PPL'rs life stories?

[david.porter9]

As a student ppl I've learned a lot of priceless stuff from lurking on these boards (whilst still recognising I am at the bottom of the food chain and know nothing). :D

However the time has come to post a (possibly stupid) question...

In a number of threads there have been references to 'ppl'rs giving their life stories' over the radio. What does this mean? Am I one of them?

In my reply to 'pass your message' I would typically say:
G-XXXX, PA28 from X to Y, position, heading, altitude, QNH XXXX, VFR, estimating XXXX at time XXXX, request joining instructions (or whatever).

Does this constitute a 'life story'? Am I telling you stuff you don't want to know? I'm conscious of how long it takes to say all this stuff, and always rehearse it before transmitting so that I can get it all out without any pauses, errs or erms. I'm conscious that everybody else listening is infinitely more experienced than me, so I try not to sound like a complete nobber.

So what do other ppl'rs tell you that you don't need to know? What do you want to hear?

All constructive replies gratefully received!

Many thanks, Dave.

[wizpigbig]

Possibly drop the heading but otherwise OK providing its not to quick as the ATCO has to write it down. Some units are adopting the following G-xxxx inbound ( obviously only if you're landing) or G-xxxx transit , This allows ATCO's to select appropriate coloured flight progress strip. The ATCO will then reply G-xxxx pass your message ,then you can give your details as described. :ok:

[Spangly]

As a LARS controller I would agree that I don't need to know the heading, 'cos I will be able to guesstimate it from your A to B routeing or if/when I have you identified.

I would also add that I presume you are VFR unless you say otherwise and I don't need estimates for reporting points. In fact, I often don't need reporting points because I can see you, unless it's really busy when I might use them so I don't forget about you.

As a PPL I was taught to give headings on first contact but since becoming an ATCO I have never understood why.

[david.porter9]

Thanks for the replies. It seems that student ppls are taught to give info that controllers don't need, then. I will speak to my instructor about leaving out the bits you mention and see what he says. However I suspect I may have to continue giving you my 'life story' until I get my licence!

Dave

[eastern wiseguy]

Hi David....as an approach controller the one thing I personally loathe is the person ....and it matters not whether they are a PPL or 25000 hours.....who launches in to a long and involved story without waiting to be told pass your message ...You did say that you gave details only AFTER an acknowledgement...but one of the worst things is to see a nice sequence of aircraft all about to hit the ILS and someone then proceeds to give age inside leg measurement and a hello to all who know me...and said aircraft shoot through ....pain in the bum...happy flying and NEVER be afraid to ask questions!! Regards

[VectorLine]

Hi David

If it is 'London Information' (or Scottish Information) you call - then the position report, next point and estimate are essential, because it is a non radar environment.

Sounds to me that you are showing good RT discipline and wouldnt change it.

[normally left blank]

Doesn't sound too bad. But "Life stories" here include: Persons on board, fuel remaining, "I'm on a private VFR flight" - and more. OK, if you've got the "Go ahead/pass your message" bit. I suspect you must stick to the long story until you've passed your test with the examiner. (This is not as stupid as it sounds!) ;)

[GroundBound]

Perhaps an example from a recent flight (I was in the back, so it wasn't me :) ).

Flight already working London Info is asked to call an airfield which will be oveflown shortly. Called the the airfield and 10 minutes later were returned to the London Info frequency. London Info says "xxxx welcome back" - there's a hint here, isn't there? However it was missed, because xxxx launches into the spiel "xxxx is a nnnn from yyyy to zzzz, position is .... height 2000ft, VFR, estimating xxxxx, squawking 7000 .... etc. ". :eek:

It was obvious (to me) the cause was pilot nervousness, uncertain of what to say, unfamiliarity with the area, not sure who was talking to and why, not so hot on English, and not wanting to get it wrong.

If you miss something out and ATC need to now it, they'll ask! Its no big deal :)

[Final 3 Greens]

Wizbigpig

Some units are adopting the following G-xxxx inbound ( obviously only if you're landing) or G-xxxx transit

As an experienced PPL, I would like to update my knowledge with this latest development.

Please would you reference the page number in CAP 413 so that I can read, digest and understand it.

Many thanks

F3G

[RodgerF]

Hi F3G

Quote :

Please would you reference the page number in CAP 413 so that I can read, digest and understand it.


Its in CAP413 Chapter 3 paragraph 5.1

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP413.pdf

RF

[Final 3 Greens]

Rodger

Thanks for the reference, unfortunately I can't find the new phrase, so I am assuming that it is non-standard in the same way that 'Radar Heading' is.

