Medevac

[MikeD]

YOU ARE A PUBLIC SERVANT. THEY ARE YOUR CUSTOMERS.
Without Controllers, Pilots can still fly. Without Pilots, we're out of a job.
We exist to facilitate their movement. Yet you yell from your arm chair about how inconvenient it was to have them block you.
I wonder how many muscles you actually had to use when the two Lear pilots blocked someone? I'm sure it was detrimental to the operation of your sector.

Hold your horses there hoss. Things are a two-way street here. The Lear pilots.....ANY pilots.....blocking radio transmissions are creating a potential safety hazard. That's no better than a controller doing the same. Just because the Lear is flying medevac DOES NOT relieve the crew from operating professionally, and conducting themselves the same.

Provide expeditious handling as safely able. That's the job right there.

Professionalism should go all the way around. That said, I hardly see anyone here telling medevac planes to go pound sand.

 

[ATC Jesus]

Hold your horses there hoss. Things are a two-way street here. The Lear pilots.....ANY pilots.....blocking radio transmissions are creating a potential safety hazard. That's no better than a controller doing the same. Just because the Lear is flying medevac DOES NOT relieve the crew from operating professionally, and conducting themselves the same.

I think you completely missed the point. No pilot intentionally blocks everyone on the frequency, contrary to what the OP claims is commonplace from the Medevac pilots. My colleague was simply saying that it happens. It happens all the time, in fact. When you have 2-3 dozen aircraft on frequency, it's bound to happen. Pilots can listen on frequency for a few seconds like they're supposed to, hear nothing, and then transmit. 3 or 4 or 2 dozen other pilots could be doing the exact same thing.http://forums.jetcareers.com/members/dvlzarchangl.28306/

That said, I hardly see anyone here telling medevac planes to go pound sand.

You must not have ever seen the operations from the other side of the mic. DvLzArchAngL and I see it constantly at our facility, and that's why we're out to change how Medevacs are treated, on a national level. If you want examples, I could write a book, from Medevac flights that are put back on the STAR, to routes that literally add 100+ miles to the trip (The SAN area to LAS area routes, in particular). It happens day after day after day and we're sick of it.

Unfortunately, the OP is completely okay with that. He is okay with adding those miles to the trip, because sometimes the Medevac pilots block other pilots when they check in? Absolutely not. Not on my watch. No way am I going to let him give the rest of us a bad name because he is too lazy to handle Medevac flights appropriately.

 

[MikeD]

I think you completely missed the point. No pilot intentionally blocks everyone on the frequency, contrary to what the OP claims is commonplace from the Medevac pilots. My colleague was simply saying that it happens. It happens all the time, in fact. When you have 2-3 dozen aircraft on frequency, it's bound to happen. Pilots can listen on frequency for a few seconds like they're supposed to, hear nothing, and then transmit. 3 or 4 or 2 dozen other pilots could be doing the exact same thing.



You must not have ever seen the operations from the other side of the mic. DvLzArchAngL and I see it constantly at our facility, and that's why we're out to change how Medevacs are treated, on a national level. If you want examples, I could write a book, from Medevac flights that are put back on the STAR, to routes that literally add 100+ miles to the trip (The SAN area to LAS area routes, in particular). It happens day after day after day and we're sick of it.

Unfortunately, the OP is completely okay with that. He is okay with adding those miles to the trip, because sometimes the Medevac pilots block other pilots when they check in? Absolutely not. Not on my watch. No way am I going to let him give the rest of us a bad name because he is too lazy to handle Medevac flights appropriately.

And that's all well and good to do. My only point was that everything is a two way street. There's no need for pilots to be unprofessional no matter who they are or what their capacity, anymore than there's a need for ATC to be that way.

 

[ATC Jesus]

Well that's a given. The only lack of professionalism regarding medevac flights, sadly, comes from lazy controllers.

 

[Bernoulli Fan]

I think you completely missed the point. No pilot intentionally blocks everyone on the frequency, contrary to what the OP claims is commonplace from the Medevac pilots.

Unfortunately, the OP is completely okay with that. He is okay with adding those miles to the trip, because sometimes the Medevac pilots block other pilots when they check in? Absolutely not. Not on my watch. No way am I going to let him give the rest of us a bad name because he is too lazy to handle Medevac flights appropriately.

I think you completely missed the point. And what you wrote above is completely inaccurate. It's bizarre that you would even conclude that from my post. If that's what Matt told you in person at work, he's made his mind up without even talking to me.

Dear Air Traffic Controllers who feel MedEvac's have to be afforded Priority Handling "Traffic or Workload Permitting"...

