AerocatS2A
5th Aug 2004, 02:51
Another quick question (mainly for the ATC guys I guess).
The AIP states that the format for a position report should be Position, Time, Altitude/Level, ETA for next position.
It further says that when giving a bearing and distance from somewhere for a position, the format should be Place, Bearing, Distance. The example it gives (from Jepps, Meteorology, Position Reports - AIREPS, 5.4 pg AU-39) is "[place] THREE SIX ZERO ZERO ONE FIVE"
This would mean that a position report might go "Port Hedland 270013 at this time 5000' Karratha at 15"
To me this seems to be a fairly ambiguous way of stating a bearing and distance, and I have yet to hear someone use this format. Most times I hear people say something like "13 miles Port Hedland on the 270 bearing/radial"
So, which is the correct way of stating a bearing and distance as a position report? If someone was to use the AIP phraseology would it cause confusion as to which 3 numbers was the bearing and which was the distance?
The AIP states that the format for a position report should be Position, Time, Altitude/Level, ETA for next position.
It further says that when giving a bearing and distance from somewhere for a position, the format should be Place, Bearing, Distance. The example it gives (from Jepps, Meteorology, Position Reports - AIREPS, 5.4 pg AU-39) is "[place] THREE SIX ZERO ZERO ONE FIVE"
This would mean that a position report might go "Port Hedland 270013 at this time 5000' Karratha at 15"
To me this seems to be a fairly ambiguous way of stating a bearing and distance, and I have yet to hear someone use this format. Most times I hear people say something like "13 miles Port Hedland on the 270 bearing/radial"
So, which is the correct way of stating a bearing and distance as a position report? If someone was to use the AIP phraseology would it cause confusion as to which 3 numbers was the bearing and which was the distance?