I have been based at DVT since 1996, and all but 3 months of that time, on the north side of the airport. In the last several years, the amount of time spent from engine start to take off has increased exponentially. It's taking as long as 40 minutes from engine start until takeoff with myself being the number one position on the ground. Let's face the facts here, it's not difficult to figure out that Sat/Sun mornings are some of the busiest times. So that being the case, why is it that you are unwilling to tell Transpac or any other pilots for that matter, that you are unable to accommodate touch and goes, because you have too much incoming and outgoing traffic? I have sat at the hold line and watched the same aircraft make four touch and goes while I've waited. I've had my engine vapor lock for the 1st time in 12 years because I had to wait over 30 minutes on the ground. Even if you just asked them to make full stop taxi backs it would help the situation. Every sat/sun morning, transpac loads up the traffic pattern and the weekend pilots,(which accounts for the majority of the pilots based at DVT), are trying to get in and out of the airport and have to either sit on the ground or wait outside the airspace. This creates a frustrating and sometimes dangerous situation. I used to operate out of northern california airports situated beneath the San Fransico Class B airspace. (Palo Alto, Hayward, San Carlos) Most of those airport towers do not allow any touch and goes during busy times. Extending downwinds helps a little but is really not much relief if there are more than two aircraft on the ground waiting. Adding to the problem is the fact that we now have to get clearance from the runup area to the runway which for me most recently an additional 5 minutes because I had to wait there while the ground controller gave an IFR clearance and subsequent read back.(something that should be done on the clearance delivery frequency).

A 30 minute wait at the hold short line is unacceptable unless there is an emergency in progress.

Air Traffic is a delicate balancing act that is still first come, first served. Now, since we don't have an electronic number tabbing system at the runways, it's up to the controller to determine priority of duties which has a multitude of determining factors. Just a few are: departures, arrivals, pattern workers, runway crossings, coordinating with other controllers, coordinating with other facilities (TRACON), adjusting for the wind, extending the pattern, watching for traffic, ensuring runway hold short instructions are read back, issuing traffic, and (dogpile!) if on-the-job training is occurring, the certified controller has to watch the trainee and try and get into his/her head what they are thinking all the while watching for the above listed items. I liken it to driving 120mph on the autobahn, texting, checking email, talking on the phone, slowing down for photo radar cameras, checking your GPS for your exit, all while in the right seat watching your 16 year old child learn to drive, and doing it all safely, each and every time.

I do expect the balancing act to work as intended, which includes shutting down pattern work if there is an inordinate amount of departures delayed or arrivals holding outside the Class Delta airspace. I will not forbid pattern work during certain times of the day as that accomplishes nothing.

In all of my air traffic years, both as a controller and in management, I've never heard of any pilot or company calling the tower or approach control to say that they got a world record time in receiving their takeoff clearance or approach clearance. I've always heard the complaints about waiting too long, circling or holding, getting vectors all over the sky, or following another slow aircraft/company. It helps me tremendously to understand your frustration if I am provided with a frequency, date, and a time so I can go and review the tapes. Armed with that information I can provide an answer to you. I'm not afraid of admitting when we're at fault or could have done a better job, but I need the data to go have a listen to paint the big picture.

There are sometimes that the Clearance Delivery frequency is combined up with the Ground Controller and the Ground Controller has to read the clearance. This is due to staffing and positional configuration in the tower. Yes, that means that sometimes you will have to wait to receive a taxi clearance.

I would like to ask a question regarding runway access that is not from full length. As a Maule pilot I don't require alot of runway to become airborne and occasionally do receive taxi instructions that are not full length. What general protocol does DVT ground controllers use and is there some helpful hints that pilots could be aware of when requesting takeoffs from intersections.

As a general rule, the ground controller will assign either full length or C2 and C3 as intersections for departure (just using runway 7R as an example), based on his/her traffic waiting to depart.

If you have a Maule (pretty cool airplane, I might add) and wish to depart from an intersection, just let the ground controller know by requesting a certain intersection, and based on traffic, we'll do our best to accommodate you. It would also help to have your run-up complete before you taxi and let the ground controller know as well, that you will be ready when you get there.

