Pilot phraseology at FISO Airfield

[grumps]

Hi,
I have always taught that when the FISO states "at your discretion" that you should give your intention,i.e. "landing/touch and go" or "Taking off" as appropriate.Cap 413 states that on being given this option that you should reply "roger " when on final with NO intention! The recently withdrawn, but excellent, Supplement 3 (General Aviation) to CAP413 gave intention.Having talked to a few FISOs recently there is obviously lots of confusion. Spatial awareness must be enhanced by giving intention, or am l missing something?
Thanks:confused:

[Whopity]

I have always taught that when the FISO states "at your discretion" that you should give your intention
When a FISO states "at your discretion" it is a signal to you that the FISO has no controlling authority and that anything you do is "at your discretion". You do not read this back as it is not an instruction however; you acknowledge, and may well include information relevant to the FISO and any other traffic on the frequency (at your discretion).

The Suppliment contained a number of differences from CAP 413, maybe why its been withdrawn! Have you looked at CAP 797 Flight Information Service Officers Manual (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP%20797%20Flight%20Information%20service%20officer%20manua l.pdf)?

[Level Attitude]

I have always taught that when the FISO states "at your discretion" that you should give your intention,i.e. "landing/touch and go" or "Taking off" as appropriate.For Departure - Yes. For Landing - No
The reason:
When an aircraft calls Final the correct response from a FISO is not "at your discretion" it should be "Land at your discretion" or "Touch and Go at your discretion".

To ensure awareness for all, I would state my intentions again if the FISO had given me "Land at your discretion" but I was actually intending to do a Touch and Go.

The only call required from an aircraft on Final is "Final"; but that doesn't stop a pilot from adding information if they deem it would be helpful to others also using the airfield.
EG:
G-XY Final
G-XY Final 3 miles (so others know where to look)
G-XY Final Runway 21 (if there is any possibility of confusion about which runway G-XY is intending to land on).
G-XY Final Land or G-XY Final Touch and Go (so the FISO knows what their correct response should be)

[fireflybob]

Personally I like to give intention with the Downwind call only - this, together with "Glide" or "Flapless" may be useful for other traffic and reminds one what type of approach one intends to fly.

This assumes one is flying a circuit, of course.

[Level Attitude]

Personally I like to give intention with the Downwind call onlyAgreed - But, if at the end of a Circuit Detail you call "Downwind to Land" there is still a good chance that after you call "Final" the FISO will have forgotten and reply "Touch and Go at your discretion"

this, together with "Glide" or "Flapless"Agree with letting people know you are going to do a Glide Approach but, with a Flapless Approach, there should be no (or only minimal) difference in your height or position in the Circuit as compared to a 'normal' Flapped Approach so what is the point?

[fireflybob]

Agreed - But, if at the end of a Circuit Detail you call "Downwind to Land" there is still a good chance that after you call "Final" the FISO will have forgotten and reply "Touch and Go at your discretion"

I would have thought any FISO would have a system for "recording" intention - you could say the same thing about licensed controllers.

This is notwithstanding any agreed standing orders with certain operators at particular locations.

Agree with letting people know you are going to do a Glide Approach but, with a Flapless Approach, there should be no (or only minimal) difference in your height or position in the Circuit as compared to a 'normal' Flapped Approach so what is the point?

I disagree - for a Flapless one needs to go maybe a half chord further downwind but I suppose it might depend on type and wind conditions.

I would omit the "to" and say "Downwind Land" - saves a nanosecond of time on the RT.

[sapperkenno]

Land? Nobody says "Full-stop" anymore?

[Piltdown Man]

Why not just adhere to the guidance in CAP 413? The additions and extras might appear to be useful niceties, but the reality is they will not add to safety. At most GA airfields, the circuit is a very rough and approximate pattern and no matter what a person says, they could be anywhere. What you really want is a proper lookout, not a discussion about non-standard RT.

Pm

[fireflybob]

What you really want is a proper lookout, not a discussion about non-standard RT.

PM, yes I will second that!

[cessnapete]

Why do operators tell you "the instant wind is" on final? Pretty pedantic, obviously the wind given, is the one read at the time. More health and safety rubbish??

