"Where's our traffic"

[CRR]

This is going to sound like another controller bitch and moan,but I want to highlight a phrase I have heard from pilots over teh past couple of weeks that does not sound professional at all.
On first contact pilot instructed to reduce speed/turn/etc. A minute or two later comes the dreaded:
"Where is our traffic?"
I realise keeping the pilot in the picture is part of our job but a comment like that doesn't achieve anything.I might have priority traffic departing from another runway. And I know it isn't every pilot that does it but its more than a few.

[bookworm]

So what phraseology would you prefer when you put me on a heading without giving any explanation and I need to understand what you're planning?

[ItchyFeet2]

Bookworm:

How about "Roger, turning left/right heading XYZ, insert callsign here!"

That'll work for me every time!

Regards,

IF2:ok:

[Sir Vaylance Radar]

bookworm
Try making that enquiry @ EWK or JFK & see how far you get !
:(

[This is a crisis]

Bookworm:

While keeping the pilot in the picture planning wise is a nice touch, it is certainly not top on the priority list for an ATCO. With all due respect why do you need to know our plan? If we had to explain our thinking to a pilot every time we gave an instruction the system would just grind to a halt.

I personally find little comments like 'where is our traffic' and 'what number are we' not only annoying but potentially distracting. Just because the frequency is quiet it doen not mean the ATCO is sitting there doing the crossword. It probably means he is talking or co-ordinating on one of his many telephone lines or intercoms. Having somebody wittering in your ear with superfluous and non-standard phraseology is a pain in the butt.

:ok:

[BOAC]

What bookworm is saying is that it is part of 'situational awareness' which is, in general, a GOOD thing to have - for pilots, anyway. Our TCAS has made a huge difference to our interpretation of the airspace around us but it IS limited in scope.

If the USA do not want pilots in their airspace to have 'SA', that is their choice. It will not stop us asking.

CRR - you do not tell us which particular part of the control scene you are, but is it really SO difficult to keep us in the loop? We do not wish to know the other pilot's sock size or auntie's name, but a clue as to why we are turning/slowing/levelling what-have-you does actually help. EG - 'number 5 in traffic' when we have been kept high-speed/straight-line to ctr/fix by the previous sector does affect the way we do things and does not take long to say?

Just seen TIAC's post and again - I would say that a clue as to what lies ahead from you guys and girls does help a lot. 'Track miles' are another very useful tool which LGW inbounds at least are very good at - and saves us asking for those, too - and messing up the crossword:D :D

[This is a crisis]

BOAC

Quite agree that situational awareness is a good thing. But most situational awareness, I would suggest, is gained by listening in on the frequency and building a picture of what is going on. Although it would be nice, it really is impossible to explain every move you make to each aircraft.

I have found that when it is busy, the pilots with the best situational awareness are those who realise it is busy and don't add further to the problems by interrupting a controllers 'line of thought' with further questions. Of course every pilot has the right to query any ATC instruction but if it is busy dont be surprised to fine that the answer to the question "Where is number 1" is:

"Ahead of you!"

:ok:

[Bern Oulli]

Student controllers are taught what the MATS Pt 1 Section 3 Page 2 Para 9 which says:
9.1 The position of an aircraft is to be passed to the pilot at least once on each leg of the circuit.
9.2 Position information for an aircraft making a straight-in approach is to be passed at least once before it commences the final descent.

Note that the phrase "is to be" makes it mandatory.

That of course is the bare minimum required by "The Book". We also teach that, providing the spare capacity exists, number in traffic is useful, a/c type ahead if particularly slow or heavy can give a clue. We also teach that good practice is to give track-miles to touchdown when turning base leg, when turning onto the closing heading, and immediately before QSY to TWR. A good radar controller will be keeping an eye on the Mode C and adjusting the track miles accordingly.

It is to be hoped that on first contact the pilot is informed what sort of approach he will be making e.g. "Vectoring for an ILS approach RWY 26". However, one must accept that when the R/T loading is approaching 100%, the important stuff, like stopping planes banging into each other, takes precedence over the nicities of how far you have to go and what that boring aircraft is you are following. Believe it or not, we do teach that a well informed pilot is less likely to ask questions and is more likely to do what he is told without quibble, thereby making every-one's life easier.