Might be a good idea if a knowledgeable ATCO from the ATC forum posted this new approach to the Private Flying Forum so that we understand what it means, avoiding the 'umh umh say again' syndrome ;)

Does sound like a good idea, anything that aids communications gets my vote.

F3G

[C172pilot]

I don't understand why you use these very long winded initial calls. No wonder you have a frequency overload situation every now and then. :ooh: ;)

What I would say (and been thought to say) after I have been told to go ahead is the following:
"G-XXXX, C172, approaching (entry point or similar), 1500ft, for landing."

If I had filed a flightplan for the flight I would omit a/c type and instead tell that I am on a flightplan. I might add my transponder code also if appropriate.

My impression is that the controller will not need to know where you have departed (no "from X to Y"). As have been mentioned before your heading is useless info. Estimates are unnecessary when the controller has radar. And about QNH - wouldn't the controller tell you the QNH in the approach clearence?

C172pilot :ouch:

[Final 3 Greens]

C172Pilot

In the UK, a document called CAP413 mandates what should be said.

Therefore responsible PPLs tend to follow this structure, which is a little longer than your suggestion.

[RodgerF]

Section 5.1 is unambiguous.

'The service that an aircraft requires should be passed in the initial call to the ATSU;' It then gives an example.

On initial contact you can say 'XXXX Approach this is G-YYYY requesting zone transit' or 'zone entry and joining instructions' or whatever you want. Saying what you want on the initial call helps the controller to be prepared for what is coming next.

This is what Wizbigpig was referring to.

[C172pilot]

Maybe I should have choosen another subject for my first post. Not making a very good first impression by questioning your procedures perhaps...

But anyway - yes, 3 Greens, I did follow the link to that CAP document and read about the procedures. What I do not understand is why in that case there are procedures telling you to tell the controllers things they do not need to hear (and in addition most people seems to be fine about that?). Or did I get this wrong? Controllers - do you disagree about that the information I suggested was unnecessary in my other post in fact is unnnecessery?

Anyway if the procedures tell you as a pilot, you should include certain things in your call that you know the controller does not need. Is it then responsible to block the frequency by making an unnecessary long call in which only half of the information is needed by ATC? What if someone else needs the frequency for more urgent matters?

As an experienced pilot maybe you are confident to cope with such a situation but as a student I tend think that not getting through on the radio when I need to make a call about something that it is important to say within a certain time, is adding another stress factor.


C172pilot :ouch: (again)

[vintage ATCO]

F3G

It helps enormously if a request or intention is stated on initial call. . . . "XXXXXXX Approach, GABCD, for transit" or ". . . . . inbound" or ". . . . . for Flight Information Service", etc. The controller picks up the correct strip and can prioritise. CAP413 is sort of getting there, how about Ch 2 para 7.2.3 'An aircraft should request the service required on initial contact when freecalling a ground station'?


vintage ATCO
www.stevelevien.com

[mad_jock]

Again this seems to be a real life situations. Which the SRG seem to ignore.

We as instructors are taught to do it the CAA way. Which means we follow CAP 413.

There is not alot we can do about it because that is what the examiner expects when we gve them the student for test.

What they do after that is really up to the great learning curve that I am still at the bottom.

If you peeps at ATC think there is to much info passed get CAP 413 changed otherwise PPL's are going to continue popping out giving their life historys.

I must admit I tell the students to give to much info

CAPHAD

The if you don't need it you can forget it instead of another 3 RT calls trying to get the info out of them.

MJ

[Final 3 Greens]

RodgerF/Vintage ATCO

Thanks for the clarification - all is now clear and I shall be using this approach from my next flight onwards. (Except that I must remember to 'foget it' for my next 1 hour JAR currency training flight where I would undoubtedly be criticised by the examiner for using non standard calls.)

Mad Jock

Not a tilt at instructors (who only follow the CAA syllabus), but we PPLs are also taught that standard phraseology saves lives, so use it!

It's not surprising therefore that PPLs who try and achieve good levels of airmanship remember this learning and follow the CAP phrases.

[Timothy]

As a matter of interest, why are aircraft type, departure and destination so important to ATCers?

A typical converstion I have heard many times would go:

"Anytown radar this is G-xxxx Bigtown 2,500' VFR request zone transit routing via the XYZ to leave at Smalltown."

other conversations take place with this and other aircraft, possibly including the zone transit clearance, then

"G-xxxx pass your aircraft type and departure and destination details."

I can understand why you might want the type to judge speed (but then why not ask the speed?) and to give visual traffic information, but then why ask relatively late in the conversation? And what does a knowledge of departure and destination bring to the party?

(I get the impression it's just to fill spaces on the strip, but happy to be corrected.)