[fireflybob]

Why do operators tell you "the instant wind is" on final? Pretty pedantic, obviously the wind given is the one read at the time. More health and safety rubbish??

cessnapete, as you may know the wind passed by ATC at airports with all the gizmos is the average over the last 2 minutes. "Instant wind" is passed on request from the pilot.

Anyone at A/G or AFISO who talks about "instant wind" is probably playing "Airports"...

[fireflybob]

So if an aerodrome doesn't have equipment that does the averaging it's probably appropriate for a FISO to say that it's the instant wind.


LookingForAJob, good point!

That said I get the feeling that surface wind readouts go in one ear and out the other with quite a few pilots.

Recall in the 1970s at EMA where a C150 was doing circuits and ATC were saying "Clear touch and go, wind scrambled eggs" - we were all listening in at the flying school. When said pilot came in the ATC rang to have a word and asked him "Do you recall what wind I was giving you when I cleared you to T & G/land?" He had no recollection!

Mind you when I see that state of the wind measuring devices at some GA airfields and wonder about their calibration I wouldn't hold my breath as to how accurate they are.

[fireflybob]

From CAP 413

The averaging period for wind observations is two minutes for reports used at an aerodrome for take-off and landing and for wind indicators in air traffic service units. The instantaneous surface wind should be available to be given to pilots on request particularly at aerodromes supporting primarily the operations of aircraft whose maximum total weight authorised is 5,700 kg or less. When a pilot requests the instantaneous surface wind, the word "instant" is to be inserted to indicate that the wind being reported is not the two minute average.

That said the phraseology in CAP 413 for both AFISO and AG just show "Surface Wind".

[DavidWoodward]

With reference to the wind debate, the two minute wind is usually given by a FISO, however in some situations it can be fairly different than the instant wind. I had a situation about two months ago where a large CB was growing to the south east of the field. The two minute wind was giving around 280/10 knots and the instant wind was giving 080/06 knots. Obviously, the instant wind was much more accurate than the two minute average so that was given with the prefix "instant wind".

Also, with reference to the origional post, I always explain it by saying to somebody that when we say "take off at your discretion" we are simply saying "take off if you want to" and I then say if somebody offered you a biscuit by saying "take a biscuit if you want to" would you reply with "take a biscuit if I want to" and then leave everybody wondering what you're going to do? Besides, saying "taking off, G-CD" is much easier than saying "take off at my discretion, G-CD." What does "take off at my discretion" even mean anyway?

[chevvron]

At my FISO unit we only have an 'instant' reading anemometer and our local instructions, on direction from the CAA, tell us that as the UK 'standard' is a 2 min average, we MUST say 'instant wind'.
What really confuses us is when a pilot reports 'final for the option'.
Not covered in CAP 413, in the USA where it originated, airports must have FAA approval to use this, it apparently means the pilot may land, touch and go or execute a go-around, but some pilots (including a few instructors who presumably trained in the USA) are using this in the UK. The problem for the FISO is that if the circuit is busy, we can normally warn a following pilot that the one ahead is landing or doing a touch and go, but use of 'the option' prevents this and in some cases, if the following pilot has got too close and the first aircraft decides to land rather than touch and go, they may need to execute an unnecessary go-around.

[beerdrinker]

"Cleared for the option" is not just a USA thing. It is used in France too.

[BizJetJock]

I never really understood the purpose of clearing someone for "the option", since as far as I am concerned I always have the option to go around or carry out a balked landing when cleared for a full stop.
Although I did cause a kerfuffle once by doing a high speed stop from an intended touch and go in a medium jet at a military airfield; their main concern was that we didn't have a security clearance to stop there and were relieved to hear that we would be able to depart immediately after the brakes had cooled!

[chevvron]

But FISOs cannot say 'cleared for the option', they cannot clear you to do anything and there is no guidance in CAP 413 as to what they should say so I would request instructors refrain from using it at FISO airfields and request they teach their students to do the same.

[DavidWoodward]

I've never come across anybody saying "the option" but have heard people saying "stop go" in which case I say "land or touch and go at your discretion". At the school where I fly they always teach that no matter what the pilot in front has said they are doing, they are always doing a full stop landing and you should space yourself out accordingly. They also teach that if the runway is still occupied including any safeguarding areas when you reach 200ft on the approach then you should go around but of course that's another debate, not one to do with phraseology.

