Closed “Second Opinion” Topic Revisited

MaxSez: Unfortunately @Caden_Colvan failed to follow the “Contact Controller First by PM” rule on his recent incident as outlined in subject Topic nor was he clear and concise in his gripe.

Having read and analyzed his gripe and ATC expert responses it appears there was a failure to communicate evident here. The underlying problem as state by Caden by comment “The controller was (Name; he cited me) for spamming frequency “but I was burning my little bit of fuel left and I needed to land”.

There’s a lessons and a bottom line to be learned here; In my studied opinion and Pilots perspective. Don’t venture forth on the Expert unless your fully cognizant of the Rules and Operational Procedures, you do so at your own jeopardy.

The Bottom Line, from all perspectives for this Incident; Understand that if your in a critical fuel state as you near your destination your a Peanut. If at arrival your Approach is rejected you have no other option except end the flight, lose credits, try for an alternate, crash or take a Ghost as a malcontent If you press on. If your tank are obviously about dry with minutes left on the clock your only real available option is a communications response to an Approach’s “go away” or “challenge” you must proceed with an “Unable” and take your chances. As a Pilot in Command and situation dependent, if you can’t comply for any reason with ATC “guidance and ”Since the Approach comm menu is not Pilot Friendly with today’s IFATC mind set prepare yourself to challenge a Ghost if you opt for an “Unable” which in challengeable under the currant Rules with the Controller and ATC Moderator.

A Solution; Until the communications menu is updated with Pilot Friendly requests like “Unable, expanded with “Low Fuel State” ect the Ghost Gottya. IFATC’s are not mind readers, so Caden’s Incident is un-challengeable to the IFATC Moderator (@Joe), sourer grapes. Caden incident is a prime example of the need for a Pilot Friendly Comm Menu update! What say you Pilots?

(Note 1; Unable is not a dirty word nor a negative, it’s in the ATC Bible the AIM with specific guidance and in the IF Menu for you to utilize’s when you the “Pilot” considers it appropriate.)

(Note 2; Those who challenge my assessment here or my “Unable” conclusions pls don’t waste you time with counter arguments stated before in similar Topic, I will not respond. Positive and supportive comments are welcome. Challengers meet me on PM for discussion. Bring yr lunch!

G’day Regards All


I’ll have to read the original topic, but unless I’m missing something, if you truely are in a “low fuel state” and meet the criteria, a low fuel emergency can be declared by the pilot.


@Joe. MaxSez: The author of the Topic apparantly a long time member as noted in his bio missed something along the way. His Incidant/Topic was convoluted and not initially clear. Low Fuel was related late in his multiple comments interspersed with multiple corrective action comments which where redundant and did not address the low fuel state program option. The Topic was closed.
I used it as a Segway for the revisit. It gave me the opportunity to sing the “Unable” song and hopefully regenerate interest and reopen the dated “Pilot Friendly Menu” update debate which lays fallow in the Archive after a significant amount of requested input from the Pilot community. No action was suggested on IFATC part in this Topic. Just a story line setting the stage for another Pilot Friendly comm menu push in a future Topic.

Ya always need a hook to reach a goal. Pilot Friendly Comm menus and 20 second Overspeed reaction times are my next windmills to tilt. Watch the skies, glad I caught you interest.

Warm Regards, Staffie.


This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.