Why Virgin so unprofessional?

[GT-R]

Why do Virgin pilots have an overwhelmingly low level of professionalism on the radio?

I am sick of hearing the 'Virgin' dropped before flight number, the reading back when to call another frequency, "left FL400", position reports either a conversation or some sort of mutant Intl HF report, requesting START and push back, asking for pushback and taxi as a statement and being asked for high speed cruise and descent and sitting at FL400 till the green T/D.

Why Virgin so different to the other jet operators and the regionals?

[coaldemon]

How do you know that they go to the T/D point? Are you a second officer with Virgin? Also time to redo the english grammar classes.

[ovum]

Fans?! Fans?!...what, are we talking about footy teams? Sorry but if either of you are 'fans' then there's something wrong. Nothing wrong with having a preference for legitimate reasons but come on, do you sit on the threshold with flags and beanies?

...and Wunala, I would hope that you're assessment of radio professionalism comes from an educated point of view...for some reason I get the vibe that it doesn't :rolleyes:

Stupid thread all round really :suspect: :ouch:

[Dehavillanddriver]

Firstly GT-R - people in glass houses.....

That being said, the overall standard of ALL Australian radio work is quite low.

The reason in my opinion is the ICAOing of the AIP.

The AIP refers to DOC 4444, DOC 9432 and Annex 10, which is all well and good, except no-one has a schmick what is contained in those documents - and why should they - they are near on impossible to easily get hold of, and we pay for the Australian AIP.

I don't believe that Virgin pilots are any better or worse than any other operator in this country, and notwithstanding my comments above, we as a general statement are streets ahead of that beacon of worlds best practice the US of A.

Some phrases that get up my nose..

on climb..

on descent

ready on reaching

ready in turn

visual on top

to name a few - and I am as guilty as the next man!

GT-R look in the mirror and make sure that you are perfect before you cast dispersions on others!

[A Comfy Chair]

G'day all.

I think radio communications in general sometimes leave something to be desired.

Wunula, I think the point that was being made wasn't that they don't sound "nice", or aren't being nice to controllers, more that they aren't making calls in the correct format. The AIP stipulates what should be said in most situations. This is for safety reasons (to avoid confusion), and for practicality reasons (eg, a busy controller doesn't want you to say in 50 words what could be said in 10).

In terms of training, that very much depends on who trained you. Although Virgin don't train pilots from the ab initio stage, they certainly do train them (as well as check) in the simulators. I cannot say if any emphasis is placed on R/T proceedures.

The particular points raised are indeed a problem, some more than others. I'm not sure if you can isolate one airline quite so easily, however.


I also think that the AIP needs to be ammended itself. It does contain most of the required information, however it isn't particulally clear in trying to convey this information. IMHO anyway.


And Ovum... GT R presents something that he's seeing in the skies... surely the safety of everyone isn't "stupid"?

[ACMS]

Howdy all. It's been quite a while since my last post but I do read these threads most days.

I live in Honkers and I fly quite a lot to Oz and a little bit in Oz. Also I have owned a scanner for more than 20 years. So I feel as a senior Captain/Aviation crazy nut I'm in a good position to have an opinion.

The standard of RT in Oz is quite good, well disciplined and clear. From both Pilots and Atc. Unlike a few other places in the world. The American Pilots/Controllers say quite a few unusual things in their comms and it can be very entertaining but not always very professional.

In the rest of the world ( where some of the VB Pilots have come from ) we are required to ask for START and Pushback. Singapore would have ya balls if you started without a clearance. Also it is ICAO standard to report "reaching/leaving" FLs' In the old days it was "maintaining/left"

ATC wouldn't give a stuff if VB cruised at .85 or .78, this is the Captains choice. Unless another A/c was close behind then Atc may impose a restriction.

It is normal to "sit at cruise till the green T/D". That is how Mr Boeing designed the damn aeroplane to work. Maybe you haven't heard of VNAV? You can if you wish descend earlier or later, no probs just less economical.

Sounds like you are a private pilot who thinks he/she knows best.

Stick to GAAP airports please.

So in the words of the Americans " see you next time"

[ACMS]

I was answering the amateur guy/gal who posted this thread named GT-R . I would have thought that obvious to all. Sorry if I offended you Wunula, I agreed with your post, so settle down a bit.

He was writing a lot of rubbish, I chose to log on and put him right on all of his issues. Or did you miss that?

I don't have to think I'm a Professional Pilot, passing my twice annual sim checks and getting paid on the 26th kinda gives me a hint!!

