British Airways PILOT GETS ANGRY with KENNEDY CONTROLLER!

[@jabba0975]

'British Airways pilot makes good decisions. ATC gets snippy.' Fixed the title for you.

[@TrapKingz.]

My favorite part is after the clearance got cancelled the pilot asked what was the reason for it? And she says I just needed you to maintain 160 for 3 more miles which is exactly what he was doing to begin with 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@allgrainbrewer10]

Sure thing, mum.

[@shingshongshamalama]

"Okay do this." "I physically cannot do that." "Alright go around." "Why?" "Because shut up."

[@lightningrodofh8509]

ATC: "Okay, do this" BA: "I don't wanna" ATC: "Fine, then don't"

[@endokrin7897]

Im sorry, but that controller is a bit(h. Pilot nearly got mad but was able to stay fairly cool. Punishing a pilot and flight because they couldn't keep speed up? Lame and possibly dangerous. Although, I AM surprised the 747 couldn't do 180kts for a couple minutes. If it really couldn't, then it was an even MORE unreasonable request from ATC with a petty outcome.

[@robroy621]

Karen has found her way in to atc...

[@cmotdibbler4454]

@@endokrin7897 It isn't that the 747 couldn't do that speed it is that it needs to be under that speed to make the approach

[@pdxoregon1]

LOL!!!!🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@denhal1]

Pilot didn't get angry. Sounded more like frustration to me. He is flying within aircraft parameters and controller takes him out of sequence as punishment for refusing to compromise aircraft safety. She should have slowed the following traffic as he implied.

[@JayJasperLondon]

I agree 110%

[@geckolocator]

Speaking as a Brit, saying "we'll discuss that later" means we are thinking of disembowelling the person we're speaking to.

[@cannedheat300]

@@geckolocator My guess is that she would have stabbed him if she's a true New Yorker.

[@JayJasperLondon]

Matt Ferguson Too right 😂🙏🏻

[@Bureaucromancer]

@@geckolocator It means that to EVERYONE BUT Americans.

[@Boodieman72]

I hope the BA crew file a complaint.

[@user-wl6bw3jl4n]

For what?

[@Boodieman72]

@@user-wl6bw3jl4n Did you even watch the video?

[@mrjjman2010]

Chris V improper procedure, unprofessionalism, forcing excessive use of the channel by giving shitty instructions and not listening when the pilot mentioned that’s not protocol and the parameters of the plane cannot do what she is asking.

[@user-wl6bw3jl4n]

@@Boodieman72 I did. What's the complaint? ATC did what she felt would continue the flow of inbound flights. The BA pilot promulgated that he was not going to comply with her instructions due to stabilization criteria per company policy. She instructs him to break off the approach and vectors him around for another approach - nothing illegal nor unsafe. I don't see how submitting a complaint would change anything. Enlighten me please as I am keen to learn.

[@Matt5bm]

@@mrjjman2010 👌

[@ramjet2977]

It’s not about the aircraft or pilot being unable to comply it’s about each airlines own stabilized approach criteria which precludes us from doing what might seem a reasonable thing to controllers. If you land from an unstable approach as detailed by your company you will face disciplinary action where I work.

[@HEDGE1011]

ramjet2977 Where I work as well. FOQA monitors everything and if you land from an unstable approach you will be getting a phone call to explain yourself.

[@jamesgraham7297]

@@HEDGE1011 Don't know if you are ramjet2977 are familiar with this www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/pilot-in-near-miss-found-dead-in-car-1561147.html It's a harsh reminder of the need to fly to the airline OPs Manual

[@SenorCrazylegs]

I fly here all the time with a major carrier, and this is the most dangerous destination on the network. Aggressive, non-standard ATC, extremely poor approach designation and design (with awful missed approach controlling), rushed ground control with multiple frequencies in use, and the ground crews make Manila and Jakarta look positively space age sometimes. Last time I was there I had a TCAS RA at 1200', as did the aircraft ahead of me. We both went around, and absolutely nobody cared. It's a madhouse. Edit: Oh, and 180kt until 5nm (1500') is crazy - even in my smaller airbus. They do it routinely as well. You have to ask for 170kt, then steal 10 more knots (ie go to 160kt) or you get into this ridiculous debate, or you'll be unstable and go around.

[@HEDGE1011]

SenorCrazylegs I also fly into there with a major carrier and have done so for 29 years: I couldn't agree more! I'm normally senior enough to avoid it now, and it's the only destination I avoid every single month. JFK has the rudest, most aggressive, totally non-standard controllers of anywhere I've ever been, and I've been a lot of places. Terrible facilities, awful airport design, rushed taxi clearances, petulant, spiteful ATC. Just the absolute worst. I actually bid to get Christmas off after bidding no trips that touch Kennedy. It's a national embarrassment and I feel especially bad for our foreign colleagues who are bullied by controllers because their first language isn't English. Hey JFK: you're a disgrace!

[@davedoe6445]

@@HEDGE1011 new york city is more like a third world country than a part of the US...

[@warden330]

Worth remembering, too, that this isn't a pilot only used to working out of small regional airports and unfamiliar with the demands of a busy airport. BA work out of Heathrow, so are very aware of traffic separation constraints. SOP are written with that in mind. Working ATC in these locations must be frustrating and difficult, but controllers need to cope with what is practicable and accept that they are not the ones flying the plane. The pilot actually explained to her why he was unable to comply; she might have been surprised but it was something she had to work around.

[@BryanSnider]

I agree! It’s amazing how LGA or JFK still have “climbs.” That you get vectored on. The SIDS ans STARs are so 1970s It’s 2019. How about some RNAV procedures that can decrease the workload and have pilots fly more predictable. It’s so weird seeing charts without preassigned routings or very limited rnav routings

[@regiondeltas]

@@warden330 Yep, this is a BA747 pilot and I would imagine the captain based on his RT - this is a guy who will have many hours in and out of busy international airports. Very poor controlling and a blatant punishment go around - reminds of when they vectored a Ryanair aircraft into a continuous hold and basically wouldn't let him leave.

[@derrickstorm6976]

Actual title, "British pilot gets frustrated with amateur flight controller at JFK"

[@TheBlooRayChannel]

Pilot is spot on. This was weird. Looks like the controller was taking her frustrations out on him. Can't understand why she'd make things good for NUMBER 2 by FORCING NUMBER 1 to adjust???

[@ragher6999]

Maybe Number 2 was Airforce 1.

[@algorhythmic3904]

Pilot: I have a number for you to call

[@JOSHVO97]

So I know ATC has to do their job and most importantly they have to help out and keep everyone safe however in this case the pilot is absolutely right. He can't comply the instructions from ATC because of the approach he was following and also because the aircraft he is on. He needed a stabilized approach. Also I'm sure the airline has their pilots to follow certain approches and final procedures.

[@TB4JY]

New York. Who would have guessed.

[@aljack1979]

Is it me or does it seem that there I'd some form of elitist approach of the controllers at JFK. I know that they are busy but it's almost like that the pilot's are there to make their job easier when it's supposed to be the other way around. Such attitude from ATC. Safety of the aircraft is paramount, ether do your job properly (slow and space the aircraft properly for landing) or don't do the job! Maybe too many flights going into JFK?

[@HEDGE1011]

Alan Jackson JFK is busy, but plenty of busier places have better ATC and less confrontational attitudes. JFK has a culture problem, period.

[@aljack1979]

@@HEDGE1011 Totally agree 🙂

[@infiltr80r]

Ey, I'm controllin' here!

[@fingerhorn4]

JFK is no busier than Heathrow. I've never heard a single confrontational conversation like this at Heathrow.

[@N1120A]

Unable are magic words. ATC can't force you to do what you can't. He was also right about being lower and having the right of way.

