PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - "...taxying Blonkity for Wonkity, request traffic and transponder code"
Old 6th Jun 2006, 13:36
  #33 (permalink)  
triadic
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Change fatigue is at full throttle !

Problem has always been training. Not only instructors at the flying schools but the training captains with the airlines. Very few know what is correct so they make it up along the way.

Once upon a time this change process was floated past the RAPACs for input and comment, but that seems to have fallen by the wayside. Many of these changes are from CASA who on past experience knee jerk to incidents where they think alternative words would be more appropriate. It would be good to know why some of these changes are implemented (other than "it's ICAO"). If you go back in time you will find changes that got scrubbed and are now back again! What about changes that are just short term (eg when TAAATS was introduced).. we still have them as there has been no review. Just where is the corporate history these days???

Mr K, whilst there is an ATCer in the house, can you answer me this? When I arrive at aerodrome with VHF on the ground and say "...landed Blah Blah cancel SAR" and you say "Blah Blah SARWATCH cancelled" am I supposed to reply with "ABC" (or whatever the callsign may be)?
An old one, but there has NEVER been a requirement to acknowledge and acknowledgement. What ATS say to you in response is their acknowledgement, so there is NO, requirement to acknowledge further unless of course you like the sound of your own voice!

like just telling me that you will be on descent in 2 minutes. Dumb rule though.
Not really dumb. Not only is the requirement to advise PRIOR to descent to enable ATS to review any known traffic, but to let the VFR chap 500 ft below you that you are about to start down! Another reason why you should say your position with the same call. ATS know where you are (usually) but the VFR below do not.

Nothing worse than: "ABC top of descent in 2 min" [top of descent where??]

I thought your taxi call was sufficient to get you IFR traffic for departure. Failing that, "Airborne Uppercumbuktawest" was for if you couldn't establish comms on the ground. From memory that got you 5 mins to complete manoeuvring and get a departure call out.
If you want ATS to know you are in the air and contact was not possible on the ground then an airborne call is an option. As soon as ATS get that call they will start putting you in the system. Saying "standby for departure" is pointless... just what else are they going to do??

What about "Code 1234"
The use of the word "code" is not required at any time by either ATS or pilots. If you go back in time it was a misprint in the AIP when transponders first came in. In the bit where it said code there should have been [brackets] around the word code to indicate the insertion of other text - ie 1234, but the brackets were left out, hence it became an Oz practice for many years until audited against o/s practice.

Just who is responsible for the training?? CASA of course, but then they don't have much/any corporate history to be across this themselves and it is left up to those that have been around for some years to try and get the message across.... a bit like swimming upstream!! difficult to get anywhere!

triadic is offline