[BJBBB]

Unless the ATIS specifically stated that you should expect a visual approach, the controller violated FARs and is part of a criminal conspiracy. Also, phrases and specific words that controllers are allowed and required to use are well documented. The transcript revealed the use of non-standard terms; which is very dangerous when a controller does not precisely communicate with a pilot using English as a non-primary language.

I am a licensed (private) pilot with an instrument rating. I fly a GA airplane aprox 150 hr/yr, mostly for business. Within the previous two years, FAA controllers have given me incorrect instructions in three seperate instances, twice while I was deep in the soup. The controllers failed to correct their errors even after my readback, then yelled at me when I wasn't going where they wanted me to go. Each time, I had a camera on the panel and the camera's audio connected to the ICS and radios.

The latest incident, the controller told me to call them after landing. I refused to talk to them without legal counsel, so they forwarded the incident to an Air Safety Investigator. My lawyer listened to the controller's many falsehoods, then listened to the investigator ask me questions. Then my lawyer talked to the investigator as follows:

lawyer - have you pulled the tapes?

FAA - yes, but I have not listened to them.

lawyer - do you think that the controller could have given him an incorrect vector?

FAA - not possible.

lawyer - please listen to this. [plays video on computer]

FAA - [after playing video] we cannot further discuss this. We will need [controller] to bring a union rep.

me - Why don't we send the video to the FBI. Isn't it a felony to lie to a federal investigator?

FAA - [quickly exits room]

Most enroute controllers are working six days a week. I do not care, so am I. Many, perhaps most, experienced controllers are making north of $200k. I am not.

Final note. When dealing with any level of authority, record everything. Put cameras in your home, in your vehicles, and on your body. The authorities, whether it be the local police or the feds, are not there to help. You will lose money and time and freedom if you cannot document their incompetence and malfeasance; and even then you may still go to jail.

[pas]

A comment mentioned that the dialog is not really what what said. Here's a recording https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rdapQfJDAM&t=0s (haven't checked)

[ralph84]

Cool story, but of course the SFO ATIS specifically mentions visual approaches when they’re in use. In fact it’s night VMC right now and the current ATIS says:

> SIMULTANEOUS CHARTED VISUAL FLIGHT PROCEDURES IN USE. LNDG RWYS 28L, 28R

https://datis.clowd.io/KSFO

[inferiorhuman]

Cool story, but FAA regs state that

  Before advertising non-precision approaches, priority should be given
  to available precision, then APV approaches. 

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc_html...

SFO prioritizes non-precision approaches because they're prioritizing throughput over safety. They got lucky with Air Canada, but at some point their luck will run out. The bigger issue here is that ATC gave the flight a 10 minute penalty instead of denying clearly communicating that they would not make an ILS approach available.

You can check the active NOTAMs here:

https://www.notams.faa.gov/dinsQueryWeb/

You can see that the ILS will be non-op on 5 December (and 6 December for 28L). If SFO is going to deny use of ILS they should clarify in the published approach procedures and/or in a NOTAM. As it is the ATC had no business trying to bully a pilot into doing something they're not comfortable with.

[ralph84]

Visual approaches are not non-precision approaches. They’re visual approaches.

Lufthansa wasn’t denied the ILS, they were put in a hold until separation could be created. The same thing happens every day at airports all over the world. The difference is the vast majority of pilots don’t whine about it on a congested frequency and expect to get priority.

And any pilot who is not comfortable performing a visual approach shouldn’t be at the controls of an airliner.

[glompers]

Well -- that's one fewer criminal conspiracy to worry about! Thanks!