Not arguing, just wondering.

W

[Chilli Monster]

As far as the type is concerned you're quite right, it's mainly performance and traffic information.

As for destination and departure - lots of reasons.

1) Gives you an idea where to look on the screen of they don't know or say where they are (the number of position reports saying '4' north of......... and you point out that they're actually '14' north of........ for example is amazing ;))

2) Gives you an idea of the route if they don't say what it is

3) Gives you an idea of who to chuck them to next

(As you may have noticed these are all mainly looking at it from a LARS perspective)

4) Gives you an idea who / where to notify if anything goes wrong (departure if the worst happens and you want to find out anything, destination if they have an R/T fail whilst with you and you can notify the intended aerodrome of arrival).

The list is not inexhaustive - but these are a few goods ones

[Timothy]

Chilli

Thank you. And I guess that the reason that this information is often asked for at the end of the conversation is that it is needed for passing onto the next LARS unit in handover?

W

[AlanM]

WC

It should be gleaned from you at the start ideally, but if there are other things to do it is fairly low priority.

In terms of the type we need to know for a variety of reasons. Not least the single/twin/fixed/rotary implications over Londonium! Also helps on giving traffic information. I heard a colleague once say......>" Traffic information, three miles north west, east bound, no height info, believed to be ....(pause).... an aircraft!!" no *****!!!!

Yes - the point of departure/destination help me guess your routing and who I should chuck you too next. If I know you are back to Biggin I can chuck you to them before you would go if left to your own devices probably:)!!!!!! Of course, it helps in terms of overdue action as well.

[Timothy]

" Traffic information, three miles north west, east bound, no height info, believed to be ....(pause).... an aircraft!!" I wonder if it was the same person I had the following conversation with early one morning:

"Heathrow Special good morning G-xxxx just airborne Fairoaks requesting Ascot - Burnham"
"G-xxxx good morning Squawk nnnn route initially towards Ascot not above 1000' on 10xx. What type of helicopter are you?"
"I am an Aztec type of helicopter!"

If I know you are back to Biggin I can chuck you to them before you would go if left to your own devices probably!!!!!! Ah! You have clearly never worked me...the moment I am out of LCY Zone I always say "G-xxxx clear of controlled airspace request 7000 and enroute" (going North) or "7000 and Biggin 129.4" (going home). This is because I know how busy you guys are, yet so helpful, so I want to be in your hair for as little time as possible.

The fact that one of your colleagues (we know who I mean) then responds "that's another pint you owe me!" is his choice about how to use airtime!:p

W

[Andrew Sinclair]

Concerning CAP 413 Chapter 3, Paragragh 5.1, there does seem to be good reason to modify that example insofar as in the initial call the aircraft asks for a "Lower Airspace Radar Service"

I noted from another thread that it was suggested that this is not particularly good phraseology since the services of offer are FIS, RIS, RAS.

Here is the thread (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=95933)

This sounds sensible, since after asking for a LARS the controller is none the wiser to the service you are requesting. If fact it could be that according to that example you could state Lower Airspace Radar Service in the initial call and then go on to ask for a FIS, itself a non-radar service; therefore perhaps contradictorily. A future modification for inclusion in the 14th Edition possibly.

P.S. Thanks for the direction to the part that mentions stating the service during the initial call. Did not know that and will use it in future calls.

[flower]

Interestingly it isn't only those learning to fly who fall foul of what is written and expected to pass exams when using R/T.

As ATCOs we have similar problems, we are taught at the college to use R/T in the way that will mean we will pass exams , only to arrive at our respective units post college to be told forget all that , this is the real world.

We have to be especially careful with our "6" week students who are in the middle of there Cadetship not to lead them into what SRG and the CAA may regard as bad habits and let them carry on using college RT which is so very often out of place at an operational unit.

Should we perhaps as both operational ATCOs and Pilots be approaching the CAA to look at an overhaul of the RT manual. There wouldn't be major changes but perhaps the small amendments that could be made would make both Flyers and Controllers lives a little bit easier on the radio.

[Andrew Sinclair]

There appears to be a process for consultation during document revision. Here is the link

Consultation (http://www.caa.co.uk/srg/ats/document.asp?groupid=282)

I am going to register my interest for CAP 413. Maybe information from this forum can be fed into Edition 14.

[Final 3 Greens]

Flower

Should we perhaps as both operational ATCOs and Pilots be approaching the CAA to look at an overhaul of the RT manual. There wouldn't be major changes but perhaps the small amendments that could be made would make both Flyers and Controllers lives a little bit easier on the radio.

I'd be up for this. Anything that introduces improvements based on operational experience has got to be good.