My question is similar to the one asked by the Cherokee Six pilot regarding aircraft types. Currently, the ICAO codes for the Piper Cherokee Arrow, Arrow II and Arrow III are all the same--P28R--including the turbocharged models. The Arrow IV and Turbo Arrow IV share P28T.

This does not seem to support the use of the codes to allow ATC to anticipate aircraft performance. My Turbo Arrow III (P28R) offers performance similar to that of the Turbo Arrow IV (P28T), all the way into the flight levels, while the normally aspirated models (which include both P28R and P28T) share similar performance characteristics.

Is performance estimation the primary criteria for the codes? If so, who is responsible for defining these codes and is there a process to propose changes?

Great question, but, I am probably the world's worst person to answer that. The aircraft type designators seem, to me, to be based on the climb rate and descent rate, so, yes, you are correct in presuming the performance information is the primary criteria for the code designation. I must say, however, that this is just my perception on this and there very well might be several other factors that contribute to the designations. I'm not really sure who is responsible for defining the type designations and what the process is (if there is one) to propose a change.



There appears to be only a 150 fpm difference in all four groupings of P28 aircraft in the climb rate.

I'm sorry I'm not too much help with this one

At a recent DVPA meeting representatives from Luke AFB presented details about the Luke SATR. They indicated that discussions were ongoing with DVT tower personnel regarding practice instrument approach coordination between the two facilities. Can you comment on what pilots can expect with regards to practicing the various DVT approaches from the west?

About the only new coordination that will take place might be a call from LUF to DVT alerting us that an aircraft is flying the instrument approach profile towards DVT. We, at DVT, cannot issue an approach clearance, therefore, nothing will change with regards to practicing the various approaches from the west. About the only methodology of trying to fly the profile is to alert the controller that you'd like to fly the profile of a certain approach and we will allow it based on traffic, pattern traffic, runway direction, etc. It will be on a case by case basis, traffic permitting.

I fly a 1972 Cherokee Six-300 N15040 out of the Southwest Hangars from Romeo One. My question to you is for better spacing should I Identify myself as a Saratoga? When I am light, I have on occassion overhauled Trans Pac Seminoles, and I always overhaul all the Trans Pac Archers. I typically climb out at 100 knots close to 1000fpm. This allows me to see over the long nose. If I climb out at best rate around 91 knots, traffic very quickly goes under my nose and out of sight and once I get above them, I cannot see them. Calling Cherokee 630015040 is just too many numbers and gets confusing. The only Difference between my Six and a Saratoga is the slightly shorter "Hersey Bar" wing, and the nose intakes. Both have 300 Horsepower, but I am 200 lbs lighter at gross wt. Thanks in advance for your help with this.

Typically, a Cherokee is a Cherokee is a Cherokee to us ATC types. I would recommend calling yourself a Piper Saratoga so the more aviation oriented controllers will pick up on that and understand that your performance might be a touch better than an average Cherokee with students training in it. As always, space yourself accordingly when you are following traffic. On arrival or pattern work, give yourself a tad more room between yourself and the traffic you are following. On departure, well, that gets a bit more tricky, I would guess. Let the controller know you will need 5 or 10 extra seconds on the runway in order to allow for more spacing, if that's what you need. Whatever you need, clear communication with the controllers will ensure everything works smoothly. If you call yourself, "Cherokee 630015040," you might give the impression you're giving out your phone number!

I like the recent policy of changing to tower frequencies for crossing the runways during ground operations. What I don't understand is what I've experienced dozens of times when landing at DVT to get to my hangar on the southwest ramp. I own a Mooney Acclaim. When handed off to Phoenix approach I always tell them that I am parking on the south ramp and they advise me that the message has been passed along to DVT tower with the request for the south runway.

Unless I'm coming from directly south through the Class B VFR corridor, I'm always assigned 25R/7L in spite of advising the tower controller that I park on the south side. Time after time, I land on the north runway and wait up to ten minutes to cross 25L/7R. Yes, it's busy with all of the flight school traffic on the south runway but why don't you a) send some of them across to 25R on C11 to take-off, b) have more of the touch and go traffic on the north runway and/or c) allow those of us who advise parking on the south ramp to land on the south runway so we don't have to waste fuel and time while sitting at the B5/C5 25L intersection?

