CAP413 Phraeseology Change
In knocking on for three decades as a pilot, I've always understood that on final approach one is likely to land, but may possibly go around.
Last edited by Silvaire1; 10th Dec 2015 at 16:57.
In my young days as a spotter, I heard the "cleared for the option" only, but then often, at EBAW, to planes/pilots training IFR approaches. I always wondered, but now understand it meant "cleared for the approach and low pass, and should you need/want to land, you can". It was always followed by an instruction about what to do after the low pass.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
When the pilot has explicitly requested a touch and go or low pass, the controller may wish to communicate clearance for that request without removing the option to make a full stop landing should unplanned circumstances require it.
OTOH if I'm cleared for "low pass not below 400'" it would have to be an emergency before I landed without seeking further permission.
If I'm cleared for touch-and-go it's never occurred to me that I wouldn't be allowed to call "stopping" and stop if some good reason arose, just like I could call "going around" and go around on a clearance to land
Where I fly, if I'm cleared for a touch and go (not for the option) and then call to annouce I'll be stopping the inevitable next call on frequency is going to be "123AB go around", directed by ATC to the aircraft behind me. Then number three starts thinking about his fate...
Last edited by Silvaire1; 11th Dec 2015 at 01:47.
'The option' is not covered in CAP 413 and I'm told even in the USA where it originated, the procedure must be approved by the FAA for each individual airfield which wishes to use it and even then, ATC can reply 'negative option'.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Where I fly, if I'm cleared for a touch and go (not for the option) and then call to annouce I'll be stopping the inevitable next call on frequency is going to be "123AB go around", directed by ATC to the aircraft behind me.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I always teach to reply with intention. Why make things complicated.
It's the logical thing to do.
"G-xx land your discretion, wind xxx/xx"
reply
"Landing G-XX"
or "G-xx runway occupied"
reply
"Continuing G-XX"
Been doing this the last 25 years.
What's with all this "with the option" nonsense.
Cut the chat.
And why do our AFISO after our downwind call reply by asking us to report final?
It's standard to call final, don't ask us, cut the chat, it blocks busy frequency.
Years ago our AFISO would go to lunch one till two.
Best hour of the day with pilots stating their positions downwind, base and final.
Hardly know there was four in the circuit.
Worked well.
Then AFISO would come back on at two.
It's the logical thing to do.
"G-xx land your discretion, wind xxx/xx"
reply
"Landing G-XX"
or "G-xx runway occupied"
reply
"Continuing G-XX"
Been doing this the last 25 years.
What's with all this "with the option" nonsense.
Cut the chat.
And why do our AFISO after our downwind call reply by asking us to report final?
It's standard to call final, don't ask us, cut the chat, it blocks busy frequency.
Years ago our AFISO would go to lunch one till two.
Best hour of the day with pilots stating their positions downwind, base and final.
Hardly know there was four in the circuit.
Worked well.
Then AFISO would come back on at two.
Last edited by BigEndBob; 12th Dec 2015 at 07:04.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BigEndBob
What's with all this "with the option" nonsense.
Cut the chat.
And why do our AFISO after our downwind call reply by asking us to report final?
It's standard to call final, don't ask us, cut the chat, it blocks busy frequency.
Cut the chat.
And why do our AFISO after our downwind call reply by asking us to report final?
It's standard to call final, don't ask us, cut the chat, it blocks busy frequency.
What's happened to the required 'specific and updated traffic information'. That seems to have become a secret.
Best hour of the day with pilots stating their positions downwind, base and final.
"Cleared for the option"
Very useful during training. The instructor can spring a surprise "Go around!" on the student or change a touch-and-go into a full stop, without contacting the tower. It is used in Canada as well as the US.
ATC authorization for an aircraft to make a touch-and-go, low approach, missed approach, stop and go, or full stop landing at the discretion of the pilot. It is normally used in training so that an instructor can evaluate a student's performance under changing situations. Source: FAA Pilot/Controller Glossary
Last edited by India Four Two; 12th Dec 2015 at 14:21.
But its use has to be specifically approved by the national authority for each individual airport and it's not approved in the UK.
The primary effect of the tower clearing an aircraft for the option is to reduce the amount of subsequent radio communication. The landing plane either goes around or exits the runway, and no additional radio communication necessary in either case.
Understood however the airport's ATC must be approved by the FAA to use this procedure and THEY have the 'option' to say 'negative option.'
Yes, that's right. In the US the pilot doesn't generally request 'the option', it's more often introduced by the tower when issuing the clearance. The pilot (or instructor) hears it and takes note, understanding that the plane can now execute any kind of landing without further radio communication, either before or after. FWIW.
Last edited by Silvaire1; 12th Dec 2015 at 21:06.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Placement of Callsign
The placement of the callsign is irrelevant. Where it appears in a message, other than a mandated readback, is not the relevant change here, it is the statement of the Pilot's intentions which is the relevant factor.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I said the placement of the callsign is irrelevant, I meant in this particular example, it is not relevant, what is relevant is the change to encourage pilots to state their intentions which the previous example did not do.
As for placement of callsign, please share where you believe this is mandated?
Because it isn't.
There is only one 'rule' defining the placement of callsign which is in PANS ATM at 5.2.1.9.2.2 — ''An aircraft station should acknowledge receipt of important air traffic control messages or parts thereof by reading them back and terminating the readback by its radio call sign. (Please note, it states 'should' not 'shall' so it is therefore NOT mandated, and, as yet, ICAO is not fully transposed into law).
As for placement of callsign, please share where you believe this is mandated?
Because it isn't. There is only one 'rule' defining the placement of callsign which is in PANS ATM at 5.2.1.9.2.2 — ''An aircraft station should acknowledge receipt of important air traffic control messages or parts thereof by reading them back and terminating the readback by its radio call sign. (Please note, it states 'should' not 'shall' so it is therefore NOT mandated, and, as yet, ICAO is not fully transposed into law).