[@simonjamesdean2307]

Controller should have been sacked - period. Thankfully the pilot stood his ground. He would definitely have filed a complaint - I wonder how it turned out?

[@ImGumbyDangit]

Not a pilot or controller but an avid enthusiast and retired avionics technician. I understand this airspace is incredibly busy, but I'm with the pilot on this one.

[@romantic340]

ATC is not the law, if you feel the instructions given by ATC, may jeopardize the safety of your aircraft, you can say no, pilots need to remember that.

[@SpicyFaceActual]

This is true! 100% ATC isn’t the sky police. They aren’t trying to get pilots or anyone in trouble. They’re trying to move traffic safely and efficiently. Pilots should also remember that they aren’t the only airplane in the sky when they fly into busy airspace. Getting to the front of the line and slamming on the breaks without any heads up like this guy did is a jerk move. 180 to 5 is a standard speed. 160 on a 12 mile final is not. His “screw everybody else, I’m the only plane that matters” expectation is why this pilot was so wrong. Then he makes matters worse with his unnecessary lecture and failing to answer her question. Several jerk moves. You get to fly your plane as the pilot, ATC will work with you if you have an emergency or need something special if you give them a heads up… you do not get to introduce risk to all the other planes because you failed to plan appropriately. ATC will put you in the safest and most efficient spot for ALL their traffic, sometimes that means you’re no longer #1.

[@steakhouse0115]

Honesty a 747 do need 160 to stabliize the approach so that made sense so why not just the plane behind the BA pilot slow down?

[@seanbooher8252]

Because that could cause a backup behind that traffic, which could wreak havoc on the airspace.... especially in some of the busiest airspace in the world.

[@seanbooher8252]

I also don't think requesting 180kias to 5 DME is unreasonable. You can have a stabilised approach and still lose a decent amount of airspeed on short final.

[@steakhouse0115]

Sean Booher It’ll be hard as a 747 do need a lower speed to have a stable approach and I think there’s only two ways to it 1: Get the 747 to go around. 2: Get the plane behind the 747 to go around. Of course I will choose no.2 as that should be better after all because or else it will be a eternal loop of 747s going around in JFK, such a busy airport

[@noah9130]

I agree with @Sean Booher. 180kts to 5 is very common and definitely not a problem for a 747. You have to be stabilised at 1000ft in IMC and 500ft in VMC and at 5DME with a normal descend path you're usually at 2000ft so it's definitely not a problem. I don't know why the pilot didn't want to do that.

[@seanbooher8252]

@D what I'm saying is that any pilot should be flexible when flying into the busiest airspace in the world. Asking an aircraft, regardless of size, to speed up is something that happens multiple times a day all around the world. If this was a problem with every 747 flying into JFK, we would have a lot more videos to watch. The pilot was being rude, unreasonable, and inflexible. ATC was trying to keep traffic separation where it needed to be. She did her job.

[@taxxxiddriver]

I hope the pilot filed a report

[@TheRetiredtech]

What no one seems to be realizing is that the pilot causing the problem is the one that should go around not all the others behind that doing it right. And the pilot wasn't asked to continue DOI g anything unsafe all he had to do was go around untill there was a hole In traffic large enough to accommodate him.

[@reefk8262]

The usual Kennedy sh#tshow... one of the worst airports/ATC's i've ever operated into, and I've been some dodgy places over the years.

[@briant7265]

I know nothing beyond what common sense tells me. Shouldn't preference be given to larger, less maneuverable aircraft, and lighter aircraft accommodate or go around? I know there are many factors to consider for each case, but *generally?*

[@kcgunesq]

While everyone agrees, no PIC should ever take an unsafe order from ATC, at the same time, if ATC needs something from a pilot in order to safely control traffic and can't get it, it seems to me that a "reset"is probably the safest course of action. How many accidents could have been avoided if one party would have just said, "lets try starting fresh", instead of insisting on continuing ahead?

[@tedsaylor6016]

Except that in this case the aircraft BEHIND BA-747 should have been told to break off the approach. It's not the BA 747's fault that Center/Tracon was trying to shove 180KIAS down everyones throats. I wonder if BA could somehow recoup the thousands of dollars in JETA burned doing that go-around. You can't really fault the BA pilot, as he was following the rules that BA wrote for hime to follow and that didn't include +180 on a 5NM final.

[@tntkop]

This one time..... at band camp..... we all played the wrong song and the band leader was so confused. It was so funny.

[@armanddesarrierespays719]

The pilot was right.

[@M123OCT]

I'm just a passenger, and only discovered these recordings. I must admit some disquiet (to say the least) to hear pilots and air traffic control having bitchy little contests and arguments, while we sit in the back, blissfully unaware.

[@ApprenticeGM]

This one wasn't the pilot's fault - all blame is with the controller. Pilot was professional and looking after his aircraft and passenger's safety his top priority. He couldn't have been any calmer or cooler than refuting unreasonable instructions from a clueless ATC. There's no reason for ATC talk to be relayed to passengers, none of their business and would only increase anxiety for no reason. Pilot's number 1 responsibility is to fly the plane safely not keep passengers informed of dialogue between cockpit and ground.

[@M123OCT]

@@ApprenticeGM I can hear that. My comment is based on an overview of a number of similar audio clips.

[@jack.p]

I watched this and thought I’d side with the controller, but 180 until 5 DME is just unnecessarily risky, and the pilot was right to not accept it. Especially in a 747. Also that controllers vocal fry is a bad habit that she should get out of (the way she pronounces zero)

[@enochporter]

Not to mention that she broke FAA guidelines (kinda important).

[@jack.p]

@@enochporter was the guideline that the lower plane has the right of way? Or something else? Wasn’t sure what he was referring to

[@enochporter]

@@jack.p Yes, the lower slower plane already lined up for approach, being asked to go around for a higher plane, is like asking someone to give a second trigger pull on a round of Russian roulette.

[@russell2952]

What's wrong with how she says zero?

[@stevegandalf4739]

1:07 - Brilliant !!! "You're speaking to someone from New York, you do realise that (surely) !!!" LOL :)

[@TheGordyb102]

I worked JFK, LGA final positions for 7 years and never took the leading a/c out of the sequence due to speed reductions….you take out the next one or vector for spacing if possible.

[@baljj]

The speedbird pilot is actually being incredibly polite and professional. He is flying a 747 - he cannot comprise its safe approach.

[@flyinwithfrank1363]

Bad attitude starts with the Pilot them ATC escalates the piss*ng match. Concerning lack of professionalism on both sides.

[@tommypartin6431]

Honestly I hope this controller was reprimanded, better trained, or dismissed after this. That’s just unacceptable. Pilot flies- controller helps the pilot fly. Period.

[@jg6438]

I have to side with the BA Capt. Flown into JFK hundreds of times before my retirement Never a problem when we all work together. Does anyone remember the nonofficial "crow bar apch to 31?

[@guymitchell3842]

Pilot is in the right

[@nataliemozart5698]

everybody keeps saying the ATC is rude/at fault/should accommodate the pilot... why? She's supposed to tell every other plane behind him for miles to slow down because he's too precious to fly at a speed that planes are often asked to fly at around JFK? I hope no one here ever complains about a delayed flight because they'd clearly rather wait to accommodate a single jet than do the logical thing and get the lone problem jet out of there so that the planes more capable of doing what she wanted could land.

[@marydd4147]

The ATC should be reprimanded. She should not be vindictive - the pilot is managing the plane with lives on board.

[@SpicyFaceActual]

Reprimanded for what? She’s not being vindictive at all. Yeah the pilot is managing the plane, and ATC is sitting there managing multiple planes and trying to keep everyone in her airspace safe. The pilot messed up here. Several times.

