How do you deal with unfair criticism from other pilots?

I´ve been to Wangen Lachen lots of times with the Mooney but never had an experience like this. However, the traffic circuit is done in a way to pacify villages who are against the airfield, so there is a reason why it is as it is. No, it is not at all standard and no, being over water is not enough. So did you check your GPS track vs the chart? Over water doesn´t mean you are on the precise circuit.

Maybe itˋs me but if I am thus challenged by a FI, who is an authority on the airfield (All FIˋs at LSPV are members of the group owining the airfield) I would be extremely careful to examine my own flight track vs the chart before calling out that the guy was wrong. They most often are right.

I got the same treatment in Langenthal, by phone after a training flight, when I was still new to the plane and had my hands full to fly the circuit just as it is supposed to be. Well, I failed and got called out for it by one of the people in charge. Both the FI and I were told off quite sternly and threatened with legal action if we were to do it again. Looking at the GPS track however I had to conceede that we had indeed busted the circuit during the most noisy part, namely the go around, quite heftily.

I called back the next day and apologized and owned up, explaining that I was on a new to me airplane and really had not done the maneuver necessary. He explained to me, not to my astonishment, that there are people who very precisely moitor ground tracks and keep harassing the airfield with threats. This goes for almost every airfield in Switzerland. FIˋs and people whose income depend on the airfields are often quite vocal about it.

I know it is bad and I know it is also dangerous to an extent, but we really depend on very carefully flown circuits on most airfields in Switzerland. There is not one which does not have an anti noise league who are vocal and who are not shy to forward reports about threspassers to the police or to the FOCA.

I agree with both @lionel and @Mooney_Driver.

For one thing many people claim that aircraft are flying “right above” when they are demonstrably not.

Another thing is that unfortunately in many cases even minor deviations from published routes can have severe repercussions for the airfield. (Or the pilot!!)

We once had a neighbour to our airfield who any so often called the tower by phone to complain about the loud noise some aircraft was doing overhead his house.

Story goes, that the man on the tower told him that he needed the callsign if he shall do anything. So the man called again the next day and the callsign of that incredibly load aircraft was D-1234. It’s not about the number, but a plane with a number can only be a glider without any engine.

After that he was explained that detail he never called again.

Why I shared the story here? Well, personal perception is quite limited sometimes…

I like the idea to tell the student that his FI needs his eye tested, but honestly, I think I would have left him with his perception, without excusing anything that did not happen. However, only if I was quite sure with my position, and the GPS track is quite good for this. Other than that, best thing is to listen to the concerns.

No matter who was right and who was wrong about the aircraft positions, being narky over the radio about it, is not the right time or place.

If the aircraft was in the correct place, then no comment should have been made.
But if the aircraft was in the wrong place, then having such a narky interaction over the air can be very distracting during the part of a flight that most concentration is needed.

If the FI really felt something was done wrong, he should have landed after Frans and had a polite conversation with him, with just the two of them there.
Narky comments rarely have the desired effect, as it doesn’t put the listener into a receptive mode of mind, but rather a defensive one.

Many years ago, I was returning to the airfield. I’d listened out and could hear that there was one aircraft in the circuit. The AFIS officer told me that there was one aircraft in the circuit, late downwind and that I could position to join behind them. The way that the circuit joining procedure was laid out was somewhat unusual. Basically it meant that I was flying a wide opposite direction downwind, and would make a U turn to slot into downwind.

I identified the traffic, announced my turn and turned in behind them. Just as I did, another aircraft asked if I was visual with them. I wasn’t. They did an orbit and we sorted it out. Nothing was said, nobody got upset.

After landing, the other pilot came over to me and very calmly and politely asked what had happened and why I’d not seen them. No accusations were made, just questions asked. I explained that as I’d only heard one other aircraft on frequency and AFIS only told me about one other aircraft, and I only saw one other aircraft, that I made the mistake of assuming that there was only one. Mea cupla. I apologised for my mistake and asked why they had not made any circuit calls as would have been normal, as this would have promoted me that there was another aircraft there. They explained that they were a flight instructor with a student, and that they’d been a little busy and might have missed making their circuit calls.