I'm so glad you joined so we could do this online instead of in person tomorrow night. Your indignation is unwarranted, man. I agree with you! I issue more shortcuts to regular flights than most others in the area, and I certainly am not "too lazy" to expedite Medevac flights. Go back and read my post. Two pilots keying up at the same time is different from not listening and beginning your transmission when someone else is already talking, which is the event I was talking about. Chill out, and realize we're on the same side.

 

[ATC Jesus]

I agree with you! I issue more shortcuts to regular flights than most others in the area, and I certainly am not "too lazy" to expedite Medevac flights.

Maybe I misread that you would give them priority traffic permitting. We provide VFR flight following and additional services workload [traffic] permitting, not priority handling to medevac flights. It is MANDATORY, so long as safety is not compromised. I can't even think of a situation where safety would be compromised by providing priority handling for a medevac flight. Perhaps the sector is so busy that expediting the medevac would result in all sorts of vectors for other aircraft, which could potentially result in an operational error? We get paid exorbitant amounts of money to vector aircraft and keep them separated, so it surely can't be that. I'm at a complete loss as to when safety would be compromised.

While you personally might provide direct routing (apparently only if traffic permits), as a facility and as a region, our handling of medevac flights is severely lacking. It's attrocious, in fact.

 

[N90-EWR]

Were you guys around back when they went direct everywhere in the late 80's early 90's?

 

[Bernoulli Fan]

Maybe I misread that you would give them priority traffic permitting. We provide VFR flight following and additional services workload [traffic] permitting, not priority handling to medevac flights. It is MANDATORY, so long as safety is not compromised. I can't even think of a situation where safety would be compromised by providing priority handling for a medevac flight. Perhaps the sector is so busy that expediting the medevac would result in all sorts of vectors for other aircraft, which could potentially result in an operational error? We get paid exorbitant amounts of money to vector aircraft and keep them separated, so it surely can't be that. I'm at a complete loss as to when safety would be compromised.

While you personally might provide direct routing (apparently only if traffic permits), as a facility and as a region, our handling of medevac flights is severely lacking. It's attrocious, in fact.

You know, it's funny: I think I can remember back when I was typing the original post, I went back and added "traffic permitting" after I had typed out the rest, thinking someone might get upset if I didn't reference the NOTE that Matt provided from the 7110. I never imagined someone would take that qualifier, or even that post, and twist it so morbidly to fit his pre-existing vendetta. The thread was just an anecdote from one day at work, and that qualifier was intended to increase accuracy, not meditate on situations where traffic might not permit priority.

 

[z987k]

lots

This is all well and good, but our op specs allow for, and we file at the direction of our company almost every single leg as medevac. Today I did a flight ABC-XYZ-ABC. Only the first leg had a patient but we were medevac both ways. IMO there is no reason for that and I need absolutely no priority handling on the second leg because there truly is no emergency at all, yet I file as medevac because the company says to do so, and legally we can.
Other flights we do are not remotely in need of priority handling either. Suicidal people, head aches, sore throats. Yes, we end up medevacing people with those conditions. Again, I don't need priority handling but we're medevac regardless.

All 3 companies around here do it the same way. Medevac always, it's basically just a call sign. So at least for me, if it's going to be a royal PITA to move some people for us, ask us. "Are you critical?" If no, don't worry about it. If yes, then yes please do spin that 777, if we're within 30 miles we're faster than any jet in our king air anyways.

 

[ATC Jesus]

So at least for me, if it's going to be a royal PITA to move some people for us, ask us. "Are you critical?" If no, don't worry about it. If yes, then yes please do spin that 777, if we're within 30 miles we're faster than any jet in our king air anyways.

That's not how it works, unfortunately. There is no asking involved. By filing with the medevac callsign, you get priority handling by default. Perhaps as big an issue as the one on the controller side, is companies like yours filing the medevac callsign when you are not requesting operational priority. May be time to crack down there as well.

 

[z987k]

You must not have ever seen the operations from the other side of the mic. DvLzArchAngL and I see it constantly at our facility, and that's why we're out to change how Medevacs are treated, on a national level. If you want examples, I could write a book, from Medevac flights that are put back on the STAR, to routes that literally add 100+ miles to the trip (The SAN area to LAS area routes, in particular). It happens day after day after day and we're sick of it.

Oh holy crap. What center do you work? I wasn't overly happy with the way seattle brings us in to BFI from the east as medevac, but if we requested a downwind vector on the east side, they'd give it to us if we really needed it. A STAR though? Nope, not a chance in hell if we had a patient on board. I'd simply say unable or some version of that. I wouldn't even accept it on the ground in the clearance. Heck, I'd go VFR at 17,500 ft before I took a star. Direct IAF will work though.