[@marydd4147]

@@SpicyFaceActual Oh so you're a pilot? Making a pilot "go around" made more work for her and is irresponsible when lives are at sake. That is not her damn job.

[@SpicyFaceActual]

@@marydd4147 I’m not a pilot. Are you? Does that make my argument less valid for some reason? And telling pilots to go around when she needs to ensure the safety of all aircraft in her airspace literally Is her job. And she did it well here. The pilot was acting like he was the only airplane in the sky and being a passive aggressive jerk to her. She fixed it.

[@marydd4147]

@@SpicyFaceActual As far as the pilot is concerned he IS the only plane in the sky - HIS job is to ensure safety for his passengers - hers was to facilitate it - not have a temper tantrum..I have a relative who is a retired AF and commercial pilot. Are you related to her? No more discussion - we can just agree to disagree.

[@SpicyFaceActual]

@@marydd4147 That attitude is 100% wrong and why this pilot messed up. Pilots are definitely responsible for their aircraft. But they don’t get to fly into busy airspace and increase the risk for all the other aircraft in that airspace by being ignorant and acting like it’s just them. The controller did what she had to do to separate all the aircraft… not just him. It wasn’t vindictive. If this pilot wants to slow to 160kts 12 miles out from the airport where everyone else is still doing 210 then he should have given atc an advanced heads up instead of saying “I’m slowing now.. screw everyone else”. That’s a jerk move. Are you asking if I’m related to your aunt? I’m confused… 🤷‍♂️ You can choose to leave the conversation and disagree that’s fine. It doesn’t change that you’re wrong. I’m willing to stay and back up my argument with examples and rules. You want to bail because you have no argument.

[@BossySwan]

*We’ll discuss that later*

[@jackiebird4336]

too bad we can’t Give the damn controller a phone number to call

[@herethere388]

She should be in the kitchen

[@detaart]

Man, if only cars worked this way ... Speedsign: Maintain at least 50 kph Me: Okey dokey, maintaining 200 kph

[@IScreenshotNFTs]

Pilot should've just signalled MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY. EZ fast landing.

[@rodgeyd6728]

I seem to be addicted to things I know nothing about. Having read many comments it seems the ATC did this to punish the BAW, am I right? .

[@frogsterjonesiii6482]

Was it their arrogance and stubbornness what caused them to lose the war?

[@phoenixrose1192]

No, it was the fact that they were rather preoccupied with fighting 3 European powers at the time…

[@GabeClendenning]

Seems like controllers get mad when pilots remind them that they’re flying and the controller is not.

[@GabeClendenning]

Ninedaysjane has nothing to do with sex, I feel the same way about the incident between the Aer Lingus pilot and NYC controller, which is another VASAviation

[@charlesreid9337]

@Falcon pilots are extraordinarily well trained professionals >flying airplanes

[@charlesreid9337]

we only hear the really bad ones on youtube etc. If you look around you'll hear controllers literally saving pilots lives too

[@ZygimantasA]

@Falcon You do understand that she is asking for something that was not possible for the pilot to do? Or do you have 0 clue about flying a commercial aircraft, but decided to just comment your opinion anyway?

[@kpov2533]

@Falcon clearly youre not a pilot and dont udnerstand regulations. As a pilot i can tell you that there is FAA flight requirements per plane and this one has a 160 on 5 so he declared he cant do 180 which is correct and her terrible attitude caussed this incident.

[@micahcollins3631]

Sounds like we might have a Kennedy Karen on our hands

[@DirtlovR]

Lol, "Speedird 15K Heavy approach clearence canceled, when able give me a number of your manager to copy" :D

[@andytaylor1588]

Naw, Speedbird is infamous for holding up flow.

[@IrishAirlines]

Golden 👌 lol

[@jmcc2275]

They all think they are celebrities now because of channels like this one.

[@FlightX101]

100% has the “Karen” voice 😂

[@MikeyCh09]

This is bizarre. If 15K can’t fly the requested speed because it’s beyond his approach maximums then that’s final. It’s not up to the controller to dictate how a pilot flies his aircraft. Cancelling his approach to accommodate the aircraft flying BEHIND him is also bizarre as that is the aircraft that should be instructed to go around (Speedbird had lower altitude on approach and right of way). Speedbird is totally right in this instance. Controller needs a kick up the arse.

[@MikeyCh09]

Mike Doggers The issue is that they cancelled approach for the wrong aircraft. 15K had right of way, 1AJ should’ve been asked to move instead. That’s what the guys had a problem with. Procedure wasn’t followed here and spacing was clearly an issue. 180kt at 5 DME is flying low and fast - the controller would’ve been well aware of this and asked for it anyway, that just isn’t reasonable.

[@incandescentwithrage]

@@BIGDROC99 Because, from my limited understanding, the BA aircraft cannot achieve what is classed as a stabilised approach using the parameters set out by the controller. Being the lower aircraft, BA should have been allowed to continue and the aircraft *behind* go around for traffic and resequence.

[@JayJasperLondon]

That’s what I thought 🙈

[@NN-uu9qo]

Mike Doggers that’s not safety. She did that to punish them. Take the aircraft behind out of sequence.

[@johncoyle8139]

Up the "daily business" ya mean! Come on folks, bigger fish to fly in this world. What about that Gretta????

[@Zscor27]

Why is this video not called Rude ATC controller takes out her frustration on pilot? Feels like there is a bias against the pilot in the title, but when actually watching the video in reality its the other way around

[@babababad]

Because the pilot is wasting time explaining unnecessary things to a professional ATC as if she doesn't know how an airline works. He got all huffy at her for doing her job.

[@ajk6656]

@@babababad he got annoyed at her for not following procedure and he thought she took him out just to spite him which is probably true. She needed him to slow down but he had company operational limits to follow. He's flying the plane so she should've done her job and adjusted the speed of traffic behind him accordingly

[@babababad]

@@ajk6656 ATC canceled approach clearance long after the pilot had abandoned professionalism to waste everyone's time with an unnecessary lecture. All he had to do was supply ATC with sufficient information for her to control separation, instead he goes off about what kind of aircraft he's got as if ATC doesn't already know.

[@ajk6656]

@@babababad I agree he took up the channel explaining why he was pissed off which is not very professional, but at first he told her what he couldn't do and what he could do. Her response disregarded that completely with a bad attitude which set him off. Instead of asking him to do something he just told her he can't do, she should have adjusted the traffic accordingly. It's not like he was going so slow that it was unreasonable to slow the traffic behind him

[@alexaviation8107]

@@ajk6656 Also the pilot needs to tell her he is going to file a report

[@theboatcheat1204]

Having operated heavy metal for BA globally for 27 years, JFK is among the most challenging ATC anywhere. They KNOW we have to slow to final speed by 1000ft, which equates to 3 miles, and they have been reminded countless times that any wide-body has very limited ability to decelerate, but they continually ask for the impossible, and they get stroppy when you are unable to comply. One night many years ago I ended up doing 2 go-arounds because they got us too close to the aircraft in front and the runway was not vacated... the BA179 so it was 0300 GMT and we really didn’t need it! On the 3rd approach we insisted on slowing because - again - they wanted us to stay 2.5 miles behind a CAT B aircraft which has a landing speed 20 slower than a Jumbo... absolute muppets!

[@747-pilot]

Yeah, it is always the FOREIGN pilots that seem to have the problems. Never seen any pilots on carriers from the *United States* have any issue whatsoever at JFK, in these videos! If you cannot handle the "heat" in America, then don't fly here! End of story! Just because your training is not to the high standards of the US, don't take it out on our controllers!

[@747-pilot]

OK, honestly, I think you old timers (from places like UK, Europe, etc.) are great pilots. I suppose my reference to the "loser pilots" that you guys produce, are the _CURRENT GENERATION_ of 250-hour ignoramuses that you guys like to stuff in the right seats of your big jets, mostly at places like Ryanair, EasyJet and so on!!