If I were a Pom it would be "old boy" not "oh boy" sorry I couldn't resist correcting your grammar

Great to see you are interested in Aviation, keep up all the study and the world is yours to explore. Flying is a fantastic job, enjoy to training when you start. Oh and take lots of photos, I didn't and wish I had. Now it's 25 years ago.

cheers.

One other thing

VB do train their Pilots. New guys/gals join with a bare endorsement on the 737, that's all. VB have a lot of training/check Captains whose job it is to train these green Pilots "on the line"
Most of these trainers I've worked with in other Airlines and they have very high standards in all areas of the operation ( including R/T ).

It's one thing to have the endorsement but yet another to be "checked to line"

[HotDog]

Many years ago, I lost a lot of points in my initial R/T license exam for saying decimal instead of "deicimal":rolleyes:

[A Comfy Chair]

ACMS,

I totally agree with your comments about Oz R/T being very good in world standards. Compared, for example, with what you may encounter half way across the Bay of Bengal, things go very smoothly.

From my point of view, however, requesting push and start, for example, is an error. Omitting half of your callsign is also an error.

As you quite rightly point out, if you did it the Oz way in other parts of the world, you'd get in a lot of strife. (EG Singapore). So why should you be able to make the error here? If you don't follow proceedures word for word in many parts of the world, you will not get anywhere (due language differences, etc.). I'm sure you are fully aware of this. Just because communication is easier here, and no-one jumps down your throat, is no reason to get it wrong.

I believe that it is in fact this mentality of "It used to be this way, so it doens't matter" (EG your leaving/left example) that is the real danger to aviation.
Many phraseologies have been changed, and it may/may not have been for very good reason. These things are published, so why not follow them.

The ICAO proceedures, and differences for each country are published. If we are the professional profession that we claim to be, how about we do our job by the books. Find out what is required, and do it.

[druglord]

ACMS,
Radio calls in the US is a lot more lenient than other places. Radio conversations take place much more often and therefore there is a need to abbreviate calls. For example If you were to go onto O'hare ground and go through the whole speel of "request taxi clearance blah blah blah..."you may not get yelled at but you'd certainly be flagged as a newbie. Same in LaGuardia, you can easily sit on ground frequency for half an hour waiting to get a call in, so when you do get a chance it's best to keep it as brief as possible.

[Menen]

Comfy Chair. Specific radio procedures are not taught in the simulator during conversion to type. In any case many simulator instructors have not flown for years and wouldn't have a clue about the latest radio calls. They are there to teach someone how to operate a 737/A320 etc.

In my experience there are pilots who assiduously study AIP and take personal pride in using strict radio terminology, and like the vast majority of air traffic controllers it is a sheer pleasure to listen to their clear, concise and accurate radio calls.

On the other hand there is no doubt that there are many pilots both in GA and airlines whose radio procedures are careless, superfluous and plain cowboy. This applies to both captains and first officers.

When you hear stories of captains playing silly buggers in the cockpit by trying to distract a first officer who happens to be making a PA to the passengers (disconnecting the autopilot and letting the wailer go over the PA system, comes to mind) - proof then that cowboys do exist in jet flight decks. One assumes that their radio procedures are equally amusing (?).

Until the introduction by the CAA of a huge amount of extra read-backs that occurred way back in the late Eighties, Australian pilots radio procedures were remarkably concise, and superfluous read-backs were frowned upon on the flight deck. Then came the myriad giddays, see yer laters, and similar Americanisms gleaned from international pilots, and the rot set in as far as concise radio procedures were concerned.

With the exception of transmissions from Air Traffic Controllers in general, I would say that around 65% of pilot transmissions heard on Australian air routes contain superfluous terminology and lack of accurate AIP specific words. Having said that, it is far worse overseas.

[ACMS]

Druglord: I agree, the US is much more concise and fast. I try to adapt and fit in.

A Comfy Chair: remember that some of us fly to many and varied places around the world and it would be impossible for me to fully understand all the differences and idiosyncrasy's . Hence ICAO Standards and my Fleet office keeping us on the correct path with what we should be saying. Having said that I try to fit in and when in Oz I don't ask for Start. I also find myself using Oz style calls ie "request airways clearance"
I gave up saying left/maintaining when the fleet office amended our books 2 years ago.