In the interests of PC, any reference to the masculine gender should be taken to include the feminine gender also.

[BOAC]

TIAC - CRR's post said "On first contact pilot instructed to reduce speed/turn/etc.", so the 'listening in' option is not an option - and to suddenly find you are number 5 with no clue given before does change the way we do things. It might even be a turn which significantly shortens the APPARENT track miles - which can be a problem for us.

It would not take even the most stupid of us long to detect a busy sector, I can assure you, and I would hope we all keep Stumm, but the 'unexpected' is always better received when a LITTLE background is given. If there is a reason why I might need to level for a while, or even significantly reduce my ROD, say, at FL100 on descent to,?FL60? (maybe for a cabin pressure problem or whatever), or descend at 240kts all the way from FL330, I would aim to say a brief 'why' to you when I announce it, rather than your having to ask and interrupt my unfinished crossword.:D It will help YOU plan too.

[Lock n' Load]

"Where's our traffic?" is heard by ATC as "why aren't we number 1?" and thus assigned the label whinge.
You already know why you're being vectored because you'll have heard it on first contact with approach. "Vectoring for the ILS" or whatever the approach happens to be, or it'll be in the STAR to "expect vectors". A vector is not just a heading; think back to those vector diagrams you drew in nav training and at school. A vector is a heading at a specified speed. We are not required to tell you where traffic is from which you're separated (except in Canada where we do have to give traffic if your blips will merge at minimum vertical sep).

If you're hoping from a visual approach and you're number 2, by all means ask for the traffic so you can follow it. If you just want to whinge about slowing down or being widened out, try to act your age. :E

[Evil J]

Bern Oulli,

Just out of interest I wonder why it is taught that way. I think most pilots would agree that by the time the base leg turn has been made the descent profile has prety much happend, and range checks are becoming less important, similarly i see little point in giving a range check once the pilot is established (although many of my colleagues do) as the pilot should now be receiving the DME and will know far more accurately (radar being history) how far he has to go than i can tell him.

Personally I will give a range check as soon as possible after first contact on approach and again about 20 nm from touchdown; i may give further checks if i think the a/c is flying an "inappropriate" descent profile.

But quite often the answer to "how many track miles" is " how many do you want"!!!

[Spitoon]

Some common sense is helpful here. If the frequency is going b@lls out, the reason you haven't been told why you're being put on the heading or given a change of level (i.e. a revision to a climb or descent clearance that stops off early) is because the controller probably has little enough time to think never mind tell everyone what the plan is. If it's quieter the controller will probably give you the information - if it's that quiet yopu'll probably go in a straight line wherever you're trying to get to anyway.

In the old days, before TCAS, I can understand that a pilot might have wanted more info but these days the close in situational awareness to avoid a collision is largely provided by TCAS - so I can only conclude that the requests made by pilots for traffic info are made for less significant reasons.

I've been in the ATC business for a good many years and if there's one thing I can promise you it's that controllers do not put aircraft on a heading or stop it off unless there's a good reason. And that reason will almost inevitably be another aircraft or some similar good reason. I can't speak for others but I won't do it because it increases my workload and I'm lazy. The upshot is that even if you ask where the traffic is, and I tell you, it's not going to change anything.

One final thought. If a pilot refuses a clearance that I issue but doesn't say why I'm not going to ask why - I'll assume there's a good reason and sort something else out.

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

I think Spitoon has it about right. Most aircrew recognise when a sector is busy and keep quiet. Similarly, controllers will usually explain if they are instructing something out of the ordinary.

[hooplaa]

Also - don't forget that traffic doesn't necessarily have to be airborne yet but could be still at the holding point in a very long queue!

Spacing via speed control and additonal vectors could also be to meet the towers spacing requirements - balancing the delays for all :ouch:

[Warped Factor]

Bookworm,

So what phraseology would you prefer when you put me on a heading without giving any explanation and I need to understand what you're planning?

In the London area, "thank you for putting me on this heading which will ensure I don't hold up all the much bigger and much faster traffic too much whilst also ensuring I safely reach my intended destination" (and if you're in the Mooney all free of charge as well) :)

Anyone is entitled to ask what their number in the sequence is inbound to Gatwick or Heathrow, it'll be....last. Only joking, only joking :p

BOAC, inbound Gatwick, unless extending the vectoring instead of going once round the hold, it's only required to give track miles on first descent from flight level to altitude (same at Heathrow).