Nobody got upset, no accusations were made and nobody’s day was ruined. We were both left with something to think about and something to learn from. But most importantly of all, this was done in a calm polite manner, on the ground, after everyone had safely landed.

There is just no excuse for being narkey while still in the air. It’s too much of a distraction for both pilots, and needlessly increases the risk of a mistake being made that cases an accident. (How many pilots for example have forgotten to drop the gear after some distraction that cost them mental processing power).

@Frans

Later on, I met the one how was complaining about me on the radios. He was an FI and had a student with him.

Sorry to read that. LSPV is my homebase and, while some persons there indeed appear a bit special (to use a widespread Swiss phrase)… I never heard about such a behavior before (which doesn’t mean it didn’t happen).

The pattern is obviously non-standard and the downwind is that close to the runway that, when flown correctly, you might get the impression of basically flying above (or just very slightly next to) the runway.

Just give it another try – and let me know when you plan to go so we can get an ALB… :-)

And how often does the Swiss authorities prosecute a pilot how deviates from the published traffic pattern?

They don´t need to. All those airfields are private property, so they can very simply deny you permission to use it. For them, problem solved. Of course, if they do file an occurrence report, the FOCA will have to at the very least investigate it and if true, they can fine you but at least the incident will be on your file.

Oh my dear, that’s just sad to hear. Why do they need to make your day miserable? If we make mistakes, which we all do sometimes, is it really necessary for others to play immediately like angry police officers? What’s wrong with today’s society? The person in charge could have also said it in a friendly and calm manner, without threatening you with legal actions.

Well, first of all he was right. We WERE off the circuit and therefore induced noise onto parts of the village. Clearly, that is not what they need. He called me out on it and I had to take responsibility. The areas which are noise sensitive are marked clearly on the VAC and need to be avoided, lest one wishes to induce problems for the airfieds. I did not feel offended that he adressed it but it was a valuable lesson at this point: I am now flying a plane which is faster and louder than others and need to be extra careful to keep away from the noise sensitive areas.

The operative sentence here is, I was wrong. In your case, I would really have a close look at the track and check if it was on the circuit or not. If it wasn´t, then he was right to call you out on it, most of these people know exactly what to look for. If not, then you are right to be offended.

What does disturb me on his behaviour is the reference to the GPS track and that he did not care about it, that is plain stupid. This was the chance to actually look at it carefully and determine if something had been wrong or not. Not to do that is simply unfair.

I don’t think I would understand Swiss-German on the radio (hardly at all face to face, or is that Austrian-German?), problem solved

I would probably become a bit irritated to be honest. I would ask his name and aircraft, and file this as an “incident” with a screenshot of SD, but only if it clearly showed he was wrong He distracted me from my flying, and also distracted himself from his flying. Do you have the GPS track available?

This BS story reminds me about the issue EDKB Bonn Hangelaer had a while ago. There some clown provided huge effort to bust every pilot who was not exactly following the published traffic circuit. Here we are talking of what? A deviation of 50m? 100m? Sure, the published traffic ciruits are there for a reason and most airfields have issues with their neighborhood (not discussing who was there first: airfield or the complaining neighbors). So where possible, following the circuit as close as possible should be aimed for. But I prefer a pilot being 50m off track but watching out instead of someone who has his head down to precisely follow the magenta line…

The way Frans tells the story, it sounds to me like the core problem not being if the traffic pattern was followed or not.

The core problem – and hence I would call it devastatingly bad airmanship by the FI in front of a student – is that everything in this story sounds like this FI not really making a point towards Frans in the first place but rather trying to demonstrate its authority in front of a student. And to do that he was even consciously putting flight safety at risk by putting Frans under pressure via radio multiple times.

If the FI would have gone to Frans after landing and discussion the issue we would never have heard of the story. It is actually (or at least should be) quite normal amongst pilots that they discuss things they have observed the other ones doing – and even if you did nothing wrong you learn something on potential expectations of other pilots. But doing it on the air and in front of the student clearly demonstrates that the FI had different intentions then telling Frans something …