Perfect RT

[cheechm]

According to CAP413:


Borton Tower, G-ABCD, radio check 118.7

G-ABCD, Borton Tower, readability 5

Borton Tower, G-ABCD, Slingsby
T67 starting, request departure
information

If you do the radio check and then immediately call for departure information, do you need to repeat "Borton Tower"?

I don't know how pernickety the examiners are for the RT practical, so obviously don't want to risk getting anything wrong.

Thanks

[Sir Herbert Gussett]

Where did you get 'strength four' from?? I suggest one re-reads CAP413 before advising on it! ;-)

"G-ABCD, Bloggs Tower, readability 5. Taxi holding point A3 for runway 21 via A, QNH 1027"

[The500man]

Not sure where that snuck in from, some grey matter somewhere has it lodged.Perhaps you've been around a while?

From Wikipedia:

Maritime/Amateur VHF prowords Radio Check

What is my signal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_%28electrical_engineering%29) strength and readability; how do you hear me?
5 by 5 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_by_5) is an older term used to assess radio signals, as in 5 out of 5 units for signal strength and for readability. Other terms similar to 5x5 are "loud and clear" or "Lima and Charlie". Example:
ALPHA 12: X-RAY Two-Three, THIS IS ALPHA One-Two, RADIO CHECK, OVER X-RAY 23: ALPHA One-Two, THIS IS X-RAY Two-Three, I READ YOU 5 BY 5, OVER ALPHA 12: ALPHA One-Two ROGER, OUT US Army correct check:
ALPHA 12: X-RAY Two-Three, THIS IS ALPHA One-Two, RADIO CHECK, OVER X-RAY 23: ALPHA One-Two, THIS IS X-RAY Two-Three, ROGER OUT If the initiating station (ALPHA 12 in the example) cannot hear the responding station (X-RAY 23 above), then the initiator will attempt a radio-check again, or if the responder's signal was not heard, the intiator will reply to the responder with "NEGATIVE CONTACT, ALPHA 12 OUT".
The following readability scale is used: 1 = Bad (unreadable); 2 = Poor (readable now and then); 3 = Fair (readable but with difficulty); 4 = Good (readable); 5 = Excellent (perfectly readable).


Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedure_word#Radio_Check)

[Contacttower]

I've definitely heard "strength" instead of "readability" being used...I don't think it really matters...

[Whopity]

If you do the radio check and then immediately call for departure information, do you need to repeat "Borton Tower"?From CAP 4131.7.5 When satisfactory communication has been established, and provided that it will not
be confusing, the name of the location or the callsign suffix may be omitted.

[reportyourlevel]

I'm an ATCO at a tower/radar unit. Practically, when you get in your aeroplane don't bother with the radio check as a routine. Just call for clearance/taxi/whatever - you'll soon find out/be told if your radio isn't working. Having said that, do whatever they want you to in order to pass the exam then you can relax into your own style.

[Obi_Wan]

There is another thing to thatch out for. I was listening to a student complain to his instructor that the air to ground and AFIS stations he'd called whilst inbound in the last 2 flights had been too helpful in giving out the airfield information the minute he'd announced, "Station radio this is G-WXYZ", meaning he didn't get to proactive his full, "G-WXYZ is a Cessna 152, Leicester to Sywel, currently etc."

I have found this too and although if you're use to listening for it, it helps reduce time on the radio, for those learning, it doesn't help, and also usually catches them before they've picked their pen out of their kneeboard!

[funfly]

Tower: "G-XXXX clear to land, wind 140/5, no need to read back this information"
Student: "G-XXXX clear to land, wind 140/5, no need to read back this information"
Well, the old ones.....

[Big Pistons Forever]

At the risk of being rude this lesser being from the colonies has a suggestion. If the amount of effort Brit pilots put into discussing radio pedantry was put into say, learning how to properly use the carb heat and mixture controls, I bet there would be fewer accidents ;)

My all time favorite radio dit was a conversation I heard on Seattle terminal one busy Friday afternoon.

ATC 12 Alpha Bravo cleared direct XXXXX, descend Fifty Five Hundred, gimme your best speed, contact Seattle Approach on 123.45 with your heading. (this was delivered all in one breath and very fast)

12AB (in a very deep Southern accent and slowly) Saaay Aaahgin

ATC : 12 Alpha Bravo cleared direct XXXXX, descend Fifty Five Hundred, gimme your best speed, contact Seattle Approach on 123.45 with your heading. (Again all in one breath and speaking very fast)

12AB: Saaaay Aaahgin

ATC: ( in a very exasperated tone) 12AB, what is your problem, you need to get with the program.