Assuming time available, and there usually should be, would you like a check further back e.g. leave LARCK heading 270 degress, forty miles to go". Would only be a rough guide, more accurate at descent point mentioned above.

WF.

[ATCOJ30]

Had an "interesting" conversation with a visiting E145 FO the other day, who accused ATCOs at my unit of filling-in the empty gaps in the RTF with what he termed "un-necessary info" on aircraft which he deemed to be of no relevance to him.
For example:

1. helos hovering on the grass areas to one side of the RWY
2. aircraft postioning visually behind his a/c, from the downwind position in the visual cct
3. potential TCAS traffic which was 1000 feet separated from him but opposite direction

We routinely pass this info in order to:

a) pre-empt pilots asking what the traffic is and where it is
b) to cover our backsides if the circuit traffic or helos do something stupid
c) prevent silly TCAS reports and unwelcome AIRPROXES caused by pilots sighting the other traffic ands thinking it's closer than it really is (has happened at least three times now)
d) assisting the situational awareness of pilots
e) trying to cover as many unplannedl eventualities as poss (ATCOs v.good at this, pilots???) such as the late go-round, busy flight-deck tryin to sort-out a problem and then the aircraft flies off the centreline, to one side of the runway.

One question for the pilot brigade: when you know you're # 2 on the ILS and you have one ahead (which presemably you can see on TCAS), why do some of you delight in trying to close the gap and eroding the vortex wake/radar spacing)? Bloody-mindedness or do you expect us to impose speed control to 4 miles every time? Just a thought....

[tori chelli]

Evil J

to answer on Bern Oulli's behalf, the "why it's taught like that" is because the College (now known as DAT&S...and no I don't know what that means either) has a duty/responsibility to teach the 'book' before the practical short cuts.
With regard to distance from touchdown transmissions on base leg...it makes a difference if you're 8 miles south of the extended centreline, turning base, aiming at 16 mile final with potentially 24 miles to run which (may) be closed up by a tighter vector on base leg. TCAS won't tell you that...and incidentally, when the turn to intercept is given, students are told the ILS/DME will kick in and distance from touchdown information is superfluous.

Hope you realise Bern & his colleagues are trying to prepare the guys who (might) pay for your pension as best they can.

Tori

[brain fade]

ATCO J30
Re lack of Brevity on your stations VHF
heres a bit of a transcript from the other day.

Us. 'ABC123 taxi'
BRS Twr 'ABC 123 taxi G2' ok so far

Us. 'ABC123 G2' ie may we proceed?
Twr. 'pass your msg'
Us 'ABC 123 just to let you know we are at G2'
Twr 'Roger hold at G2' Which is what we are doing!
Us ' Hold at G2' have to read back an instruction.

Twr 'ABC 123 taxi G1'
Us ' ABC 123 taxi to G1'. ok

Twr 'ABC 123 taxi to G1, hold short of the runway. after departure its standard noise then a left turn to WOTAN'
Us (read it back)

ATCO can you spot any superflous RT in this? I think this is the sort of waffle your fo was on about!

I sympatise with point b) in your post and I'm sure thats why you do a lot of it but......... brevity is important in rt. It's not a luxury. transmissions must be kept as short as possible!

In the horrible mid air twixt that DHL and the -154 it was not possible for the DHL crew to get out their vital 'TCAS descent' call due to the freq being busy. Had they been able to get the call out the accident may have been avoided.

Keep it brief. If it dont need saying.... Don't say it!

[Standard Noise]

brain fade - "Keep it brief. If it don't need saying.... Don't say it!" mmm, indeed.

Us "ABC123 at G2" - A bit superfluous. We sit in a little room with 12 ft high glass windows and guess what, we can see you at G2!
The reason you are held there is so you don't interfere with the glide path signal. If it's possible to hold you at G1, then we'll instruct you to taxy to G1. So telling us you've reached G2 is, in itself, a waste of r/t time.:hmm: That whole paragraph of your post is about wasted r/t initiated by a pilot.