I look forward to your answer and your advice on what one should say to convey one's desires to your colleagues.

Many thanks.

The only time that Phoenix Approach will pass along any parking information to us is when you are IFR and they coordinate your inbound arrival using the landline. If you are VFR, there is no coordination between P50 (Phoenix TRACON) and DVT as to parking locations. That's not to say that it never happens, because you might get a controller who goes above and beyond during a slow traffic period and will pass that information to us, but odds are less than 2% that will happen.

At DVT our standard operating procedure is that if you are inbound from the north, you can expect the north runway and if you are inbound from the south, you can expect the south runway. It's simple, safe, and effective. I would continue to request the south runway, because there are opportunities where you will get the pro-parking runway you request. There are a myriad of factors that come into play when landing at DVT: traffic volume, traffic complexity, arrivals, departures, pattern traffic, construction, student pilot traffic, language barriers, wind, weather, coordination with other controllers both in the tower and at P50, and tons more all the way down to whether it's a good mojo day or a bad mojo day! On occasions we do send some departure traffic over to the north runway to depart...but...this entails yet another runway crossing and opens up an opportunity for a runway incursion or worse to happen and that's why this is a rarity. The controllers do a great job of balancing out the touch and go pattern traffic between the runways. Bottom line, if I were working the north runway I'd feel more comfortable leaving you on the north runway, despite your parking preference, because I recognized a local Mooney pilot who knew the pattern, was confident, and I could trust to fly the pattern, follow traffic, land safely, and cross the south runway safely, without incident, if it meant swapping you on final with a another, not so confident, aircraft. Think about that for a moment. It adds to our workload, adds to both pilots' workload and focuses the controller's attention on one spot, taking away from the rest of the pattern, runways, RADAR scopes, etc.

We do listen to your parking requests and try to accommodate as best we can. If we are busy, then the chances of getting your pro-parking runway will be in the minority. Using traffic count numbers from January to June, 2009, we are the fifteenth busiest airport in the world. That's crazy! I believe we will just continue to become busier and busier as the years continue by. With the increased volume, we rely more and more on locally based, knowledgeable pilots, such as yourself to be the dependable "rock" when things get a little wild!

I hope that answered your questions, even if some of it wasn't what you wanted to hear. Let me know if you wish to come up to the tower and visit to see what we do, how we do it, and why we do that voodoo that we do. I highly encourage it!

What is the procedure pilots should follow when departing or arriving at DVT and there is a Presidential TFR in effect as we experienced this past weekend?

When a Presidential TFR occurs, there are usually two rings of restricted and protected airspace. The inner ring, which normally will not affect DVT, is the most protected and restricted one. The outer ring, which usually affects DVT, requires several things. First, is constant communication with ATC. Second, is a squawk code. This can be IFR or VFR. Since most DVPA members like to fly VFR in and out of DVT, getting a code is the toughest part. If you are inbound, talking to Phoenix Approach and receiving a discrete VFR code satisfies this requirement. If you are outbound, in order to receive a discrete VFR code, you could call Phoenix Approach on the land line before taxi or ask one of the controllers at DVT to relay your information to Phoenix Approach and ask for a discrete code. Obviously, the DVT controllers will not issue a takeoff clearance without this discrete code.

As always, arming yourself with knowledge will keep you out of trouble. Don't fly near the inner ring or you will probably have an escort of the unfriendly kind and your 15 minutes of infamy. Read the NOTAMs and TFR requirements, maps, etc. in order to be prepared for any impact on your planned flight(s). If in doubt, ask a controller and together we can go over the TFR.