12AB: ( slowly and at a very deliberate pace) Sor.... Ahhhh liisssten the saaame way ahhhh talk

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Just call for clearance/taxi/whatever - you'll soon find out/be told if your radio isn't working.
In my case this was

"Station calling xxx, carrier wave only"

I discovered that I'd somehow managed to plug my headset leads into the sockets for the right-hand seat. This was, I think, the only occasion on which, after moving the plugs to the correct sockets, I've ever called for a radio check.

[BEagle]

Just call for clearance/taxi/whatever - you'll soon find out/be told if your radio isn't working.

Quite so! All this 'radio check' stuff is a waste of time in little spamcans.

As for those self-appointed street-rapper DJs masquerading as ATCOs in the States, they should remember the maxim "Speak fast, speak twice!" - come out with a rapid fire string of instructions and you'll only have to repeat them!

[Jan Olieslagers]

Just call for clearance/taxi/whatever - you'll soon find out/be told if your radio isn't working. That makes sense on frequencies with a full-time operator.

[Squawk_code]

If you do it as close to CAP413 as memory allows you can't go wrong! Not sure if you're allowed crib sheets with the format for different calls? Ie

-ground station
-aircraft callsign
-request
-etc.

Suppose it depends on the examiner.

[rob.davis87]

I've found that CAP 413 is a great guide throughout my training but have also found that you can't just learn it parrot fashion. For example, yesterday I requested engine start and the controller came back with engine start approved and gave me taxi instructions for departure.

I'm not saying there was a problem with that, it did reduce the amount of transmissions I had to make. The only thing was I wasn't quite ready to note down the info, but did manage to repeat back from memory.

[AndoniP]

sometimes there is a small difference between what the pooley's books say in terms of RT procedures, and what the phrases used at the local airfields are.

when i was in training I just learned from the instructor -

"G-CEEV request radio check and taxi"
"G-CEEV you are fives, QNH xxxx, taxi via bravo and alpha to the holding point"

In the RT test I just made the call in the same way as I did the lessons and it was fine. I guess if the examiner teaches at the airfield they will be ok with it, even if it's not exactly as outlined in CAP413.

Just call for clearance/taxi/whatever - you'll soon find out/be told if your radio isn't working.

i prefer a radio check, seeing as the aircraft we fly aren't the newest... :(

[oscar romeo]

If you listern out for long enough you will find every one makes mistakes. :O

There is some very poor RT around from even the best pilots and controllers.

If your losing sleep about doing your RT oral exam (like I was) book a few hours ground school with your examiner before your test. he/she will set you straight, i did a day at gamston with "True" had blast and learnt loads! then did the exam worth every penny.

Who you are
Where you are
What you want
read back all instructions and anything with numbers in

works for me :ok:

[Gertrude the Wombat]

read back ... anything with numbers in
Well not quite, I hope you don't really read back the surface wind!

[jxk]

Don't you think that there's to much pedantry on this subject; one pilot accusing another of not quite using the exact phrase as per CAP413 and showing their superiority. GAL comes to mind, as long as you make yourself understood that's the main thing and not intimidated so much that you don't make the call at all. Over and out! Is that still in CAP413?

[reportyourlevel]

Standard RTF is the best way to be understood, that is the whole point of it. It has helped me out on numerous occasions with pilots with a heavy accent (and of course to them I also have a heavy accent!). Not only that, but it makes you sound like you know what you are doing and therefore you're more likely to get what you want.

Not sure if you were trolling or not, but "over and out" most definitely is not in any publication. It means "my transmission is ended and I expect a response and my transmission is ended and I do not expect a response", which is obviously nonsensical.

[jxk]

By implication the words 'over, out and roger' are still in use see below:-

CAP413
1.1.5 The following words may be omitted from transmissions provided that no confusion
or ambiguity may result:
a) 'Surface' and 'knots' in relation to surface wind direction and speed.
b) 'Degrees' in relation to surface wind direction.
c) 'Visibility', 'cloud' and 'height' in meteorological reports.
d) 'over', 'Roger' and 'out'.
1.1.6 The excessive use of courtesies should be avoided.

[reportyourlevel]

I see your CAP413 and raise you CAP493:


CAP493
Appendix E 3.6

...
OUT(1) This conversation is ended and I expect no response.
OVER(1) My transmission is ended and I expect a response from you.

(1) Not normally used in VHF communications.
...


So yes, they do still exist but aren't required in normal VHF comms. (Incidentally my post above was about the oft misquoted phrase "over AND out" loved so much by fiction, not about the individual phrases "over" and "out".)

[Nibbler]

When working A/G I use 'roger' in reply to almost every aircraft transmission of intention or position report that requires no other response, at busy times I'll add the call sign. I use 'Out' after broadcast transmissions, for example reporting a change in QNH/QFE. 'Over' is the only one I don't ever use.

We get a lot of 'request taxi' and other such invalid transmissions related to communications specific to other types of facility. Not a complaint simply an observation.