So, as I quoted at the beginning of my post, "If it don't need saying.... Don't say it!";)

[Spitoon]

brain, you seem to be on a one man crusade against BRS. You ask if there is any superflous R/T in you transcript - as it is written down by your good self there is and it's akin to "where's our traffic" referred to in the original post on this thread.

Why did you introduce an unnecessary call at G2. I would refer you to my earlier post in this thread - controllers don't do things for no reason. And G2 is not there for no reason. I would hazard a guess that its proximity to the 09 glidepath means that it is there to protect the GP signal in certain circumstances like, oh, I don't know, maybe an aircraft is using the ILS. Maybe I'm wrong - but there will be a good reason why you were held there. And when you were able to continue to G1 I'm sure the controller wasted no time in clearing you to continue.

You want to know why you were told to hold short. It's because you were being given a departure clearance but you were not yet cleared to line-up. Maybe you understood this. Maybe you've never lined up on a runway without a clearance - but trust me, if you did, you wouldn't be the first.

Why don't you give BRS a break and try to understand why they do the things they do. Better still, though it pains me to say it, why don't you get on with flying your aeroplane and let the controllers do the stuff that they know about.

[Edited simply to say that Standard got there first - and hey, I was right about G2!]

[tobzalp]

I always find if humorous that I never get asked a question when track shortening a pilot but as soon as you slow them some way they want to know everything....

[brain fade]

I put in the bit about 'G2' for because the EZY we were waiting for (to land) looked to be so far out that perhaps we could have been allowed to go. Believe me, at CDG, we would have been away!

I realise that G2 protects the ILS.

I notice that neither Spitoon or Standard commented on the " taxi to golf one, hold short of the runway. after departure its a standard noise, then a left turn for WOTAN" call from ATC. Why not boys?

Every single element of that call was either repetion of a clearance or (in the case of noise) SOP:{

I also note that although you point out (correctly) that our call 'holding at G2' was plainly a prompt, and therefore unrequired (except to remind ATC that we we were willing and able to go), you make no mention of my wider point about brevity.

There are real implications here about the use of VHF comms which are certainly not lost at 'busy' airports, or on the airways where a check in frequently elicits the reply 'ABC123 Roger'. Ever heard that at BRS?

'Brevity' at BRS is definately one of your 'growth areas'. If you disagree with that you need to get out more!

I may as well say that we all put in words that we (me too) could miss out, but at BRS it's particularly bad.

It's not a crusade, and I like going into Bristol.

Really tho, I know it was really quiet for ages, but it's got a lot busier in the last few years, and I think it's about time you raised your game.

ATCOJ30 what is all this crap about 'threshold elevation' anyway? I've not heard it on VHF or ATIS at any UK airport (OK I've not been to them all) ,but really, on EVERY approach?

I think you are a nice bunch. You would do better if you simply copied ATC practice at other airports and ditched your special 'Brizzol' stuff, both on the ATIS & the VHF:ok:

Remember it's a simplex net. Any one tx denies the net to all users

[Lock n' Load]

Quote from brainfade (who is anti-EDI as well as anti-BRS)...
"I put in the bit about 'G2' for because the EZY we were waiting for (to land) looked to be so far out that perhaps we could have been allowed to go. Believe me, at CDG, we would have been away!"

Tower controllers judge gaps every single working day, in many cases several hundred times every working day. Guess what? Most of them are pretty good at it. Often, a gap that looks usable to a pilot isn't, sometimes gue to simple visual perspective and sometimes because there's a reason that can't be seen from the cockpit. That could be slower departed traffic ahead, overflights crossing the departure path, too much traffic on the sector to which departures will be handed over, the list goes on.
Most tower controllers derive great satifaction from firing off departures as quickly as safely possible, and in the smallest usable gaps between arrivals (I certainly did!) so calling when you're at the hold, and can be seen perfectly well by TWR who has a vested interest in getting you airborne and off his frequency ASAP, is utterly superfluous.

[Gonzo]

I notice that neither Spitoon or Standard commented on the " taxi to golf one, hold short of the runway. after departure its a standard noise, then a left turn for WOTAN" call from ATC. Why not boys?

What's the problem with it? It is safe. UK ATCOs are taught that if one amends or passes a departure clearance, and the a/c is approaching a runway, then 'hold position, after departure.........' or 'hold short of runway xx/at holding point, after departure....' should be added, to avoid the departure instructions being misinterpreted as a take off clearance.