I earned my IFR rating about a few weeks ago and feel comfortable with procedures and safely flying my Mooney but I am most apprehensive with the noise coming through my headset. My instructor told me it is ATC advising on my next step. My biggest concern, on my first IFR filed flight, will be my ability to hear/understand all clearances without saying my favorite phrase "Say Again."
Do you have issue with fellow pilots who simply need exposure to "The System's" communication phraseology and tempo, sitting in your tower? Realizing security issues are paramount, tower attendance would greatly benefit those of us who are eager to learn.
I think it is a good idea to introduce us to your staff through the newsletters. I'm up a couple of times a week and would love the opportunity to 'get to know' those who help me safely get from my hanger to the friendly skies and back again. Will you include a sample clearance so we can say,"I know that guy!"?

Congratulations on earning your IFR rating as that is quite an accomplishment. Remember, there's no harm in saying, "say again," when you are unsure of instructions, a clearance, or any communication between the cockpit and ATC. Effective communication is the key in this business. If you have to ask the controller for a slower clearance or to read a portion of the routing, altitude, or frequencies again in order to completely understand it, please ask, without hesitation. With repetition of filing the IFR flight plans, receiving the clearances, and flying the routing out of DVT, you will become quite adept at the IFR procedures. As with anything, practice makes perfect.

I encourage people, such as yourself, with an interest in expanding their aviation knowledge and a quest for information to come and tour the tower. My only requirement is that I have a supervisor in the tower cab while you are visiting. Bring a photo ID and email or call to set up an appointment. You can reach us at 623.581.1492 or email me at toby.jones@faa.gov.

I won't release a voice clip of any of my controllers for privacy issues, but if you wish to come upstairs, I'd be willing to bet you'd recognize some of the voices and be able to put a face and name to the voice. I've never had a pilot who hasn't walked out of the tower without saying, "you're THAT guy/girl!"

It's all about communicating what is needed in the fewest steps. My airplane was based at Republic (FRG) and Peachtree DeKalb (PDK) before I came to Deer Valley (DVT), so I'm no stranger to busy airports. (I've also been based at Clark (3TX6) that didn't have a radio frequency at all.) Somehow the busy times at DVT don't seem as *frantic* as those at FRG and PDK, perhaps because of the north-south division strategy and perhaps because our controllers and pilots work together better. I don't know, but I'm satisfied with the result.

I learned a trick or two which have served me well at DVT. Outbound I try to call the tower for take-off when landing traffic is touching down. It turns two or three calls (hold short, position and hold, cleared for takeoff) into two calls for full stop (position and hold, cleared for takeoff) and one call for touch-and-go (cleared for takeoff). I learned that one from my tower controller friend at FRG.

Inbound I try to call early. If I wait until I'm almost in the Class D airspace, then a busy radio minute means I'm getting nervous. I hope that's good for the controllers, too.

Now that we pilots see the full communications hassle of going from north to south (or vice versa), we're irritated. That hassle has been there, but the tower and ground controllers took care of it. I think this is better, we communicate directly with the controlling controller.

I've started putting "south parking" at the end of my initial call from the north. That way the controllers can decide whether or not they want to cross me over in the air ("contact south tower on 118.4") or on the ground (land 7L, contact ground, monitor south tower on 118.4). From where I sit, a pilot trying to get into a busy airport and trying to let controllers manage their workload most efficiently, it sounds good. I'd like to know if that sounds like a good thing to you in the tower.

I hope the communications-saving tricks I use are helpful rather than annoying. There's not much sillier than going through hoops to save some people time and finding out those people would rather I didn't do it. If there are other tricks pilots should or could be using to make DVT faster and smoother, then please tell us.

All great insider trading information. Especially when to call the tower controller for departure, that one is solid! The earlier the requests such as landing runway, parking location, departure direction, etc. can be communicated, the better. In order to better accommodate your requested landing runway, you could always maneuver your aircraft (outside the Class Delta) to a point that aligns more with that desired runway. For example, instead of calling in from over Lake Pleasant for Runway 7R, fly southbound, outside the Class Delta, to a reporting point such as Arrowhead Mall or a 7 mile final and then request Runway 7R. This is just a suggestion and you might end up getting Runway 7L due to controller workload anyway, but it might increase your chances of landing on your requested runway. Always listen to the radio to get a feel for how busy the tower controller is and you should have a good gut feeling on how that runway request will work out.