[chevvron]

Granted you're always planning for a go-around and a successful landing is a bonus. Stop-go is entirely acceptable because you're telling the FISO your intention, not leaving it blank as with 'the option'.

[BigEndBob]

Where I fly the tower staff have the right balance.
Average if the wind is not too strong and instant given on short final only if its a strong x-wind or gusty.

[Whopity]

The "option" is a phrase often used by the RAF during training flights when the pilot may be practicing an approach where the Instructor/Examiner may have a different intention, not necessarily known to the pilot. It essentially tells ATC that the approach could be result in either a landing or a go-around. It has no relevance in the AFIS environment and there is no civilian equivalent.

[chevvron]

BigEndBob: That's ATC who are required to have 'average' anemometer displays as standard with 'instant' available on request. AFIS units are not required to have 'average' anemometers (although the CAA recommends it) hence they MUST broadcast the word 'instant' if transmitting instant wind.
Whopity: It does have relevance in the AFIS environment if a pilot (instructor or not) uses it in a busy circuit session.

[Whopity]

if a pilot (instructor or not) uses it in a busy circuit session. The pilot always has the option in an AFIS environment, you don't have to invent non existent phraseologfy to do it!

[chevvron]

Well they do invent 'non existent' phraseology, so what can be done? I've already informed the UK Ops and Phraseology Working Group, I can do no more.
What FISOs need is guidance on how to reply to the pilot as there is nothing in CAP 413 which covers it.

[fireflybob]

What FISOs need is guidance on how to reply to the pilot as there is nothing in CAP 413 which covers it.

"What is your intention?"?

[chevvron]

With all due respect bob, he doesn't know his intention!!

[Whopity]

The only legal requirement with AFIS is to report entering and leaving the ATZ and to maintain a listening watch. There is no requirement to say anything else. On that bases phraseology should be plan and simple. The FISO bible is CAP 797. It is not the Phraseology Committee's job to instigate change, their role is to provide industry advice and filter proposals generated by and through Airspace Policy.

[fireflybob]

With all due respect bob, he doesn't know his intention!!

But that's the point it's a statement of intention - as we all know there is always the option to go around off any approach.

The only legal requirement with AFIS is to report entering and leaving the ATZ and to maintain a listening watch. There is no requirement to say anything else. On that bases phraseology should be plan and simple. The FISO bible is CAP 797. It is not the Phraseology Committee's job to instigate change, their role is to provide industry advice and filter proposals generated by and through Airspace Policy.

Amen!

[Qwikstop]

"Take off at your discretion" is the most useless piece of non-information that contributes nothing to safety or situational awareness (IMHO). I mean what is it actually telling the pilot? Even an A/G controller will tell you if there is "No reported traffic".

Here is a very interesting link to a document by EGAST (http://www.atac.ca/web/images/Documents/Phraseology%20Guide%20for%20GA%20Pilot%20in%20Europe.pdf) on RT phraseology. Look on Page 21 - the suggested FISO phraseology here is far more useful:

Pilot: D-CD, ready for departure


FISO: D-CD, no reported traffic, runway 06 right hand circuit free for
departure, wind 090 degrees 8 knots, report airborne


Pilot: Runway 06 right hand circuit free for departure, wilco, D-CD

[Whopity]

Pilot: Runway 06 right hand circuit free for departure, wilco, D-CD Totally unnecessary to readback a NON clearance. Yet more useless information. Callsign, Roger will suffice

[chevvron]

The EGAST document doesn't comply with CAP 413 on several points eg 'Reading you 5' is 'readability 5' in the UK.

[Tinstaafl]

The 'option' term is a standard, and commonly used, term in the US. Considering how many UK pilots learnt in the US I'm not surprised some pilots are using it in the UK.

[fireflybob]

The 'option' term is a standard, and commonly used, term in the US. Considering how many UK pilots learnt in the US I'm not surprised some pilots are using it in the UK.

Agree but when in Rome do as the Romans

[chevvron]

In the USA, not all airports are allowed to use 'the option'. Permission has to be requested from the FAA. Pilots are required to notify ATC that they will wish to use 'the option' during a circuit detail and ATC can refuse permission.
But this is all ATC, they don't seem to have AFIS over there, so we're still none the wiser as to whether it is possible to use it at FISO airfields in the UK.