Originally Posted by
Lead Balloon
I ask again: WTF is the point of reporting the ATIS code received if 'the system' is going to second guess whether I've actually received all of information (e.g.) Golf? And if 'the system' is 'worried' that I don't 'really' have the QNH element of Golf, why isn't 'the system' 'worried' that I don't 'really' have other of the elements? Aviation activity in Australia every day demonstrates why counter-intuitive rules cause confusion.
And please read what you've posted about our mate Roger. In the example I gave I was not asked a question. The example I gave was and remains exactly the kind of circumstance in which Roger is the right word to include in the response (rather than readback everything including the aircraft on short final to 17 and the vehicle on taxiway Charlie, which is what is now increasingly happening).
I get it that "Roger" is not the correct response to: "Do you have Black Mountain in sight?" or "Confirm you are on assigned heading zero one zero".
On your first point, I concur - what is the point? Maybe a CB ATC can chime in if they're reading.
You're probably right as well about point 2. I was more thinking about circumstances I've heard
e.g. Jizzler 700 confirm you have information Golf? in which case it seems
Roger would not be the appropriate readback.
It's confusing, and as a weekend warrior I daresay the AIP or VFRG isn't laid out best to help educate pilots on the proper radio phraseology.
It is also a subject matter that is seemingly entirely absent from the PPL/CPL syllabus - at least in the theory exams, not the flight tests.