Like Andrew S, I'm going to register my interest too.

F3G

[vintage ATCO]

(Except that I must remember to 'foget it' for my next 1 hour JAR currency training flight where I would undoubtedly be criticised by the examiner for using non standard calls.)


A final input from me before away for a week and a bit at RIAT. . .

F3G

I would be extremely diappointed if you were criticised for using a bit of commonsense on the RT. Standard RT is fine and I uphold it's virtue, but a bit of crisp, precise, to the point, words are worth their weight. Who could/would criticise that?

All the best :cool:

VA

[WelshFlyer]

Ok - from a different perspective. As a CL/IR student (even though I'm going to use a PPL as a "half way there license") I think that using R/T correctly is very important!

We had an aircraft at my local aerodrome last week, who didn't seem to have been told that R/T transmission is not a telephone - he basically called giving his registration (good beginnings) and position/ altitude then radio silence for 5 minuits then he casually asks for permission to land - half a mile downwind of the runway.
(by casually I mean 'XX, can I land?)

Correct use of R/T is not something to be ashamed - too much information never killed anyone.

WelshFlyer

[flower]

Welsh Flyer ,
correct RT is essential . I think the point many are trying to get across is that there are differances between what the manual is telling people to use and what is really necessary.

If we can get some sort of parity between Pilots and ATCOS and do it officially then that is good news for us all.

RT sadly is often placed at a lower level of priority in Flying training than it should be.

To much info could cause problems however , as it blocks the frquency and could do so at a critical time.

Im glad to see that 2 people so far have registered with the CAA to offer their assistance.

[WelshFlyer]

Couldn't agree more - mind you, my QFI even though his R/T is excelent, whenever we go into Caernarfon if any of the Caernarfon-based FIs are around he'll greet them by name - eg, "Good morning captain Claire" (and there are points in this if you can guess who my QFI is)

But when you are flying, hopefully accurately and especially in controlled airspace it is even more essential.

(by the way flower, it's nice to see a fellow Welsh person on the boards, where do you fly from?)

WelshFlyer

[bluskis]

When giving aircraft type is it preferable to give PA xx, or Warrior/Twin Commanche/Tomahawk.

As it is PAxx on the flight plan form, I give that as type, but will happily change to the model name if that is preferred.

[flower]

Blueskis
it doesn't make much difference how you identify aircraft type, just say what you feel more comfortable with. If we are unceratin to the type we may ask for clarification.

Welsh Flyer, Im an ATCO although I have a number of people trying to persuade me to learn to fly. And I work out of Cardiff.

[WelshFlyer]

Sounds like a good idea - I think i'll use it. Not sure how my QFI'll react to that though:)

WelshFlyer.

[vintage ATCO]

When giving aircraft type is it preferable to give PA xx, or Warrior/Twin Commanche/Tomahawk.
t doesn't matter although it seems to Arrer drivers it does.
"GABCD, traffic right 2 o'clock is a PA28 at 2000ft'

"XXXXXX, Gxxxx, we're a PA28RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!"

"Oh, right" :rolleyes:


:D :D :D

[Spangly]

Working at one of the busiest LARS units in the country (499 movements last Friday), I believe the standard of r/t from general aviation pilots is by and large pretty good. This is especially so given the fact that a lot of the time they are students, and I would always encourage instructors to get their students to do the r/t as much as possible.

With a radar, all I need to know are reg./ aircraft type/ altitude/ from and to. If you don't say otherwise you'll get a FIS. If you say your routeing I'll probably make a note of it, and likewise with POB (just in case...). If I need to know anything else I'll ask.

The most unnecessary call I often get is identified squawkers reporting overhead the field when they haven't been asked to - I know, I can see you!

[Timothy]

If you don't say otherwise you'll get a FIS. Again, opinions vary on this. Some ATCOs say "Flight Information Service" unprompted and wait to be asked for an upgrade while others enquire "what service do you require?"

Should we take a hint from this that the former is on the busy side while the latter is happy to provide an RIS, or is it just a matter of taste, style and local standards?

W

[Final 3 Greens]

VA

I would be extremely diappointed if you were criticised for using a bit of commonsense on the RT. Standard RT is fine and I uphold it's virtue, but a bit of crisp, precise, to the point, words are worth their weight. Who could/would criticise that?

You'd be surprised ;)

[Spangly]

If you ask for a RIS then I'll give one unless it's absolutely crazy. If it's just medium busy (or there's a lot of weather clutter) then this may be a Limited RIS with late warning of traffic. Also, the more people that want one, the more limited the service will be as it does mean you're looking out for someone more than when they're just under a FIS. Ultimately it depends on the personal ability of the controller and we're all different.

