somewhere between HAWKO and FLYES. 20 miles out is more than enough time to change the frequency of the localizer, as the course heading between the 25s is exactly the same. Even more so than that, 3 days ago was the second time in the past year where visibility got down to below VMC conditions to where the ILS had to be used. My point: visual approaches could easily have been used.

 

Now, given that distance to the field, you could easily have sidestepped back to 25R at RELIN, which would have completed the ILS 25L approach. But that again would have given you plenty of time to weigh the options.

 

Again, the biggest issue here, is coordination with the use of 25R as an arrival runway, especially with the conflict with 19L/R arrivals and departures. Without knowing what configuration is being used, and how pilots are navigating themselves around or on the field, more harm than good could have been done.

 

As far as the controller goes, I will say that after explaining your reasoning to him, they could have scanned head to see what potential issues would come up from a 25R arrival and planned accordingly. Again, there would have been plenty of time for that.

 

The pilot in command always has final say with what happens to his aircraft.

 

Therefore if you don't like what the controller has given you, speak up or forever hold your peace.

 

Because of the above issues, simply being PIC doesn't override operations at an airport, making you absolutely right and ATC wrong. the responsibilities of PIC ends when it comes to the safety and separation of other aircraft both on the ground and in the air.

 

Scott, I say you are wrong.

 

There is a Preferred/Suggested runway listed on those websites, but that does not make them designated or the correct runway.

 

Charts for the particular arrival and the descriptions in the chart say exactly what should be done. In this case, GRNPA1 would have required vectors to a given runway, plus without knowing which one of the 4 configurations were being used at KLAS, could have been really frustrating. Case in point: What if someone was departing 7L?

 

With a place like KLAS, there are a lot of variables to take into account.

 

BL.