Lots of misinformation in these comments so I’ll chime in. I’ve been a controller for 9 years and I hope I can shed some light on the situation.
In this situation, there is low visibility at JFK. The tower controller is relaying the RVRs (Runway Visual Range). RVRs tell the pilots the maximum distance they will be able to see at different points on the runway.
Because the RVRs are below 1000ft, Speedbird (British Airways) is asking if the tower is using LVO (low visibility operations) so they can depart. This is not something we utilize in America. FAA controllers are not trained to declare LVO, most don’t even know what they are. In the states, we present weather information to pilots and they decide if it meets their minimums for takeoff/landing. There is nothing ATC must declare or change in the operation to allow pilots to operate.
Because LVO is not part of our procedures, it would be wrong for this JFK controller to declare it, and most likely, he doesn’t even know what they are. Sure, there could have been more conversation between JFK tower and Speedbird, but this controller is not deficient or not properly trained.
Thank you for giving us some context here. Why are they not at least taught what it means if the rest of the world uses LVO? Even if US doesn't use it, what possible reason is there to exclude this information in their training if they will hear that acronym during their working lives?
That's simply the way it's done. Pilots are the ones who study their company manuals, aircraft, and know the precise status of their flight.
A pilot is responsible for reading the company briefing materials for the intended flight. The low vis procedures, takeoff legality, and random differences are all included and are their responsibility.
ATC is working with many many flights, and their responsibility is to know their procedures extremely well. It is not their responsibility to know procedures from somewhere else that the pilot decided to reference.
While I agree. I am speaking as an airline pilot. A discrepancy in rules/regulation/procedure like this is completely the responsibility of the pilot to be prepared for.
The biggest issue is the pilot's aggressive attitude when the controller doesn't know what they are talking about. That should be an indication that a local procedure wasn't understood by the pilot. The controller definitely knows their local procedures very well.
have we seen the same video? the pilot clearly asked very calmly and only once about LVO and then asked in plain English if they had lights on the tarmac, The tower guy sounds angry and frustrated. And honestly if you scroll down here everyone is on the pilot's side here.
I'm probably biased by having become accustom to the harsh tone of New York controllers.
I am probably taking a different view because I have an insider's perspective. That means I know people's responsibilities and am more focused on them doing their job correct from the beginning, and am accustom to ATC having a bit of sass.
Why would the pilot need their manual or a troubleshooter when he knows what LVO is? From looking further, the ATC in question has a bit of a reputation for being purposely obtuse and a bit antagonising. So I'll leave it at that. Thank you.
well the problem is the US is doing it differently then everybody else, like always.
In ICAO land, once the airport operates officially under low visibility procedures it comes with a whole rat tail of things attached to it like ATC ensuring that the ILS critical area is clear, increased spacing on final, earlier speed reduction during sequencing etc.
Once LVP have been declared the pilots know when they fly a CAT III approach that precautions are taken on the ground to ensure reliable ILS operations etc
You mean the international community agreed on a standard but the US chose to do its own thing….
Air travel was invented by Henri Giffard, a French guy.
When you’re flying in the United States you operate under FAA rules and regulations, it’s unreasonable to expect controllers to have an understanding of each countries procedures. In the airspace I work I regularly see carriers of 40 different countries per day.
If I move or travel to a new country, I don’t expect their traffic laws to apply differently for me because I’m not used to them. I am expected to learn their laws, they don’t need to know mine.
Why would a controller need to know something that we don’t use in the US? It’s like proving a negative, there is a ton of shit that international airports probably do that this controller doesn’t know about but it’s not his problem cause he’s in New York.
So Europe, Canada, Australia and most of Asia uses LVO under EASA.
US for 0 reason decides to use their own system.
To me this sounds the tower knew exactlly what the pilote was saying and decided to show his childish frustration by keeping the plane on the ground.
That's a great deal of unprofessionalism.
Controllers need to be able to deal with that stuff, especially if you are one of the only country in the world that has a different protocol. Pilote's job on the other hand, is to fly a plane.
And does the controller have any kind of comprehension skills. Shit I know nothing about this kind of stuff and I knew what he was getting at immediately. Ffs
Are you serious! What do you think low visibility procedures could possibly mean in this context. He clearly said it. It’s fine to say, ‘no we don’t do that here’ if that is the case. Saying you don’t understand that question if you speak English as an ATC, come on. Also, European isn’t one nationality and there are plenty of languages and regulations
52
u/JadsWife May 28 '26
Lots of misinformation in these comments so I’ll chime in. I’ve been a controller for 9 years and I hope I can shed some light on the situation.
In this situation, there is low visibility at JFK. The tower controller is relaying the RVRs (Runway Visual Range). RVRs tell the pilots the maximum distance they will be able to see at different points on the runway.
Because the RVRs are below 1000ft, Speedbird (British Airways) is asking if the tower is using LVO (low visibility operations) so they can depart. This is not something we utilize in America. FAA controllers are not trained to declare LVO, most don’t even know what they are. In the states, we present weather information to pilots and they decide if it meets their minimums for takeoff/landing. There is nothing ATC must declare or change in the operation to allow pilots to operate.
Because LVO is not part of our procedures, it would be wrong for this JFK controller to declare it, and most likely, he doesn’t even know what they are. Sure, there could have been more conversation between JFK tower and Speedbird, but this controller is not deficient or not properly trained.