Menen: Yes Oz introduced ICAO readbacks around 5 to 7 years ago? maybe longer. I remember before that we wouldn't say much except Alt readbacks and clearances. ( can't remember the exact AIP requirements but it wasn't much )

[Thump & Go]

Comfy Chair (or anyone else), excuse my Kiwi ignorance but please explain why push & start requests are an error???? I hear them every day here in Godzone.

Thump

[ACMS]

Thump & Go Yes I know most will ask for Push and start and I don't really see the problem, but technically they are correct that in Oz you don't need to ask for start. Unless you need a cross bleed.

[A Comfy Chair]

Menen. I agree with what you are saying. I was not intending to suggest that they are taught, as such, in the simulator, but whether or not when using radio proceedures in the simulator, it is picked up and discussed by the check captains. I was also more referring to licence renewal and training excercises more than the initial endorsement, which as you rightly point out is often done by sim instructors that are no longer flying, hence could be out of date with regards to radio proceedures. Some, however, I imagine still take pride in this part of their knowledge.
Endorsement sims are also, obviously, to teach you how to fly the aircraft, not fly in general. I can see I was not clear in this in my previous post.

ACMS.. Yes, may of us do fly to many and varied places around the world. I, also, am far from perfect when it comes to knowledge about idiosyncracies of various countries. I am more concerned about the general lack of concern for following the correct proceedures. I can see that you do take the effort to follow the correct proceedures when in a specific country, and that is to be admired. I also endeavour to be concise and correct when in the air, and do make an effort to study the correct proceedures for the area, however, like anyone, I do make mistakes. But at least (like yourself), I am making an effort. So many do not.

I guess in Australia I wouldn't be surprised if I heard international operators making minor mistakes. That is to be expected. I'm slightly concerned with the fact that a lot of domestic operations still make a lot of errors, and I cannot really see a valid excuse for this. Mistakes will happen, but from my own experiences, it occurs too often to be just mistakes.

[Grivation]

Imagine how unprofessional GT-R might consider the numerous French, Italian, Czech, Mexican, Indian (I could go on....) controllers and pilots who speak in mother tongues rather than the holy ICAO script. :rolleyes:

GT-R I'm afraid you're just another example of the insular world of Australian aviation.

[Hudson]

I recall some years back when a pilot requested "Clearance to Push and Start" to the ground controller at Melbourne. ATC replied that he was cleared to push-back no problem but that he could not issue a start clearance because he could not see the engine area and that only the tarmac crew was authorised to give the all clear to start engines.

The point ATC were making is that they can give a "start approval" but the physical check of all clear around the aircraft prior to pressing the first button could only be done by someone who could see. Therefore to ask for clearance to start depends on what you mean exactly.

[druglord]

That's hilarious grivatation! Yeah some people are way too anal around here, if you want ICAO standards than quit griping about the new NAS

[Aussie]

It is normal to "sit at cruise till the green T/D".

Anyone care to explain what the green T/D means?
THanks

[DirectAnywhere]

Dynamic arc generated by the FMS and displayed on the HSI to indicate the FMS calculated top of descent point.

[Mr.Buzzy]

How about we rename this thread? "

"The Seinfeld thread. A thread about nothing!"

[A Comfy Chair]

Mr. Buzzy. I'm slightly concerned that you think that the safety of air travel is "nothing" R/T proceedures here may be better than in other parts of the world, but omitting half of your callsign can certainly cause confusion. Confusion can be dangerous.

Grivation, if you read the differences, you will find that in many countries speaking in the native language is an approved R/T communication. So they are perfectly professional in doing so. They are following the rules.

druglord... No-one has said they want ICAO standards, well not that I can see anyway. I cannot speak for others, but all I want is for people to follow the R/T proceedures that are in place in Australia, not change the rules to ICAO.

There is no reason whatsoever for crews flying domestically in Australia making incorrect calls. Its pure lazyness. In the most part, ATC can do it, so why can't we?

[126.7]

GT-R

WHY YOU NOT SPEAK ENGLISH!

[ACMS]

Direct to anywhere and Aussie.

The T/D is actually a small green circle with the letters T/D in green beside it. It is displayed on the Navigation Display ( ND ) whilst using map/centre map/plan modes. It is not on an HSI which is typically fitted to an old generation aircraft.
The T/D indicates the approximate map position of the FMC calculated top of decent point.

The Dynamic arc you refer to is an Altitude range arc ( green )based on vertical speed and groundspeed, indicates the approx position where the MCP altitude will be reached. Only diplayed on the ND in map/centre map modes.

hope this helps.

cheers.