I fully understand that the runway crossing procedures that are now in effect, are mandated by the FAA and not the whim of local controllers and managers. While implemented during the cooler time of the year, sitting in a line of aircraft trying to get to the south ramp, was at best inconvenient. However, now that summer temperatures are about to ramp-up into the triple digits (110-120 degrees) sitting in that same line takes on a whole new meaning. Our aircraft engines are not getting sufficient cooling causing oil temps to rise significantly not to mention that the folks inside the flight deck are sitting there sweltering waiting an eternity to get to their parking location. I am asking that you make your controllers aware that potential health and mechanical issues now come into play during those long waits. Might it be possible to extend the downwind legs or even limit some landings to "full stop" status to allow for the clearing of the waiting aircraft. Sitting in an air-conditioned tower does little to alert the controller to what is happening on the ground during those blistering days. Would appreciate any help that you might be able to give us. thanks.

I too, understand and can appreciate how uncomfortable it is sitting inside an airplane with the temperatures hovering around molten lava. All DVT's controllers are aware of the wait time and it's impact. We try, as best we can, to mitigate the long wait time, be it at the approach end waiting to depart, in between the runways, or inbound to land. It's a delicate balancing act with each controller having a slightly different approach to the same end result: a safe transit through our airspace and runway environment.

When conducting instrument training in VFR conditions, requests for practice approaches into DVT are often answered with, "Contact Phoenix approach." Calling Phoenix approach often results in a suggestion to call Deer Valley tower. Since most of the Deer Valley approaches can be conducted without entering any airspace other than the DVT class D, why are controllers unable to issue practice approach clearances as is done routinely at many other airports?

In a nutshell, we, at DVT, are not allowed to issue any type of approach clearances, whether practice, VFR, or IFR due to the liability issue. At DVT, we are not RADAR controllers, we are VFR tower controllers, which means in simple terms, we are not allowed to issue a RADAR vector and heading to an aircraft or assign a hard altitude while using the RADAR separation standards while airborne. You should never hear, "turn left heading 220, descend and maintain 3000," from a DVT controller. If you do, check your frequency! So, in order to get a practice approach clearance and some fancy RADAR vectors for that approach, Phoenix TRACON Biltmore Sector (freq 120.7) would have to be the controller to ask. Due to workload and the heavy IFR traffic into SDL, I would think it would be rare for the TRACON controller to have the time to issue a practice approach clearance and work his/her magic on a practice approach into DVT. An easy way to get a practice approach in is to fly the approach profile as best you can while following the pattern entry instructions the controller has issued you. As always, communications are the key, so let the controller know you would like to fly the approach profile while inbound as far as you can so s/he knows what you are doing and can expect a slightly different flight path while entering the Class D airspace. Good common sense prevails here as well, don't fly an opposite direction practice approach to the current runway configuration, unless you want a really exciting flight and the dreaded phone call!

There is talk of special arrival and departure procedures planned for DVT flight schools. FFZ and IWA are already using them. Is there a time frame for DVT and will they differ much from the current VFR procedures

As much as I can, I will speak for both TransPac and myself. Yes, we are working on some canned arrival and departure routes. They still need some fine tuning and more than likely, will be available to be published for the masses to digest, understand, and use on a daily basis.

With the summer heat coming on, can controllers adjust priorities of ground operations involving runway crossing to minimize runway crossing times. Cockpit temperatures increase drastically along with engine temperature. Heat can destroy an engine in short order and is a factor every Phoenix pilot must manage during summer temperatures.

The short answer is, no. Each controller's priority is to be safe, then efficient. We do, indeed, try and minimize the delay between the runways as much as possible. We understand the increased temperatures and their effect on both a human squeezed in the cockpit without the luxury of AC and the overheated engine possibility. About the only bone I can throw you is that hopefully, there will be less aircraft out flying in the high temperatures, therefore the wait will be decreased in between the runways.

Is DVT TWR planning to go to a 24Hr service and if so what is the time frame?

No, not 24 hour service. We have been authorized to be open from 2100-0000 local time. As soon as I get the staffing with fully certified controllers, I will open the tower from 2100 - 0000. My goal, if everything goes as planned, is Mar/Apr 2010

Why are there so many frequency changes when I have to taxi across the runways after landing or while relocating?

