It was a nice day for flying, even though a cold front was blowing in from the west and spawning a few showers along my route. I was level at 8000 feet, on an IFR flight plan, and about halfway into a planned 90-minute flight to my family home in Georgia. Despite an occasional slight deviation for buildups, I was proceeding more or less directly to my destination and monitoring the ATC chatter. The traffic level seemed fairly normal for en route airspace, the airplane was humming along nicely and all was right with the world.
Thats when the controller called with clearance for a descent to 4000 feet “for traffic.” At that time, I was a good 90 nm or so from my destination. The cloud bases were around that height and the winds would have forced me to take a groundspeed hit. Also, Im flying a single and like to stay as high as I can as long as I can. Plus, going down to 4000 would put me in what I often call “Indian territory,” where the VFR Cherokees are lurking. I responded to the effect that I really didnt want to do that, hinted that Id be open to another solution and asked, “Wheres the traffic?” The response? “Thats none of your business.” Excuse me? Of course, it most certainly is my business, if for no other reason than a mid-air collision would ruin my whole day. My idea, however, was to obtain information on a potential traffic conflict with the goal of coming up with a solution that would meet my operational needs and the controllers requirement to keep some airspace between us. Feel free to consider mine an antiquated concept of how pilots and controllers should work together to make each others role easier and more professional, but there it is. Maybe Ive reached a cranky stage in life, but I sincerely dont have to take that nonsense from ATC, or anyone else. Without allowing the controller to retract that response, I simply cancelled IFR. The controller, seemingly acknowledging a foul had been committed, offered flight following on the same squawk. I accepted and began a slow climb to 8500 feet, a VFR altitude. Soon, I was handed off to another controller but not before getting the telephone number for the facilitys Quality Assurance (QA) desk and making a few notes of my own, including the ATC facility and frequency I was working, along with the time of day and my position. It wasnt until I had been handed off to the next ATC facility that the traffic became anything close to a factor. It was an IFR Baron, level at 6000 feet, crossing right to left. Now VFR at 8500, I had no trouble picking out the twin and easily maintaining separation. Also in the mix was an active Military Operations Area (MOA) I would be entering soon. A few days later when I was back home and had the time to tilt at this windmill, I began what I hope will have been a fruitful odyssey through the FAAs ATC bureaucracy.
…none of your business…
It was a nice day for flying, even though a cold front was blowing in from the west and spawning a few showers along my route. I was level at 8000 feet, on an IFR flight plan, and about halfway into a planned 90-minute flight to my family home in Georgia.
Key Takeaways:
- An IFR pilot was told to descend for traffic but was dismissively refused information about the conflicting aircraft by ATC, leading the pilot to cancel IFR and fly VFR.
- The pilot filed a formal complaint, which resulted in apologies from ATC management and disciplinary action, including additional instruction and a performance letter, for the controller involved.
- The author views this incident as indicative of a growing trend of dismissive ATC attitudes towards general aviation, suggesting a two-tiered system that often treats general aviation pilots as an inconvenience rather than collaborators.
Key takeaways sponsored by Aviator Pro | Start Your Training ->
See a mistake? Contact us.