 

[z987k]

That's not how it works, unfortunately. There is no asking involved. By filing with the medevac callsign, you get priority handling by default. Perhaps as big an issue as the one on the controller side, is companies like yours filing the medevac callsign when you are not requesting operational priority. May be time to crack down there as well.

I so badly want to not use it when we don't need it, but SOPs and all that. I've specifically asked to not use it on non-patient going home legs, but got a "absolutely not". Luckily up here it's really not such an issue except maybe at 1 airport, and even then... sometimes.

 

[ATC Jesus]

ZLA (Los Angeles).

A STAR though? Nope, not a chance in hell if we had a patient on board. I'd simply say unable or some version of that. I wouldn't even accept it on the ground in the clearance. Heck, I'd go VFR at 17,500 ft before I took a star. Direct IAF will work though.

You seriously need to come pull that down here. I mean that in a good way. Most of the controllers would completely flip out if you unabled a STAR. I'd love to see it.

 

[FM_Weasel]

Man, I never get sick of aviation professionals ranting like madmen on the internet. It reminds me of work.

 

[z987k]

ZLA (Los Angeles).



You seriously need to come pull that down here. I mean that in a good way. Most of the controllers would completely flip out if you unabled a STAR. I'd love to see it.

Ya, that's a LONG ways south for me. At least 1 fuel stop in the King air.

Do they assign a re-route in air or just amend the requested direct clearance? The only time I don't file direct is if it's into a VFR airport and I'm looking to get down and cancel around the filed fix.

Of note, I used to have a different job, and spent quite a few months in your airspace, sometimes insanely in the way of LAX departures and arrivals, (for hours on end)and you guys were wonderful to work with.

 

[TripSix]

We clear direct, and get them direct, all day every day. That cat is out of the bag when we call the center and tell them direct, asking what altitude they want them at. And likewise, when the center has them direct and calls us asking what altitude we want them at.

No Supe, no OM, no fancy FAA memo. Those things don't punch our landlines or vector our airplanes.

And please, don't take it the wrong way - but I'd be pretty pissed too if I worked in a place where that basic principle of moving an airplane has apparently gone out the window.

Next controller won't take it? •. Take the airplane and we'll hash it out over a beer and some wings after work if your panties are in that big of a wad over it.

 

[ATC Jesus]

Of note, I used to have a different job, and spent quite a few months in your airspace, sometimes insanely in the way of LAX departures and arrivals, (for hours on end)and you guys were wonderful to work with.

Ahhhh...one of the photo mission folks. Deep down, it irritates us, but we get over it. Ha!

Do they assign a re-route in air or just amend the requested direct clearance? The only time I don't file direct is if it's into a VFR airport and I'm looking to get down and cancel around the filed fix.

Both. They will come over on the preferential routing, so they are getting it on the ground. Most recently, when direct routings are issued by controllers, other controllers/facilities are putting the aircraft back on the STARs while airborne, which is just absurd. I guess those controllers just don't feel like working a little harder to accommodate your flights. I'll bend over backwards to work you guys in on direct routings. I don't care how many people I have to move out of the way, or how much additional effort I need to put in to make it happen.

 

[genot]

Keep it in your jeans for goodness sake. I've unabled a member here flying LN during the post DCA opposite direction deal-a-thon. Is this how Center trash air their grievances? Its cute though seeing Center people even begin to pretend they know what an IAF is.

I've never encountered a controller where it counts who wouldn't stand up for an LN. I also happen to have an inkling that any LN pilot worth anything would not hesitate to declare. I see them ALL THE TIME from other continents. Seeing that makes a spark go off in my awfully dull TRACON brain thinking, well he's LN from Chile. Maybe the patient isn't in a 1,000 mile helo medivac Oddesy post traffic accident. He maybe, just maybe is stable. Guess what? If there is a question, I'll ask!

The controllers unable to function off STAR, now that's funny. I imagine its a lonely world where you can't vector your way out of a wet paper bag. I've lost ALL radar before. Do I get a cookie?

 

[derg]

Ahhhh...one of the photo mission folks. Deep down, it irritates us, but we get over it. Ha!

If Autothrust Blue wasn't absolutely pleasant, I will reprimand him immediately.

 

[MikeD]

Weird seeing ARTCC drama....would've thought they're one of the more laid back ATC places to work at.

Then again, I don't ever talk to or deal with ARTCCs anymore, so maybe things have changed.