The answer is not to irritate pilots with numerous frequency changes on the radio or have them spend an inordinate amount of time pushing buttons with a heads down posture in the cockpit, but to keep everybody safe while crossing the runway.

I struggled with the procedure I implemented here as I had the big plane mentality when I came here from PHX Tower. Stepping back, looking around and adopting the little plane mentality here (which, consists of a plethora of factors), I decided this was the best and safest procedure for DVT. As you know, both in flying and ATC, one size does not fit all. Taking into consideration the student flying populations, the language barrier, the runway incursion record, past pilot deviations, the airport layout, and yes, our own controller performance, drove me to this end result.

I elected not to have the north tower controller control the taxiways in between the runways. My reasons are: (1) the tower controller's workload during busy times does not allow for ensuring a proper readback, proper frequency change, and then watching, quite literally watching that aircraft, to ensure s/he holds short of the runway, (2) the tower controller's primary function and duty is to ensure separation on the runway, not on taxiways, and I would be requiring s/he to take their attention away from the runway (that's not including the pattern), and (3) the ground controller's function is to control the ground traffic, which includes getting the runway hold short readback and keeping a very close eye on that aircraft to ensure s/he stops short of the runway. Basically, I'm letting my north tower controller control the runway, the pattern, sequencing, and issuing traffic for Runway 7L/25R, which is their main job function, while the ground controller watches planes on the ground.

At larger airports, all the inbound traffic is sequenced for the tower controller, there's no pattern entry instructions given or having to act like your own approach control, like we do here at DVT. At larger airports, everything supports the tower controller who is the guy/girl in the hotseat. At larger airports there are no touch and goes, stop and goes, or options on the runway...you land them, turn them, cross them, depart them and frequency change them. All that being said, the language barrier with our local flight school is horrible and a huge challenge. Can you imagine the north tower controller trying, for the fourth time to ensure a Chinese student's fist solo attempt at reading back a runway hold short instruction is properly received while s/he doesn't watch his runway or pattern and something happens? That's not a risk I'm willing to take and would be willing to bet a lunch that most pilots are not willing to take that risk either.

The biggest change in the whole procedure was the fact that any aircraft crossing any runway at DVT has to be on tower's frequency. That was the biggest impact and biggest change for the flying community and the controllers. The old methodology was for the ground controller to verbally (not recorded or on a landline) ask permission to cross the tower controller's runway in between plane A and plane B. Now, planes A & B could be anywhere in the sky or on the ground. The tower controller would then verbally (again, not recorded) coordinate with the ground controller to cross his/her runway between planes A & B, or planes B & C, or planes C & D. The tower controller would just simply wait for a verbal sign from the ground controller saying the runway was clear and then continue his/her operation without sometimes looking at the intersections where the crossings occurred or the aircraft that just crossed. That worked, but wasn't necessarily the safest procedure available. Hence, my change. I think the frequency changing in between the runways was an ugly stepchild by-product of my main goal. I would rather have a pilot have his/her head inside the cockpit changing the radio frequency for the 5 or 10 seconds than the old procedure, which put each pilot at risk, occurring. A smart pilot would taxi up to the hold bars and while the aircraft is stopped, change the radio frequency, not while taxiing. Unless, you're SWA who taxis 200 mph and probably changes frequencies on the fly more often than they serve drinks in the back! An extra bonus is that when an aircraft is crossing a runway, you are actually on the frequency that owns that piece of pavement, giving you 100% more opportunity to catch a possible error or miscommunication that could prevent an unsafe scenario. The old methodology was sitting in a Science classroom but listening to the Math teacher next door...there's not much opportunity to hear what's going on in the Science classroom, is there? Now, despite the fact it takes 5 additional seconds to change the radio frequency, the ability to hear the Science teacher while you're in the classroom opens up a world of opportunities!

Let's face it, the runway environment has the highest chance of an accident occurring versus a taxiway. It's my job to ensure we keep that runway safe, but I can't do it without everybody's help.