[@HDTokyoAviation]

@@747-pilot Steady on there cowboy, I operate out of the likes of many major European airports and the guys who struggle to follow basic procedures and cause the most havoc are the American carriers. I love how you have the audacity to label it is the "high standards of the US", because as a matter of fact I operate for a very reputable European airline whom has zero fatalities and after returning from the US where I did my basic training the first thing we were all told by our instructor who happens to be an ex Concorde Captain was to forget everything we were taught in the US because it is all incorrect. This is exactly what I hate about American pilots and controllers, they are amongst the least competent, most unsafe yet they have the biggest God like ego and it is that exact attitude which gets people killed, the statistcs are written everywhere go look them up. Like I said, a bunch of cowboys who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near an aircraft. Rant over.

[@karlosbricks2413]

@@747-pilot Interesting. So you yankees consider an A319 to be a big jet? That's very interesting indeed...

[@HDTokyoAviation]

​@@karlosbricks2413 Not just that, apparently they consider anything with more than 9 seats a big jet because they need 1500 hours before they can even touch it... They also think flying a Cessna 152 around the circuit for 1500 hours makes them God like pilots -.-

[@digital11337]

“Unable” is the magic word on this one

[@karlosbricks2413]

To be fair, he said he can't and offered an alternative, controller ignored that and insisted on 180 until 5

[@davidjordorson9852]

Unable .... will now always be the magic aviation word

[@uniqueurl]

That's Sully word

[@michaelgrisham208]

There is another word AA002 uses, Emergency.

[@GreenJetsam]

The pilot is completely correct I’d say. You can’t stabilise a 747 at 180 and he correctly informed ATC that he was unable and as he was the lower aircraft he has right of way. Bad part on the controller id say. He was polite enough and tried his best to accommodate by saying he can do 160 so I think speedbird didn’t do one thing wrong

[@wadesaxton6079]

Steffan Dawe so.... He can fly 160 but can’t bump it up to 180??? Mind you he’s only being asked to give the extra 20 until a 5 mile final. If you can’t lose 20 knots and stabilize in 4 miles so your stabilized before 1000ft you might need to try harder. Also he was unreasonably slow way out compared to every one else.

[@andytaylor1588]

It was a SPEEDBIRD pilot. They are never correct. He was holding up the pattern, as they usually do. She wanted a bit more speed out of him and he could easily accommodate. Of course, she could have waited 30 seconds for him to complete the config in order to reach the 180 kts. Probably tired of Brits. It's easy for that to happen.

[@GreenJetsam]

Andy Taylor the POH for BA in the 747 states you are t able to stabilise the approach and continue unless at 160kts. He is the pilot he has right of way. It’s insufficient planning by ATC. The Speedbird (British or not) did nothing wrong in this instance. Bit arrogant of you to say such things about British pilots

[@jordan4541]

@@andytaylor1588 I assume you have experience in flying the 747?

[@altimaklr]

@@jordan4541 stabilized on virtually any transport category aircraft is 1000 AGL. Ref speed on a 747 is already quite close to 160, there's no reason he needed to be snippy about things, and I believe someone else took over the radios for him (it sounded like) after the cancelled approach

[@kabaddiify]

In a sense pilot is right, he has to fly the plane

[@phapnui]

And ATC is right to keep planes separated. Would be interesting if this was further resolved and if either or both parties would have done something different?

[@VASAviation]

Indeed

[@thawekpl]

@@phapnui so she should've increase separation behind him, not by sending him out... It's should be FIFO structure as much as possible. I understand that would require slight more workload for her but that's her job.

[@masflow09]

kabaddiify yes, my instructor told me not to be afraid to say no to atc

[@binarysignals9593]

@@masflow09 It is illegal not to follow ATC instructions and any pilot found not doing so can be prosecuted for endagerment of an aircraft which carries a pridon term of life in prison, at the very least the pilots licence would be permanently revoked.

[@CHBAfifaKhan]

I hope the pilot made a report on that controller.

[@fhuber7507]

I hope the controller has to pay for the go around fuel.

[@pluto8404]

I hope the controller gets arrested and tared and feathered

[@justanotheraviator2357]

@@pluto8404 sometimes I wish shit like that was legal

[@HupfderFloh]

@@justanotheraviator2357 arresting people? Legal? Are you mad?

[@justanotheraviator2357]

@@HupfderFloh different situations. Not like this!

[@doowop54]

She seemed a bit too eager to “punish” him here

[@wewk584]

Why is revectoring punishment. If the speed restriction was necessary , how could she accept unable without taking some action. Speed restrictions are to keep planes from running into eachother either in the air or the runway. Other airports maybe she could have adjusted the other planes but the airplanes are spaced with little wiggle room there

[@Zajebancije]

She didn't get laid for quite a time, I guess, that makes women do thing like she did right there... Get laid often and avoid conflicts like that.

[@JBobjork]

But it wasnt a speed restriction, she wanted him to fly faster. Then it should have been the one behind that should have slowed down?

[@census3370]

wewk584 I’m not too sure but I’m pretty sure the plane in front with the lower altitude has the right of way and the plane behind him should be the one asked to slow down or revectored.

[@doowop54]

@@ninedaysjane2466 has nothing to do with her being a women - would have said the same thing about a man

[@fingerhorn4]

Yet another example of aggressive, confrontational controllers around JFK. I've listened in to Heathrow for years and have yet to hear one single confrontational exchange. There is something about some US controllers that seems to create so much unnecessary aggro. Not all of course - most of them are excellent. The BA pilot was completely correct. The Controller was rude, ignorant and plain wrong. She caused the situation by vectoring aircraft too bunched up in the first place

[@patrickmorrissey3084]

The people that work at Kennedy are all assholes from Long Island.

[@timvanloo6]

@@patrickmorrissey3084 All of them? Sounds more like you're one of them. Calling everyone an asshole just because they're from a place is something an asshole would say :)

[@TimCBuilders]

No seriously, my uncle and cousins are in L.I. I'm there all the time. Assholes thru and thru😂

[@Steve211Ucdhihifvshi]

I think its just america in general its A culture of me first fck you its mine, i come first etc.

[@twiff3rino28]

Typical New Yorker.

[@aps-pictures9335]

We all have bad days at work - but the worst bit about this was her attitude. ‘You still haven’t answered my question, so whenever you want to get around to that’. Unacceptable. She was also in the wrong, the pilot cannot compromise his SOP’s and overspeed the landing to make her life simpler.

[@rjhornsby]

APS - Pictures that was my problem. The sarcasm was unprofessional, unnecessary, and unwarranted. The pilot said everything but the exact word “unable”. It’s clear that his explanation was communicating “unable”. When a pilot (or controller) uses that word - or words to that effect in this case - it means there’s a good reason, usually safety related. I hope the controller here gets pulled from the tower, made to listen to the tape, explain why she acted that way (so she can be introspective), and be warned that if it happens again she’s looking for another line of work. A bad day and a bad attitude are different things. One is temporary, and the other will get someone hurt.

[@babababad]

@@rjhornsby "the pilot said everything" is the exact problem...ATC requested aircraft to slow to a speed within criteria and he came back with some pedantic, patronizing explanation. ATC's subsequent reaction wasn't constructive but perhaps understandable given the uncooperative pilot.

[@Logan11thMEU]

Rick Hornsby of course she is, shes a woman.

[@suicidism]

@@babababad How is "I can't do that mam" pedantic or patronizing? He is basically saying he is unable to comply. You can't threaten the pilot or start bitching, especially if you are incompetent at your job, like this so called ATC. Thanks god I don't have people like this in my station.

