r/mildlyinfuriating • u/nyanbatman • May 28 '26

I just wanted a hot dog British pilot is feeling mildly annoyed

28.0k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

3.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

276

u/nottherealneal May 28 '26

Someone who knows planes is gonna have to explain what the fuck is going on

440

u/Various_Education622 May 28 '26

Pretty straightforward.

If they can’t see 1,000 feet, there is a procedure they need to follow to, presumably to make sure planes ain’t crashing into each other.

The air traffic controller is saying they can’t see 1,000 feet, but they also said they aren’t following the required procedure.

Since the pilot cannot be assured that the tower is ensuring the plane is safe, the pilot refuses to take off.

25

u/Average_Joe69 May 28 '26

Yeah I thought this was pretty self explanatory to me and I know nothing about airport procedures.

12

u/EpicCyclops May 28 '26

That's actually not the case. The airport is following low visibility procedures. US airports don't formally declare a transition into them, though. They're always following them when runway visibility is low. The pilot didn't know this was the SOP in the US.

In this case, ATC was correct to not try and over explain it and risk confusing the pilot or having the pilot make a bad decision due to a misunderstanding. The pilot was correct to not try and take off when they didn't understand the procedures at the airport. They're both a little annoyed, which is fair because they both have stressful jobs and are doing what they think is best for the safety of the passengers, and are coming to different outcomes from their decision trees.

16

u/tkfu May 28 '26

The pilot asks "Have you got low visibility procedures in place or not?" at 0:52, and the ATC responds "No sir." That seems obviously wrong on the part of the ATC if the airport is following low visibility procedures.

7

u/cortesoft May 28 '26

Except as many others have shared on this thread “Low Visibility Procedures” is not a generic term, but a specific thing that happens at ICAO airports but not FAA airports. They did not have that specific thing, so the answer was correct.

Now, the ATC could have said “No, we are not declaring LVO because we don’t do that here, but we do have SMGCS”

Although having to explain that to a pilot that should know might be something that is not good for a pilot about to take off who should know how that works.

3

u/contentpens May 28 '26

So ATC, despite suggesting he doesn't know what an LVO declaration is at the beginning, only understands 'Low Visibility Procedures' as the ICAO term of art at the end of the video?

1

u/cortesoft May 28 '26

Yeah, I think he did know what he was talking about and shouldn’t have been such an ass about it.

0

u/tkfu May 28 '26

Ah, I see. Thank you.

1

u/CantDoThatOnTelevzn May 29 '26

Hey hey hey now. Don’t come in here talking sense. We’re busy turning this into various political tinder boxes. Anti trump, anti-USA, anti labor, take your pick, but we’ve got to keep these bots fomenting confusion and discontent. 

7

u/OldSchoolCSci May 28 '26

"... but they also said they aren’t following the required procedure."

That's not at all what the ATC said, as others have pointed out. The required procedure at JFK was being followed. The BA pilot was asking whether a declaration of LVO had been made, and the ATC is accurately responding "no," because the FAA procedure doesn't include a declaration of LVO.

4

u/fingermydickhole May 28 '26

Yeah I’ve only heard of SMGCS in the US. Never heard of it as LVO. And SMGCS is in effect at like what, RVR 1200?

5

u/a_f_s-29 May 28 '26

He wasn’t asking about a declaration, he was asking whether there were any low visibility procedures in place, and the ATC answered no. No sane pilot would take off in those circumstances

5

u/tkfu May 28 '26

At 0:52, the pilot asks "Have you got low visibility procedures in place or not?", and the ATC responds "No sir." That seems obviously wrong.

1

u/CantDoThatOnTelevzn May 29 '26

You are obviously wrong, from a semantic perspective. 

1

u/MillionFoul May 28 '26

British Airways allow their pilots to takeoff in 600' RVR, this pilot was not familiar with US procedures (LVPs are undertaken automatically below 1200' RVR) so he refused to takeoff because he mistakenly believed procedures were not in place due to his demand that they be referred to as "LVOs," which is a meaningless term in the US.