I see LnL has added some reasons why you might not get away when you think you ought to. Also, bear in mind that every departure from BRS requires a release (though I stand to be corrected!) from approach (and/or maybe Cardiff as well).

[Standard Noise]

Gonzo yep, you're half right, every IFR dep requires a release from radar, and the problem is, we have to obtain that before we taxy an a/c from G2 to G1.
Only if we have the release, can we be sure of getting the a/c away. No point in taxiing someone past G2 and not being able to get the release and then causing a go around because the one on the ILS isn't happy at getting G/P fluctuations at a critical phase of landing.
BTW, brain fade, that explains why we sometimes ask the inbound if they are visual, and if they say yes, then we taxy you forward to G1 and explain to the inbound that they may get G/P fluctuations due to your prescence at G1. Oh, sorry, would that be a lack of brevity on the r/t?:rolleyes: Ah well, all in the name of using the 5 mile gap.
Right now brain fade, if we're on the subject of looking at each others' working practices, then I'm going to say something that may annoy you. Some of the pilots here at Bristol and in particular the E145 jockeys really do need to raise their game a bit. I used to work at Belfast City, where on 22, we had a backtrack for every dep. Quite often, we would have the Embraers backtracking 500 metres or so, turning and rolling, all in a tiny 6 mile gap. It worked! When I came here to Bristol, I was told that I'd be lucky to get any Embraer to accept a dep when there was a 5 mile gap. I was shocked to say the least, considering there is no backtrack on 27 and only a 250 metre taxy from G2 to the 09 threshold. So if we're looking for improvements, tell me why pilots on all the types based at or operating into BHD can use 6 mile gaps with a backtrack of 500m but at Bristol, they can't with no backtrack or only a 250m taxy???????
See, I knew you wouldn't like that one.
Oh, and another thing, when you are ready for departure, it's customary to inform the tower by saying "ABC123 ready for departure", not "ABC123 holding at G2."
There's not one of us ATCO's here at Bristol that isn't committed to using every gap we can for departures. Pity we can't say the same for the pilots who use this airport.:mad:
As for "taxy to G1, hold short of the runway. After departure standard noise, then a left turn to WOT", Gonzo is correct, there's nothing wrong with that. We get hammered by our own management and the Campaign Against Aviation when there is a runway incursion, even if it's not our fault, so we tend to use this phrase, or say "hold position....." then give the release. Point is, some pilots think that once they've been told "after departure......" they think it's some hidden instruction to line up, or even worse, they say "after dep std noise ABC123 cleared take off." And yes, I've had that read back to me more than once here at Bristol. Maybe it's an English thing!?:confused:

Finally, and only cos I'm off home soon, " you would do better if you simply copied ATC practice at other airports and ditched you special Brizzol stuff....."
Hey, the CAA gives us some books (MATS pt 1/ UK AIP/ CAP670 etc etc) and we have to work within the framework of said publications. We do. End of.

Clear as mud?:suspect:

Oh yeah, just one final thought.......
If you don\'t think we\'re much kop here at Bristol, get yerself of down the nearest friendly ATC college and get a licence. Then we\'ll see what your made of! Failing that why not ask for a transfer?:confused: :rolleyes:

[Spitoon]

From Brain I notice that neither Spitoon or Standard commented on the " taxi to golf one, hold short of the runway. after departure its a standard noise, then a left turn for WOTAN" call from ATC. Why not boys?
From SpittyYou want to know why you were told to hold short. It's because you were being given a departure clearance but you were not yet cleared to line-up. Maybe you understood this. Maybe you've never lined up on a runway without a clearance - but trust me, if you did, you wouldn't be the first.
From the Manual of Air Traffic Services Part 1After an aircraft has been instructed to hold clear of the runway and a clearance message is passed which might be misinterpreted as permission to take-off, the clearance shall be prefixed with an instruction to hold position.
And yes, the day I get my ATPL I might try to tell a pilot how he should fly his aircraft. When Brain gets a controllers' licence I might have some time to debate the niceties of how to control more than one aeroplane. In the meantime....