[@larsev]

@@babababad The other way around. ATC requested a higher speed than SOP

[@bogdanrus1148]

As an ATC I never resort to asking pilots to modify speeds unless it’s absolutely the last option. There’s no way I would know their ship better than they do, so I’d rather take the braking of the aircrafts on final into account when I vector them. There was plenty of time for the traffic behind to get a later turn into final and everything would’ve turned out great. No speed change needed. It’s hard for some to accept the fact that your job as an ATC is to help pilots as much as possible, not boss them around.

[@thort9ac]

Buddy! Where are you an air traffic controller at because obviously you haven't worked real traffic? The 7110.65 spells out that vectoring is used to get spacing and speed is used to maintain it! When you work high volume traffic the front of the gap is just as important as the back of the gap! You HAVE to control the speeds because having too much space i.e. pilot is flying too slow, is just as bad to the operation as too little space!

[@56independent42]

Strange, i always thought ATC was just allergic to pilots and helped them go out of the airspace as safely as possible.

[@mumblecake251]

Think it is important to say that there are many good controllers and also a few bad ones. At least in the UK there is also the problem that there is more and more a driver for cost saving meaning that they are understaffed ... shouldn't be the case at JFK though

[@BlackOpSource]

@@56independent42 The sooner I get rid of them, the sooner I can go back to discussing the chow run. Bogdan, airports with any real volume require speed control in order to maintain arrival rates and consistent spacing. There's a whole section on speed control in the 7110.65, I'd recommend you read it sometime, lots of very interesting stuff in there.

[@harosokman]

Where do you work, we use speed control everywhere, 10 knots at 60 miles may save a sequence of 6!

[@quenchize]

The controller circled No3 to avoid slowing down the No4 that is mental! Preceding Aircraft was doing 200 she could slow the NAX or send it through the locliser for spacing. Pilot seemed very reasonable he offered 160. IMO the controller was quite rude. BAW was doing 130 and was asked when are you SLOWING to 160, "When ever you get around to answering my question that would be great" Appalling RT. Pilot would have done better to just say "Unable"

[@andytaylor1588]

160 or GREATER is what she stated at first. He was holding up the line.

[@JonBiddell]

Technically the pilot was correct, but man,what an attitude

[@ying20000818]

130kt ground speed. Considering the winds even at 2000ft can be quite strong (in the UK anyway), the BA 747 could very well be flying anywhere between 150 to even 170kts indicated so when he offered 160kts (indicated, not GS like shown on scope) or greater, at least to me, it would sound like he was happy to speed up a lil/keep the same speed to keep the controller happy but not any faster.

[@2snowgirl520]

I hope she gets fired.

[@pltradioman]

rude? bitchy is the word. she vectored the guy that flew cross atlantic just to make her point.

[@AjitSidhu360]

In many parts of the world its 160 to 4 dme, I fly an a A320 and I'd be unable to comply with 180 to 5 Dme because on a 3 degree approach 5 dme is about 1500 feet, most airline SOP's (standard operating procedures) have what we call "gates" 1000 ft and 500ft at my current company 1000ft we must be in landing configuration (flaps and gear) and speed within +30 of VAPP it would be a massive push and challenge to maintain 180 to 5 dme and then dump everything and slow down within about a mile, can't imagine with higher inertia what its like for the 747, good on the crew.

[@noah9130]

Ajit Sidhu I think it's still possible. At 5 dme you're at 1700ft. If you're at 180kts at this altitude with the gear down it's quiet easy to be stabilised at 1000ft. In some airlines it's even 500ft in VMC conditions. Now of course it depends on the plane. I don't fly the 747 but I think it loses speed really quickly.

[@roxy5048]

@@noah9130 The 747 actually doesn't lose speed as fast as you might think. Though it's heavy and large, it glides really well.

[@CraZy291]

always great to have input from the professionals, thanks!

[@pleasegrowabrain]

Ajit, this reinforces my earlier observation that controllers are typically not pilots and don't know squat about the operational limitations of the aircraft under their direction. The controller cancelling his clearance was just her ego overriding her better judgement and professionalism. A call to the tower post flight would absolutely be appropriate, and from the sound of it was likely the pilot's intention.

[@judgemarshall6127]

Yes..... 1,000 ft AGL "Gates" upon being configured are SOP at the Airlines (usually worlwide). The key is to be more vigilant, self aware of your environment, and a anticipate the ensuing slam dunk. Preparation means everything on sequence, descents, speed, and where you're at in that sequence on "all" approaches. Be Safe out there.

[@saxmanb777]

I, too, got penalty vectors once out of JFK. He said we weren’t accelerating fast enough for him and we got chewed. Wtf dude. My plane is slow!

[@francescocandian2708]

"Penalty vectors"? Geeezus, man, are we back to the Middle Ages of flying? Flying is about sticking to rules, regulations, procedures, performances, techniques, etcetera. Can you show me ONE publication mentioning the existence of "penalty vectors"? Please!

[@flyguy0765]

@@francescocandian2708 I think he's referring to getting a phone number from ATC sir

[@JohnGalt289]

@@francescocandian2708 One example is the "Penalty Box" at ORD. It actually used to be printed on the airport diagram "Penalty Box". If you didn't get to the runway fast enough or took excessive time to run checklists ORD Ground would send you to the Box and you'd be penalized and have them replay something back like "SKW5020 you are number 23 for the active". So yes ATC does do things like this. Theyre most not vindictive but this does exist.

[@francescocandian2708]

@@JohnGalt289 Thanks. Honestly, I had never heard of that, yet I believe you. But of course, I do not buy this s***. Can the solution to high traffic be better Flight Deck performance? Partly, and ONLY to a certain extent. But higher performance means higher standards and in turn this implies different TRAINING standards. The "penalty box" solution is disrispectful, unless the assumption is that for some reason a given crew is WILLINGLY taking longer than required to perform their duties. Which, btw seems to be the ATC controller's attitude, and in my opinion EXACTLY what irritates the crew. If, on the other hand, it is recognized I am doing my best as a pilot, yet my performance is sub-standard, we should either consider changing my performance or changing the standards. In both cases the solution is not an idiotic "penalty box". This is a "Third World", "Banana Republic", "Medieval" approach, "your problem"-style approach. Guess what, when I'm crashing on your kindergarden it's OUR problem...!

[@JohnGalt289]

@@francescocandian2708 I partly agree that solutions for super busy airspaces need to be training for both flight crew and ATC but I really was just saying that the FAA/ATC does do things like make you wait or give you bad sequencing for little things like this.

[@bennettt4404]

Bad move on the controllers part. He was ahead of the other traffic and a heavy jet! Should have sent the other plane around behind him.

[@LAGoodz]

Sounds like the controller would be more at home in a McDonalds drive-thru.

[@mrmustangman]

LMAO.......

[@olasek7972]

Anthony 1976 actually it was the pilot that showed worst manners

[@LAGoodz]

Olasek Thanks for being corrected, silly me. Obviously you’re a 747 pilot with massive experience flying the airplane into JFK 👍💪

[@olasek7972]

Anthony 1976 and what exactly makes you think that judging who qualifies for McDonalds drive-thru requires 747 experience?

[@LAGoodz]

Olasek Because a Big Mac isn’t as important as 300 tonne machine containing hundreds of people, with a bad attitude controller running the drive-thru.

[@robgaskell2391]

He was frustrated. But her passive aggressive "when you get around to that, that'll be great" is unprofessional

[@sakatababa]

pilot avoided to answer the question

[@jonjumbo]

Clearly ATC is at fault. She's incharge of vectoring all aircraft safely with safe seperation between them

[@wadesaxton6079]

Jonathan and Speedbird clearly slowed down earlier than normal. Causing an accordion effect behind him. Not that hard to just bump the power up, give an extra 20 and just as easy to lose that 20 inside a 5 mile final as asked.

