EDDL Tower and Approach Confusion

I’m quick to PM a controller in a situation like this. I’m always logged in to the forum here when I fly so the messaging is quick and easy. As stated it will be nice when details get ironed out and the system is more seamless. For what it’s worth I would have stayed with the tower and landed if I was on the ILS/GPS.


Did you call me Janet? 😂😂

1 Like

Thanks for you opinions, everyone.
Staying with one and therfore ignoring the other could have resulted in getting ghosted. No matter the choice.

Tower apologized to me for missing the notification that Approach became active. It seems it was lost in the hectic situation with about 30 aircraft.

Approach explained that a delay in when a freq is seen as active contributed to the confusion.

The question is not about who is right, or which freq I should’ve stayed on.
My question is: What could I have done in this situation other than quitting?
I was too close to intercepting the ILS and there was too much traffic to fiddle around with all sorts of commands. I needed to fly and focus on my landing.

What needs to change or be added to help dealing with situations like this, because this will happen again.

It ruined my flight, but let’s not focus on that. Let’s find a solution.


I really don’t get why this post gets so many likes.
It’s a lame excuse.
Basically it states that ATC can’t do a good job without two devices.
If that is the case IF is seriously flawed.
If it isn’t the case this could be a sign of poor attitude not becoming an ATCO taking his job seriously.

Either way it’s not funny and not a good thing.


Hi Jan,I think it was a nice way to say that sometimes it is difficult for us (IFATC) communicate with each other, because some have only one device.

That still seems to show that the way notifications are being sent is flawed or that you can’t cotrol with just one device.
Either way, not good and definitely not a joke.


… And it’s as frustrating for controllers as it is to the pilots. :(

I can imagine.
So what needs to change?

1 Like

Yes we can for sure,but if i can communicate with my approach is better,lot of time happening that approach cleared SO for 5R and when he contact me on tower call inbound in 5L,and messed up all sequences,or more problems,for that is important to communicate btw controllers during a session.

1 Like

It isn’t a lame excuse, at all. I strive with this lots of times. Trying to coordinate with tower which runways are in use, or simply letting tower know that I’m online. It’s frustrating. Really… Frustrating…

Perhaps in the future, a text based ‘communication’ system between ATC stations, or even a new sidebar tab called “coordination” which shows a list of online stations, and you have certain commands you can send like

  • [Station] online.
  • Which runways in use?
  • [callsign] going around
  • [callsign] doing pattern work
  • Runway change, stand by
  • Send me [callsign]

Maybe I’ll do a feature request with that some time… That was actually not a bad idea.

1 Like

Makes sense!
Don’t get me wrong though.
The lame excuse remark was triggered because it seems the situation is perceived as funny when it seems to be actually showing there’s a much bigger issue.
When it’s not possible to do a good job as an ATCO without two devices, it shouldn’t be allowed to control with just one.
I don’t know anything about being an ATC. I’m only a pilot in IF.
I did think that ATC had to have a certain level of responsibility. Turning it into a joke is not a good sign, in my opinion. And he wasn’t even part of the situation so he can’t know what went on. Still, the “joke” got more likes than the issue itself. That fact isn’t really reassuring to me.

People will probably say I shouldn’t take it all that seriously, which would be funny because this forum is full of topics complaining about pilots not taking ATC seriously. :D

1 Like

MaxSez: It’s odvious the communication menu need revisions. I’ve been harping on Pilot Friendly comm responses/interogiitories for some time. I’d of had recommended changes submitted to the Chief Pilot as discussed by now but it take time to prepare a list without referring to the AIM. Let’s put the shoe on the other foot. Changes could be expedited if FDS made a general request for input from the community.in the form of a Header.

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