[Standard Noise]

Spitoon - nah, don't wait til you get an ATPL, just tell 'em what they should be doing, works for me!
If bf thinks he could do any better than you or I, then let him try, if he's got the balls...........................oh, and his own 'yellow peril' of course.

[eyeinthesky]

Standard Noise:

I agree with almost everything you say, apart from:

"BTW, brain fade, that explains why we sometimes ask the inbound if they are visual, and if they say yes, then we taxy you forward to G1 and explain to the inbound that they may get G/P fluctuations due to your prescence at G1. "

As someone who operates on both sides of the gulf that seems to have opened up on this subject, I would argue that once I am visual with the runway and/or the PAPIs, then glidepath fluctuations are irrelevant, as I am using the eyeball and not the ILS to judge my flightpath. Thus I would suggest that your explanation to the inbound might be superfluous, but no more so than a call to report at a holding point which is visible to the Tower!

1-1 then...?!

[brain fade]

hmmm.....
Just to be clear. Not saying BRS unsafe or 'unprofessional'.
just saying a lot of clearances are repeated. Any denials?
I also acknowledge what you say re some pilots taking to long to go after saying 'ready'. thats poor.

If you guys at BRS don't agree with me that there is a lot of verbal diarrhoea (is that how you spell it?) on the freq then frankly you've got your heads in the sand, my luvvers! Every pilot I know at BRS would be too polite to tell you, but not me as you can see!

There has to be a limit tho' to my moaning, so it's about time I shut the **** up :{

I've no wish to be an air trafficker, sooner be a drug trafficker, the whole ATC plot gives me the willies, but in a previous life I was a B1 signaller in HM forces and I fuggin hate pish poor sloppy voice procedure on the VHF.

As someone said to me once, "bad service is only a problem if you accept it".

The VP at BRS, is particularly 'wordy' and frankly if you were as busy as you may well be in a few years, you'd brush it up.

I'm not going on about this forever, so ignore my comments if you want.:rolleyes:

Brevity is important in comms. Are you really saying you could miss out nothing?

[Data Dad]

Brain Fade


ATCOJ30 what is all this crap about 'threshold elevation' anyway? I've not heard it on VHF or ATIS at any UK airport (OK I've not been to them all) ,but really, on EVERY approach?


From MATS Part 1....

7.3.5 If it is known that a particular company uses, or a pilot has clearly indicated that he will use, QNH during the final approach the controller may omit QFE and substitute QNH and aerodrome elevation or if appropriate, the threshold elevation in RTF messages.

Up here at the Ice Station the Threshold Elevation of the runway in use is included in the ATIS - when Pontius was a pilot and 90% of our customers used QFE we used to pass the appropriate figure to the 10% that landed using QNH - now the world has changed and nearly everbody uses QNH the figure goes on the ATIS to save constant repetition.


Re: Standard Noise's comments on E145's...

Embraer Regional Jets were the prompt for my signature :)

DD

"I cleared you for take off, I didn't give you squatters rights!"

[brain fade]

Data
Ta. How come it's not on the ATIS or passed by voice at most airports then?

[Standard Noise]

Right, let's have another go then................
eyeinthesky- unfortunately, everything we do is regulated by the Campaign Against Aviation, and these nice chaps just love to jump on the poor overworked ATCO when something goes wrong (whether it's the ATCO's fault or not). Therfore, we indulge in a favourite hobby of ours, it's called 'back-covering'. Thus the reason why we say "........you may experience some glide path fluctuations......." Just cos a pilot claims he's visual, doesn't mean he's not got one eye on the G/P indications. We just have to legislate for the lowest common denominator (you know the sort, pilots who moan about traffic in the circuit being too close, despite being in class D and being passed the appropriate tfc info).
brain fade - "just saying that a lot of clearances are repeated. Any denials?"
No, I'm not denying it, but as I said above, we have to legislate for the lowest common denominator, which, quite often, can be the 'professional' smartie tube drivers rather than the ppl students.

DD - which airport is it that has the threshold elevation on their Pamos? Am I right in saying it's Edinburgh?

[brain fade]

Standard
This 'back covering' of which you speak, is at the bottom of a lot of this. It's no excuse tho.
Many airports (and the en route folk) don't have the time to do such a thorough job on the back covering as you guys at quieter airports like BRS. therefore they rely simply on good practice.