[@HEDGE1011]

Wade Saxton Again I ask for your operational knowledge and experience on the -400 to make this statement. Signed, A guy with a B-747-4 type rating and loads of applicable experience

[@vanessaruiz4705]

if he cant go as fast as needed for whatever reason, it is easier to pull him out, than it is to correct the speed of the other 5 planes behind him.

[@mrjjman2010]

Wade Saxton are you the same goof commenting on all the other comments trying to rebut actual pilots with your non existent knowledge? I like watching these videos but at no time do I think I’m an actual pilot or have the expertise of one. Get off the internet, wade.

[@vanessaruiz4705]

@@mrjjman2010 there are at least 4 "actual pilots" here that agree with the ATC, given this particular airspace. So it's not only one person.

[@elkhunter8664]

40 years in the ground operations side. Of all the phone calls I've witnessed between a captain and ATC, after arriving at the gate, this is the most common. ATC asking the pilots to do something that falls outside of safe aviation parameters. On the plus side, once on the ground, a simple, civil phone call to the controller usually sets things right. No big deal, pretty routine.

[@omerozgur1126]

elk hunter the bad attitude is the problem. No one should work as Atc with those kind of attitude. Btw the request was against Faa and ICAO rules.

[@Bureaucromancer]

@@omerozgur1126 Yup. The request wasn't the problem. The shitty lecture and incoherent procedure after being told unable is.

[@elkhunter8664]

@@omerozgur1126 Pretty much what I was saying. The controller got huffy. The pilot handled it well. Best time to discuss this is once the aircraft is on the ground.

[@detaart]

If it's routine, then things aren't being set right, now are they?

[@alekm9446]

Looks like an ATC training issue to me. Train the controllers to understand what the pilots need and accommodate accordingly. Doesn’t seem like a difficult change to make.

[@minitrundle]

Just thinking about it, 180 till 5? Then they will need to drop 40 knots before touch down. Thats a big ask for a 747.

[@seoceancrosser]

New York controllers are the worst. Always an attitude. Not following procedures to push metal through. BAW was correct in this situation in that he has standards to fly his aircraft to before complying with controller instructions. “Unable” means exactly that.

[@HEDGE1011]

seoceancrosser Yes they are but more specifically JFK is infinitely worse than LGA (or EWR). That's why JFK is the only airport I bid to avoid every single month. The only way you'll find me there is on a reroute. I did it a ton when I was junior, now I'd be happy never to have to see that place again. The worst.

[@HEDGE1011]

Michael Gordon Fair enough. Why does have so many of them working as Air Traffic Controllers?

[@julianhuertas8909]

New yorkers bunch of cockwads

[@JoeRantCT]

Kennedy Steve retired. Behold his replacement: Kennedy Karen.

[@C2K777]

She gave him an instruction he was unable to comply with, explained why he couldn't comply, she got short with him after that. Aircraft behind could've/ should've been asked to slow after she was told the reason the 747 couldn't

[@Phx737swa]

You can’t just slow down an airplane because then you slow down the one behind them and so on it becomes a mess. You have to sequence them back through either the BA or the Norwegian. Weather she was right or wrong about which one she pulled out is up to you I’m just explaining there’s more to it than just slowing down.

[@C2K777]

@@Phx737swa She literally told the one behind to speed up straight after telling BA to do so so she could've not had the plane behind increase it's speed. You also can't have aircraft coming in in an unstable way. To expect that( especially when you've been told that would be consequence by the pilot flying) is totally unreasonable imho

[@Phx737swa]

C2K she had him maintain the faster speed that needed to keep the flow going. This flow number you have is from the time you depart they are betting on you coming in at a certain time. And 5 miles out is still more than enough especially at 2000. I haven’t seen the approach plate but they are probably just intercepting. But you’re correct if that they didn’t feel comfortable accepting it then they don’t have to and she had to re sequence someone and it just ended up being them. You’d find the same thing at ORD LAX any of the big Bravos. It’s all just keeping the flow going

[@Bureaucromancer]

@@C2K777 TBH I think it's going to bite one of them in the ass at some point. More than enough accidents have already happened when pilots take clearances they really shouldn't... An overshoot at LGA isn't a hard scenario to picture.

[@-108-]

Well, from my review of the most popular comments here, I'd say it's pretty much unanimous that the controller in this instance was in the wrong, and Speedbird was completely in the right.

[@Dr.Gunsmith]

I’d love to know what happened next and did he report Karen 😂

[@DublinVideos]

She wanted a 747 to fly 180 knots to 5 miles 🤣

[@MrMowky]

He's like twelve miles out.

[@DublinVideos]

@@MrMowky Yes and in 7 miles time they will be 5 miles out

[@shaanemillat]

180 knots itself is the highest speed limit for maximum flap settings (flaps 30) of Boeing 747-400, if I know correctly.

[@jbreezy101]

He just told you he can't do it. I know that the controller has to keep spacing but in a dispute, whether emergency or not, the benefit of the doubt goes to the pilots.

[@minitrundle]

Surly if thats the case, what she should of done is got NAX1AJ to either match BAW15K speed or less to keep the spacing. Or set one of the aircraft up on the other parallel runway.

[@Person01234]

@@pdxpilot06 Did you even think about your post for 2 seconds? It's less safe to send the aircraft further into their approach around than the one less far into the approach. Which is why the FAA safety regulations give the lower aircraft the right of way. Which is why, as everyone is saying, if there was an issue with following traffic, the plane behind should have been the one sent around.

[@taustin266]

At Houston Hobby a few years ago, a Cirrus (I think) in the approach sequence was flying too slowly for ATC and was going to be overtaken by the plane behind. Hobby’s ATC gave the go-around to the Cirrus which then stalled and crashed. The controller was specifically criticized for making the Cirrus go-around even though it was first in the sequence.

[@airwipe1639]

timmohthee is it this one kzbin.info/www/bejne/o5eWqZugjdFna5Y

[@drfaustus72]

Well, you're leaving out a whole lotta things there. The Cirrus was taken out of sequence in that instance several times and given several runway changes. The controller was critized for making things very complicated and confusing with a single pilot at the controls. One go around is easily trained for, but three+runway changes, flaps in and out in a small but fast airplane? It can easily stress a single pilot, especially after a long flight. Of course, you're right if ATC had just followed FIFO it probably would have been fine...

[@taustin266]

Yes, there were many, many factors that went into the crash - the pilot’s inexperience, her refusal to speak assertively and accept ATC instructions without question, conflicting and confusing commands from ATC, the list goes on and on. I only mention the sequencing because it’s what applies to the video. Of the many things that the ATC was criticized for by the NTSB, making the Cirrus go-around because it was flying too slowly for the planes behind it directly applied to this video.

[@taustin266]

Airwipe yes

[@XPLAlN]

@@drfaustus72 ...and even more particularly if you are taking zolpadem and flying illegally being out of date for the BFR.

[@the.mr.beacher]

"So whenever you get around to that, that'd be great." WTH 🤔🤨

[@fred1296]

Controller was WAY out of line in this situation by ignoring the operational limits of BAW15K.

[@MetalSmith]

She made a mistake, the pilot told her it was outside of his ability to do safely, so they had the aircraft go around and reworked the busy sequence to better fit the needed parameters. If the only thing you screwed up was the one plane, and you were informed, just pull out the one thing you screwed up and rework it. Don't rework the next 5 aircraft . It seems like if this was a mistake on the ATC part, it was the safer of the mistakes they could have made.

