Evening Mr Philthy et al …
.
Don’t ya just love AIP amendments
.
ThoughtCrime,
.
You said,
how about "passing XXXX climbing to YYYY"
.
on CTAF's!!!!
.
'Passing' call is for Radar environment to ATC! Nobody cares otherwise.
… don’t have AIP or MATS handy for references …. In practical terms … D Towers like the ‘passing’ info as it often negates having to ask for it when looking to clear or de-conflict low level non-pump up’s etc
.
jungmeister
"Continue Approach" is probably a bit of unnecessary padding.
… it is primarily to stop pilots asking for a landing clearance before we can issue it (perhaps due one rolling or rolling out) … saves on RT and/or twitchy skippers from applying TOGA when the gap is gunna be OK
… otherwise it can get ugly when a go-round is trying to use the same bit of upwind as the airborne departure ahead, slower and lower
You don't have to read it back!
true … please don’t read this back
It has been around for a long time and probably relates to "Procedural Towers" IE those without a Radar Approach service.
… think you will find it is used at all towers in certain circumstances
An acknowledgement with callsign only sounds a bit blunt. It happens with the "Ready" call too and some controllers say "Hold Short of the runway" but others just acknowledge with a callsign.
.. another ICAO/AIP requirement … we should all be issuing ‘hold short of Runway XX’
Certain Tower checkers are more vigorous than others in pursuing the stamping out of unnecessary TWR transmissions
… standardisation is a BIG issue at the moment, across ‘like type’ and (where possible) more generally … expect some improvement in uniformity over the next year or so!
.
Cheers
.
da Dog