[Mr.Buzzy]

Mr. Buzzy. I'm slightly concerned that you think that the safety of air travel is "nothing" R/T proceedures here may be better than in other parts of the world, but omitting half of your callsign can certainly cause confusion. Confusion can be dangerous.

Thanks for the lecture Comfy chair. I didnt realise that confusion can be dangerous!

Next time I think of a ruddy faced college boy poonce puffing his cheeks in disgust when I say Gday to the contoller. Ill think of you.

[DirectAnywhere]

Ta for clarifying ACMS. That funny coloured TV thingy is still called an EHSI on my aeroplane though so I still call it an HSI.

Isn't there something about old habits and new dogs??;)

[Borneo Wild Man]

Try flying into and out of Indian airports,Indonesian,Russia,China(I could go on) and oh yes those arabic speakers who obviously have never tried to copy down their own ATIS reports.
At least you can understand Oz ATC even with a bit of non standed terminology thrown in.Personally I find it refreshing listening to english first language speakers after what seems like all night sitting over the Bay of Bengal talking to Calcutta on HF(when they can be bothered answering).
So guys get a life!it could be a lot worse!

[A Comfy Chair]

Thanks guys.

I think that last post fairly well summed up my point.
I'm very concerned at the general lack of effort to be standard.

ATC IS worse in a lot of places around the world, no one is denying that.

But many of you all seem to think that because OZ ATC is understandable, its allowable to be non-standard! Just because we don't have some of the comprehension issues that exist in other places, isn't an excuse to make the errors here.

As I have said, ATC can get it right, so why can't we?

And Mr. Buzzy, the next time I get confused as to who is being addressed because all I hear on the radio is "415", instead of "Virgin 415" or "Qantas 415", I'll think of you.

[GT-R]

Virgin Blue pilots try and call their company on 121.5 about 4 times more than anybody else combined, and their frequency isn't anything like 121.5.

Worse, they think 'doh' means 'go ahead' and transmit again with all the details.....

Clueballs. :}

[Dehavillanddriver]

GT-R

You obviously can't take a hint!

Don't throw stones unless YOU are perfect!

I hear plenty of QF and QFlink pilots making transmissions on 121.5

We are ALL human and make mistakes - when you are certified as deviod of all humanity and thus free of mistakes - then you can have a go.

Until then...

[GT-R]

This has nothing to do with being perfect, it is an observation that Virgin seem to be content with a lower standard than other carriers.

Face it mate, you are in Virgin because Qantas didn't want you.....

[Dehavillanddriver]

Well is that so!

We will leave the personal attack aside because my mum used to say if you can't say anything nice....

There is no way that you can make a blanket statement that Virgin accepts a lower standard than other carriers.

I assume from the tone of your posts that you are a skygod with QANTAS.

I can assure you that both QANTAS and Virgin operate to the same standard - which by world standards is pretty high.

Neither company is exempt from mistakes, and neither company is perfect.

I think if you did an OBJECTIVE analysis you would find that both QF and DJ are comparable from a standards perspective.

[Mr.Buzzy]

Hey DH Driver. Dont let someone that names himself after his wanky little car wind you up.
Everyone knows that he has just finished a Uni. module that taught him all about the green circle. It really is just something for him to ponder as he sits by the fence scanner in one hand.... Johnson in the other!

[Dehavillanddriver]

Buzzy,

You are correct of course - I just wish that we would all pull together as professional pilots and not act like creatures that would eat our own young if it put us in front of the next bloke.

The fragmentation of the pilot bodies in this country is leading to the reduction in a lot of our previously sacred conditions...

United we stand, divided we fall....

[Mr.Buzzy]

Dehavilland,
Words that ring very true! Not for a long time has unity been so important! Look around us. ALL of us. We are doing just as Dicko and his cronies want..... Dividing..... Conquered!

[ACMS]

The rot started in '89 if you all remember that far back:p

[Desert Dingo]

Shhhhh. We are not allowed to mention **that year*** :(
Some people do not like being reminded about it, so we gotta get a life and move on, remember. :ok:

[Dehavillanddriver]

I think that the rot started before that fateful year.

The international and domestic pilots were under one umbrella at one time and then a split occured.

That eventual outcome of that split is being used to good effect by management in at least one company to create friction between the two groups over a new wide body airbus type.

I make no comment about who was right and who was wrong, as I wasn't involved. I simply make the point that had all the professional pilots in this country been under one industrial banner - of whatever form - things may well be better for us all.

But who knows!