Departue A/G - initial contact:
"Goodchap Radio, G-ABCD request radio check and airfield information" and "G-ABCD ready for departure".

Arrival A/G - initial contact:
"Goodchap Radio, G-ABCD at Location request airfield information".

The CAA released a supplement to CAP413 including audio of the radio calls used for each type of ATS being used. I have this found very handy - http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP413Supplement.pdf

In moments of thoughtlessness, high workload or stress my comms when flying have been pretty awful so no stones will ever be thrown in this glass house.

[The Old Fat One]

Those who incline to the view that correct R/T terminology is pedantry might do well to remember that the worst accident in aviation history happened because of gash R/T procedures.

It is either right or wrong...end of story. 999/1000 you do it wrong, no problem. Unfortunately sh1t happens.

[Genghis the Engineer]

We get a lot of 'request taxi' and other such invalid transmissions related to communications specific to other types of facility. Not a complaint simply an observation.

I'm sure I'm one of the people who do this.

It can be difficult, away from home base, to be absolutely clear what level of communication is required at a specific site.

Speaking for myself, if in doubt and it's quiet - I'll tend to slightly over-communicate. If in doubt, and it's busy, I'll give an absolute minimum assuming that if I missed anything important, they'll ask. It seems to work.

G

[jxk]

So here we are still being pedantry. OUT!

[Genghis the Engineer]

So here we are still being pedantry. OUT!

How could a thread about "perfect RT" not descend into - or for that matter start in - pedantry.

G

[Crash one]

A pilot requesting entry & line up at an A/G field & then sitting there for ten minutes holding things up waiting for permission.
I would much rather see the correct knowledge of various procedures than piss about with pedantics. People who learn at A/G fields don't just blunder into the threshold with "XXX entering the active" when they are at an ATC field. Or do they??

[reportyourlevel]

Oh yes they do! Certainly we've had a few runway incursions over the last couple of years after the ATCO has said "taxi holding point G6 and report ready for departure" and the pilot has taken that as line-up clearance. I've also had it the other way, where someone has been at the holding point and I've cleared them for take-off, then they've replied "Runway 21 cleared for take off, confirm I can line up?". Yes, that generally sounds like a good idea.

[Genghis the Engineer]

"Your discretion" generally solves most problems at that juncture.

Popham do this, it works fine. "readability 5, QNH is nnnn, taxi at your discretion", "line up and take-off at your discretion". No impression of a clearance, but communication flow is maintained and everybody is happy.

(At-least Popham used to do that, I haven't been a club member there for a few years, more's the pity - great club. I'm only guessing that they still do it that way.)

G

[Nibbler]

Genghis not a problem and a good approach to RT at A/G, we are not that anal over the RT used but there some wonderful extreme examples. I agree it can difficult to know exactly what to say as there are local variations of what some airfields like you to pass them on initial contact.

From my observations over the last few years it seems to me when initial training was at an ATC field then you are more likely to fall into that terminology and request / report everything and anything. Crash One - only the other week a pilot did exactly that, lined up and waited for clearance to depart, even asked for it when we didn't say anything. Potentially frustrating for some but no real stress in the tower :)

Perhaps the subject of another thread but what I am most concerned about is the almost 100% failure to declare 'Student G-XXXX' on initial contact. If I know it's a student I am certainly far more aware of and alert to their calls and where they are (should be), particularly when inbound and in the circuit, even to the gaps between calls and when I have a choice of which station to speak to first when 2 call at once. I might add - as are all the other aircraft on frequency. This adds considerably to flight safety and is not being used - instructors are you aware of this?

[Gertrude the Wombat]

I've never quite got the hang of what I'm supposed to say at A/G fields - I use them so rarely and they all seem to be different.

The most recent one I took off from, they told me at the desk to book out on the radio. So I called

"xx radio, G-ABCD, taxi for VFR flight to yyyy, three on board"

roughly as I would at an ATC field and got

"G-ABCD, runway in use xx, QNH yyyy"

which worked fine.

[Nibbler]

I've never quite got the hang of what I'm supposed to say at A/G fields - I use them so rarely and they all seem to be different.

The most recent one I took off from, they told me at the desk to book out on the radio. So I called

"xx radio, G-ABCD, taxi for VFR flight to yyyy, three on board"

roughly as I would at an ATC field and got

"G-ABCD, runway in use xx, QNH yyyy"

which worked fine.

If it works it works.

For those who might be students or have an interest our 'book out on the radio' (A/G) is;

"xx radio, G-ABCD request radio check and airfield information, flight to yyyy, 3 POB"

Reply would be - "G-ABCD, xx radio, readability X, runway in use XX right/left hand circuit, QNH xxxx"

The CAA approved RT examiner chap conducting my A/G exam suggested passing the surface wind information on initial contact in or outbound but I don't unless the wind is such that it might be of concern to the pilot.