Narrative:

There was a paper on position telling us that there would be a flight check that will be doing RNAV approaches to our class C airport today and other airports. Before I took the position; I asked the supervisor if he knew in detail what that meant; there were no details noted nor was it in the read and initial action binder. He knew vaguely and said the flight check would be operating VFR. I told the supervisor that he was requesting 2 opposite direction runway approaches during our peak traffic period. The supervisor said he understood. I was training a developmental on that position. The first approach went fine because there was no conflicting traffic. When he departed again requesting another opposite direction runway approach; the traffic had built up. The positions were combined; as it was three weeks ago when they'd had a bad operational error. There was an air carrier on a downwind; [along with] two jets and a DH8; 3 vfrs; two from the northwest and one from the southwest; all inbound to the class C airport on runway 2 and runway 5. I knew my trainee was about to be overwhelmed and saturated with traffic; so I advised the flight check aircraft to fly heading 360 and maintain VFR. He kept arguing and trying to bully his way into being issued the RNAV approach. There were many things I needed to do; clear; and coordinate; while the flight check aircraft took over my frequencies; by complaining and insisting that he had priority and quoting me the 7110.65. He blocked all transmissions with his complaining. When he finally quieted down for 5 minutes; he said; he knew I was busy but thought I didn't know that he was VFR and can just about do whatever he wanted without my approval. He wanted to just go in VFR on runway 20 and cancel his VFR services. Since the airport is in charlie airspace he cannot enter without being sequenced and cannot go on an opposite direction runway without being cleared for one. This would have jeopardized safety for all the other airplanes out there. To keep every one safe; I needed him to keep quiet; follow instructions and stop trying to intimidate the controller into allowing him to do something unsafe. He finally asked to terminated VFR services and advisories. I told him to stay out of C service area and granted him approval to change frequencies and to terminate services. I recommend that these flight check procedures be done during light traffic periods. It would be better it they could do it at night; when there is less traffic to conflict with. The pilot needs to be talked to about how he can be a safety hazard by not caring if there is other traffic that he is blocking out with his transmissions and demanding that he be given priority. If he was doing the active runway approach; we would have fit him in as soon as possible. But to shut down the airport and spin 7 other planes out there is not reasonable. Management needs to stop approving these hazardous procedures without staffing appropriately and to approve it during light traffic periods. Approach should be staffed decombined during the day time rushes. Three weeks ago they had a very serious operational error; which resulted into 4 errors and a NTSB investigation because they had that position combined. Because of the combined configuration; we are working 4 different frequencies and answering the coordination line to tower; constantly getting off line.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Approach Controller and trainee both report on a Flight Check pilot who became insistent; to the extent of blocking the frequency; about conducting an opposite direction operation when in the ATC opinion; traffic would not permit.

Narrative: There was a paper on position telling us that there would be a Flight Check that will be doing RNAV approaches to our Class C airport today and other airports. Before I took the position; I asked the supervisor if he knew in detail what that meant; there were no details noted nor was it in the read and initial action binder. He knew vaguely and said the Flight Check would be operating VFR. I told the supervisor that he was requesting 2 opposite direction runway approaches during our peak traffic period. The supervisor said he understood. I was training a developmental on that position. The first approach went fine because there was no conflicting traffic. When he departed again requesting another opposite direction runway approach; the traffic had built up. The positions were combined; as it was three weeks ago when they'd had a bad operational error. There was an Air Carrier on a downwind; [along with] two jets and a DH8; 3 VFRs; two from the northwest and one from the southwest; all inbound to the Class C Airport on Runway 2 and Runway 5. I knew my trainee was about to be overwhelmed and saturated with traffic; so I advised the Flight Check aircraft to fly heading 360 and maintain VFR. He kept arguing and trying to bully his way into being issued the RNAV approach. There were many things I needed to do; clear; and coordinate; while the Flight Check aircraft took over my frequencies; by complaining and insisting that he had priority and quoting me the 7110.65. He blocked all transmissions with his complaining. When he finally quieted down for 5 minutes; he said; he KNEW I was busy but thought I didn't know that he was VFR and can just about do whatever he wanted without my approval. He wanted to just go in VFR on Runway 20 and cancel his VFR services. Since the airport is in Charlie airspace he cannot enter without being sequenced and cannot go on an opposite direction runway without being cleared for one. This would have jeopardized safety for all the other airplanes out there. To keep every one safe; I needed him to keep quiet; follow instructions and stop trying to intimidate the controller into allowing him to do something unsafe. He finally asked to terminated VFR services and advisories. I told him to stay out of C service area and granted him approval to change frequencies and to terminate services. I recommend that these flight check procedures be done during light traffic periods. It would be better it they could do it at night; when there is less traffic to conflict with. The pilot needs to be talked to about how he can be a safety hazard by not caring if there is other traffic that he is blocking out with his transmissions and demanding that he be given priority. If he was doing the active runway approach; we would have fit him in ASAP. But to shut down the airport and spin 7 other planes out there is not reasonable. Management needs to stop approving these hazardous procedures without staffing appropriately and to approve it during light traffic periods. Approach should be staffed decombined during the day time rushes. Three weeks ago they had a very serious operational error; which resulted into 4 errors and a NTSB investigation because they had that position combined. Because of the combined configuration; we are working 4 different frequencies and answering the coordination line to Tower; constantly getting off line.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.