[@majiwaruu]

​@@MetalSmith Aviation right of way rules state that the lower aircraft on approach has the right of way, and you cannot descend below and overtake to gain the right of way. The Speedbird had the right of way, and the following traffic should've been the one to slow their approach speed for the Speedbird or go-around if unable. Generally speaking, all aircraft being overtaken have the right of way and you cannot overtake an aircraft on final. ATC was in the wrong 100%

[@pilotho]

How does any controller expect a 747 to slow from 180kt to Vref in 5 miles and getting stable at 1000ft. I think physics class needs to be taken again.

[@knndyskful]

I wish I was a pilot so I understood all this :D

[@cjmillsnun]

@@knndyskful It's fairly simple. Big heavy plane takes a long time to slow down. Must be at final approach speed and plane configured for landing by 1000 feet to go.

[@Wiki7202]

can someone explain why the controller was annoyed that the aircraft could not slow down considering traffic was behind speedbird 15k heavy?

[@PolarPenguin526]

The SpeedBird was asked to do 160 yes due to the traffic behind him but in my opinion he kinda deserved landing approach canceled since he just could of went 170. also if he’s flown into jfk before why is it now he as an issue. hope this helps lad.

[@VASAviation]

She had her sequence built and BAW would destroy it maintaining slower than 180 knots.

[@ndmz903]

@@PolarPenguin526 160 was the max he could go with the current flap setting and probably also gear down. The controller should have slowed the norwegian behind him or made them go around. 180 is quite and high approach speed for a 747, and 170 would still be too fast for the configuration he had, so he would have to pull up the flaps and the gear which means he wouldn't have enough time to reconfigure after.

[@Wiki7202]

so not reducing speed would have affected separation distances which could have caused others to go around had speedbird landed? so does that mean it was easier for speedbirds clearance to be cancelled and for speedbird to be re vectored for a second approach? please correct me if i am wrong.

[@Megabishop65]

@@PolarPenguin526 "could of went" ???

[@krubokrobu]

If she had stated a speed requirement earlier in the approach, he probably could have complied. It looks like she noticed the separation issue quite late when it was already hard to correct it.

[@ownage2214]

If you listen to many TRACONs you will hear speed restrictions almost always given right around approach clearance. They're also usually published on the approach plates.

[@feartheduck6664]

She was negligent.

[@greensagan]

@@ownage2214 Can you give me an example of an approach plate with a speed restriction?

[@BlackOpSource]

@@greensagan I have one, the RNAV Z 06L (and 06R) at PGUM. 210 knots or slower at RASPE, and at or below 4,500 feet. I think the approach gets lower minima (partially) by restricting the energy the aircraft can carry crossing the IAF; the similar RNAV Y doesn't have these restrictions.

[@robertmorgan8754]

Wasn't this Karen Controller the one famous for the, "Okay, so you lied," comment (which was funnier than heck) a year or two ago? The voices sound similar.

[@dermann439]

the famous JFK attitude strikes again...

[@in-motus]

Attitude of entitlement, I'd say...

[@LongdownConker]

Agreed, except Kennedy Steve, he was great lol

[@mrjjman2010]

This is the first comment section of one of these videos where it’s essentially unanimous that the controller is wrong, at least among people who are commercial(or say they are)pilots. Like almost no comments defending the controller in any way and zefo arguments as why the pilot would be in the wrong(that have to do with procedure and/or aircraft operating capability and safety). I’ve never seen it that one sided on any of the videos.

[@krashd]

And yet the title is still structured to make it sound as though the pilot is in the wrong, I'm smelling a little anti-British bias. Or just clever clickbait.

[@harryfaber]

As an old glider pilot, no one ever told me to go around because I wasn't doing the speed they wanted me to.

[@V1Fleetz]

@@harryfaber lol

[@shadowalker6791]

Basically because the controller was in the wrong. If you look at just the regs. The lower and slower airplane has right of way over a faster, higher airplane. The first one in sequence should've been given priority as he was already stabilized for the approach unless the trailing aircraft had declared an emergency.

[@maxsdad538]

No, it's NOT "essentially unanimous". ATC is managing the ENTIRE airspace, and has thousands of lives relying on her and ALL the aircraft working together. Speedbird decided that HE was more important that all the other aircraft, and she didn't have time to play games and explain everything. I suspect that in a pissing contest, she's going to come out on top.

[@1romancatholic]

I think pilot was flying safe and spoke nicely. I think tower lady had an attitude.

[@63076topher]

The pilot had a attitude the virgin Atlantic flight which comes from the same place had no problem following the ATC instructions.

[@jackblack2370]

I'm sorry but JFK controllers are the absolute worst ...

[@HEDGE1011]

Sanjay H Don't apologize when you're correct!

[@ayrshire1418]

this isnt JFK, this is new york tracon. big difference in the two.

[@jackblack2370]

@@ayrshire1418 OK gotcha ... she'd fit right in at JFK though!

[@HEDGE1011]

Richard Dalrymple Technically I realize you're correct Richard, but I'm also going to wave the nonsense flag on this one. I've flown into all three NYC airports for over 29 years now, and the handling in and out of JFK as well as the handling on the ground there is BY FAR the worst in the US. I sense that you have a parochial interest in this matter and if so I'm sure you're a nice guy, but much of the industry detests and disrespects your colleagues. That's the truth.

[@gazza2933]

Crikey!! I thought that was supposed to be Athens.

[@chaitanyak4455]

Terrible ATC. 180 to 4 would not be possible on an A320 forget 747. She requires a class on Aerodynamics and stabilisation criteria.

[@glishskiii]

180 to 5 out is pretty standard. Atc can give you a speed assignment to the final approach fix or 5 miles from the end of the runway, whichever comes first. I’ve never had an issue slowing even in a loaded 321.

[@larsev]

@@glishskiii But this Speedbird was not an A321.

[@glishskiii]

Lars Henningsson yea I’m aware. Not saying it was

[@mrjjman2010]

glishskiii what’re the weight differences and the stabilization criteria differences between the planes? I mean that’s cool but if they’re different on a different plane.. then how is that relevant?

[@jamesgraham7297]

@@glishskiii standard for what aircraft/airline?

[@kreolekid71]

Piss poor planning on her part! Penalty vectors due to a speed restriction outside of the aircraft’s approach tolerance, wow!

[@justinhink4198]

Might be piss poor planning but if she can't make the sequence work then she has to break someone out. She is not a 747 pilot and working some of the busiest airspace in the world. This is not her first rodeo.

[@Tocsin-Bang]

ATC should have got the number 2 aircraft to reduce speed.

[@shorehambeach]

I remind myself never to fly my plane to JFK as ATC is so rude. Then I remember I am not a pilot.

[@ayrshire1418]

this is not jfk tower. this is the tracon. N90

[@HEDGE1011]

Richard Dalrymple Thanks for mentioning this Richard...I think I actually said something about calling the tower supervisor once at the gate and shut down and I misspoke. I can't readily find that right now or I'd edit it but I appreciate you making that clear. What I should have said was that I'd get the number for the facility and call their supervisor to discuss it. Best Regards and thanks for the prompt.

[@johnwyoder]

😅

[@sce2aux464]

"Kennedy Ground, Honda Accord with information Golf, request taxi for departure to the west..."

[@BillSmith-rx9rm]

Hell, I don't think I even want to fly into JFK on Microsoft flight simulator!!!

[@Robin6512]

Pilot was right. Hope he reported the incident

[@omerozgur1126]

Icao rules dictate maximum speed can be 160 till 4 miles. So 180 is out of the window. That lady should have been reported.