[FlyingForFun]

"Traffic information, three miles north west, east bound, no height info, believed to be ....(pause).... an aircraft!!"Been away for a few days, and this thread has moved on since this quote. But I can't resist telling about an incident a week or two ago, when I was receiving a FIS from a LARS unit (won't say which one, to protect the not-so-innocent!).

I was inbound to my home airfield in my Europa. Also working the frequency was another Europa, inbound to the same field. The other aircraft requested a frequency change to the A/G frequency:

Other pilot: "G-AB, request frequency change to Somewhere, 123.45"

Controller: "G-AB, frequency change approved, be aware you're following another Europa helicoptor that's about 5 miles ahead of you into the same field"

Other pilot: "Roger, G-AB"

Me: "G-IK, request frequency change to Somewhere, 123.45 - and for your information, I'm fixed-wing"

Controller: "Oh... <pause> G-IK, say your type"

Me: "Europa, which is a fixed-wing aircraft."

Controller: "Oops, didn't know that. Frequency change approved."

Gave me a good laugh anyway! :D

FFF
--------------

[priscilla]

I would say you'll feel if the frequency is busy or not.
Say minimum and controllers will ask what they need (depends if they have a radar or not, or if they have your flight plan or not)
I work in a french approach ...I hope you'll fly there :D
We like to have " XXXXX, Pa28, from Luton (ICAO code helps!) to your field, approx ground position, squawk, altitude" then we see you on our radar and that the most important for us.
Then we'll ask "what's your desired routing, when do you want to descent, do you like gladiators... ;) and so on.."

[Spangly]

FlyingForFun - Excellent! I find most controllers' aircraft recce is appalling, but not surprising given that our bread and butter is mostly PA28s, AA5s and Cessna somethings. At least they admitted their mistake!

One of my favourites was unknown traffic called to someone. They came back, "Roger, is it a helicopter?".

[rodan]

Again, opinions vary on this. Some ATCOs say "Flight Information Service" unprompted and wait to be asked for an upgrade while others enquire "what service do you require?"

It's up to the pilot to request the service. If you don't request anything, you will get a FIS from me. Personally, I assume that if you want anything above the minimum, you will ask for it, whether I am busy or not. Even if we do sound busy, it doesn't hurt to ask for a RIS - we won't take offence, and will certainly accomodate it if possible :D

Can I make an extra special plea to pilots departing radar-equipped airfields to report their passing levels and the level they are climbing to on first call to Radar? It's so much quicker when they do, we just have to ask otherwise.

[Timothy]

Can I make an extra special plea to pilots departing radar-equipped airfields to report their passing levels Gives me another opportunity to ask for clarification :p

How accurately do you want passing level? It always sounds silly to say "Passing 47 for 80" because, apart from anything else 47 doesn't "exist", only 45 and 50 do.

OTOH if you are using the passing level to veryfy Mode C, you must want it more accurate than the nearest 500'.

So, if my altimeter reads 4750 on 1013 what do you want me to say?

W

[flower]

WCollins ,
regarding Mode C we want you to tell us exactly what it says on the dial so
passing FL 47 for FL 80 is exactly what we want to hear.

[rollright129]

When passing from/to, should you use raw airfield name or ICAO code, e.g. Heathrow or EGLL? The latter obviously takes longer, but is it more helpful for the ATCO?

[WelshFlyer]

I'd say it depends on how busy the frequency is at the time - play it by ear.

Textbook wise it would be a case of "Echo - Golf - Lima - Lima" but again you could probably get away with using "EGLL"

WelshFlyer.

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

It's a matter of context, isn't it ? Most people have heard of Heathrow, world-wide ! However, if you're flying from Elstree (EGTR), for example, most people in the southern half of Britain have heard of this field, so just say "Elstree". On the European mainland, however, better to say "Echo Golf Tango Romeo". At least, that was my practice some years back.

[Chilli Monster]

Use the name, not the ICAO. You'll find most civil ATCO's convert automatically in their heads anyway and you'll only confuse a lot of the military ones ;).

[Barnaby the Bear]

For what it is worth. I would just stick with how the book tells you to do it. At the very least while you are learning.
At my unit there are times when I am very busy I must admit I prefer just a brief initial contact, and then when suitable I shall ask you to pass your message.
You can't be criticised if you are going by the book though.
And I wanted worry about being labled a PPL giving his life story. Professionals can be just as bad, if not worse!
:}

[priscilla]

If you fly abroad, definitely use ICAO ! it's not so long...and it's shorter for us to write...and we surely understand better..
good flights !