[@mytech6779]

FAA ATC order says, "Do not assign speed adjustment to aircraft: ... 4. Inside the final approach fix on final or a point 5 miles from the runway, whichever is closer to the runway." For the trailing aircraft. There are instructions to account for spacing compression during speed changes. Standard procedure is to assign arriving jet aircraft below 10,000msl a speed not less than 210kts and 170kts within 20nm of the runway threshold.(The aircraft can be allowed to fly slower, but should not be required to fly slower. ie "maintain 170kts or slower" is acceptable) The wording of the FAA rules indicates this is a best practice not a not a hard rule, as it is followed by "Lower speeds may be assigned when operationally advantageous." 'When operationally advantageous' is FAA speak for special conditions that can not be handled with the common recommended methods. That is the exception provides a substantial gain in efficiency or safety, as an example maybe an airport is near a mountain and normal speeds cause approach problems.

[@Person01234]

Given the pilot saying "I don't believe that is FAA approved procedure but we'll discuss that later", I suspect either she accepted that she was at fault on the phone (or possibly he did), or such a report was filed.

[@BlackOpSource]

​@@Person01234 Even if he had contacted the facility on the ground he would not have spoken to the controller. He would have spoken to whoever was working the desk and fielding phone calls for that area, most likely an FAA operations supervisor. Given that no one appeared to actually violate any rules here apart from getting their panties in a twist, all that would likely come of it is a discussion between the controller and her supervisor.

[@Person01234]

@@BlackOpSource This is wrong in every way.

[@BlackOpSource]

@@Person01234 I've been controlling air traffic professionally for the last ten years, but do tell.

[@robabob1001]

Yeah the title of this video is wrong... It should be Kennedy controller gets bitchy.

[@fhuber7507]

Controller can't tell the pilot to violate the laws of physics because she is trying to cram in an extra landing.

[@chuckschillingvideos]

I'm not a pilot nor a controller. But what it sounds like to me is that the ATC asked the pilot, who was on a CLEARED APPROACH, to alter his stabilized approach envelope to accommodate traffic behind him. WTF? Does she know the performance envelope of his aircraft better than he does? Was she trying to force him to make up for her possible mistake in vectoring the second aircraft behind him on an approach that was too close to him in the first place?

[@TacoJFK3226]

An ATC that doesn't belong in her job

[@martinrobbins1207]

Too may controllers not sufficiently familiar with aircraft performance characteristics. "Huh? What's that?"

[@weekenderfam7965]

typically I hear ATC to adjust the speed of the following plane behind to accommodate the plane in front, if they can’t do that then they will have to go around. Why you would want to take out a plane that has the approach set up and go through the thing all over again, unless there’s serious safety issue like something on the runway, or as a punishment because you cannot do what I want.

[@alaqmargandhi1165]

Hmm, well she wanted them to be 180kt until 5 DME, at around 6.8 DME, they should 1800ft, and I’d assume somewhere around 1400ft, and I don’t think it’s possible to go from 180kt to about 145kt (Average VRef for B748). And yeah I think it was right for the pilots to say they couldn’t do it, because there is honestly no way they could stabilize by 1000ft.

[@Garythefireman66]

Where's Kennedy Steve when you need a good laugh? Yes I know he's retired.

[@steakhouse0115]

The damm old days with Kennedy Steve

[@Cissy2cute]

He would have said something to relieve the tension. I'm not sure if he would have handled this differently, but I certainly would bet that he would have smoothed the situation down a bit. He had a special talent for dealing with just about anything, even angry and frustrated pilots.

[@GrizzAxxemann]

When did that happen?

[@marctaiji5052]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/fGLGfJmQltmfh5Y

[@MadelineMcAuley]

@@Cissy2cute I thought this was a social experiment of something he had done, but with a girl voice- just to see how people would attack her (but not Kennedy Steve had it been his voice)

[@breesewilson6742]

This whole comment section is a bunch of experts. 😂

[@rael5469]

She made a 747 leave the pattern for traffic BEHIND them??? Unbelievable.

[@allgrainbrewer10]

he would mess up the whole sequence, so ya. F off limey

[@sakatababa]

747 started to slow down too early, endangering those behind them kennedy is busy, they have landings and takeoffs like a machinegun if you slow down too early, like 14-15 miles out, you are collecting a full minute by landing and then you have a longer rollout when another plane is behind you 3 minutes out and another 3 minutes behind him and another 3 minutes behind him, that makes a very bad situation where everyone has to slow down just because you did and someone crashes into someone else so you remove the one plane that caused the issue instead of moving everyone else if a pilot can't fit his plane within that small window that atc is giving them, it is safer for everyone for that pilot to make a go around

[@rael5469]

@@sakatababa I think the transcript is not accurate because it looked like she wanted him to maintain 180 and he said he could maintain 160 or greater......which would have allowed him to maintain 180. So it sounds like there was just a miscommunication between the controller and the pilot. In either case making him go around to accommodate the plane behind him was wrong.

[@sakatababa]

@@rael5469 no, no. transcript is accurate. that is lingo for "minimum speed", the speed that you will not go below at any cost. it is understood that you will go near that speed while on approach (that is also lingo for landing pathways, there are several separations like final approach etc). would you rather she pushes out the plane behind him then him? she has to push out someone or they will crash. jfk has very heavy traffic, a lot of planes are taking off and landing at the same time. it is fairly normal that two planes land within 150-200 seconds from each other. that is literally when one is rolling off the runway to taxi while the other is touching down on that same runway, just 2-3km behind him. if the first one holds on the runway or approach for any reason, the plane behind him can't just pull brake or slow down further. he has to maintain speed to have lift on wings to stay in the air. if he slows down any further, he will crash. ba (british airways) pilot was slowing down too far out for it to be safe for all other planes that are behind him on approach, you can see planes in front and back on the radar image in the video. if he goes too fast, he risks crashing into plane landing in front. too slow, he risks that the plane landing behind him will crash into him or into runway or short of runway because he went unstable from slowing down to avoid him. it is fairly standard practice to remove the one that makes the trouble, not other pilots that can follow instructions.

[@sakatababa]

@@rael5469 no, no. transcript is accurate. that is common for "minimum speed", the speed that you will not go below at any cost. it is understood that you will go near that speed while on approach. would you rather she pushes out the plane behind him from the que then him? she has to push out someone or they will crash into each other. kennedy has very heavy traffic, a lot of planes are taking off and landing at the same time. it is fairly normal that two planes land within 150-200 seconds from each other. that is literally when one is rolling off the runway to taxi while the other is touching down on that same runway, just 2-3km behind him. if the first one holds on the runway or approach for any reason, the plane behind him can't just pull brake or slow down further. he has to maintain speed to have lift on wings to stay stable in the air. if he slows down any further, he will crash. pilot was slowing down too far out for it to be safe for all other planes that are behind him on approach, you can see planes in front and back on the radar image in the video. if he goes too fast, he risks crashing into plane landing in front. too slow, he risks that the plane landing behind him will crash into him or into runway or short of runway because he went unstable from slowing down to avoid him. it is fairly standard practice to remove the one that makes the trouble, not other pilots that can follow instructions.

[@masflow09]

she can give directions, but one thing is that the pilot can comply and he said it he cant do 160 at the time 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@krubokrobu]

Wait, I heard the controller say she wanted him to go 180 (or faster). The pilot is the one who said he has to go 160.

[@wewk584]

I think they were both right. Pilots should always say unable if unable. And its dangerous to let approaching planes get too close to each other.

[@ZygimantasA]

@@krubokrobu You do know that it's not easy to just keep going up and down in speed when dissenting a commercial aircraft right?

[@jcota2003]

Pilot was asked to speed up to 180kts, pilot advised he was configured for 160kts and unable to comply. I am not a pilot but seems to me if he had flaps set, possibly gear down that reconfiguring to accelerate to the 180kts and then reconfiguring again to slow down for landing might not have been possible. I only had basic ground school and such a long time ago so the nuances of flying a 747 into some place like JFK is not something I have never experienced first hand. But to me the ATCs attitude is wrong.