Try it.;)

[Standard Noise]

S'not my good practice I'm relying on, it's yours!:ok:

And until the Campaign Against Atco's leave us be to get on with it, it will remain our favourite hobby.

[brain fade]

Standard.
I like you. You're a feckin master at missing the point tho.:{

[Data Dad]

How come it's not on the ATIS or passed by voice at most airports then?

I have no idea! Possibly yet another piece of inconsistant "rule making" by our Regulators......

DD

[Standard Noise]

Look, in the last two shifts of this cycle (quiet nightshifts), I've had a heading of 275 read back as 270 and an altitude of 2500' read back as 2000'. Both times by 'professional' smartie tube drivers. When you guys start to get it 100% right, then we'll be able to relax with the repetitive back covering clearances. Another favourite which has happened more than once in my last 6 duties, has been "ABC123 taxy to holding point G2."
"ABC123 taxying to G1" Mon Dieu!!!!!!

Is English not your first language? I know I grew up in NI, but my accent isn't that strong !:hmm:

[brain fade]

As long as people issue and read back instructions, there going to be mistakes. Doesn't mean you have to say everything twice!

You're missing the point again my babber!:rolleyes:

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

Any chance of resolving this squabble over a coffee somewhere?

[Evil J]

Where i work (regional airport similar size to BRS) we neither pass the elevation (except for an SRA) by RT or on the atis, and I have never been asked for it.

Personally I think passsing it to a commercial aircraft is tantamount to telling em the final approach track or ILS frequency??? Correct me if I'm wrong here pilots, but arent most of you landing ref the rad alt these days anyway, and pressumeably its a requirement to have the appropraite plate in front of you anyway which has all that info on it. And even the aircraft that dont have rad alts have still never asked me for the elevation.

I'm not having a pop at anyone who does it(and certainly dont want this to degenerate into another Bristol slagging exercise), as lots of places ive flown to do pass the elev, my point is that if we dont pass it, and no one has every complained or said we should...is it really necessary???

[Standard Noise]

WBS - yep, we probably could resolve it over a coffee somewhere, but I don't see the point.:p

brain fade - every time you have asked a question (on any Anti-Bristol thread), I have answered it to the best of my abilities, this isn't some conspiracy to evade answers. Even other ATCO's from other units have answered some of your questions but you're still not satisfied. I'm beginning to think you're suffering from broken pencil syndrome............................pointless.:bored:

[ayrprox]

i dont mind pilots asking where their traffic is when i'm not busy. What does annoy the hell out of me is when the pilot then questions my instruction because he thinks he can overtake the other or asks why he's slowing down and not the other guy.
Here's a tip if we think you can be no1 we'll bloody well put you no.1. if we don't we won't. Its not a popularity contest or a race it just a fact. If you are landing at the same airport as the one in front and we don't think you're going to overtake we will slow you down to maintain the gap or put you on a heading to engineer a gap and if we're not busy we may even explain that to you but please dont assume that because the r/t has gaps that we are doing this for the hell of it.
and as a final note, questioning my judgement as to the best way of controlling the aircraft in my sector at that moment is not going to increase the chances of my changing my mind.
Thanks for listening
Rant over

[brain fade]

Ayrprox
Can't speak for anyone else but the only time I ask what number we are is when I'm hoping we're no 1 so I can ask for a visual!

standard.
I prefer tea. i'll come and see you when I get the chance. Your'e right tho, it is a bit pointless asking you and I agree you've made the best job of trying to answer that you can. It's also plain that I still don't know why you do the silly warnings and I still don't know why you do the 'threshold elev' calls either. i shall seek enlightenment elsewhere but I'd have thought, since it's your practice, that you'd be well placed to know why you do it??
BF wrong again!




Evil J
I agree. It's a bit like being asked if you've remembered to put the wheels down.

[250 kts]

And even when you know where the traffic is on TCAS you STILL ask for further descent. eg "AAA123 approaching FL310 requesting lower"

"AAA123 maintain FL310 traffic just below you"

"Yes we've got it on TCAS"

Only happened a few times over the winter months but for Gods sake don't make a habit of it during the summer. Anyone who does will go right to the back of the queue.;) ;)

[Spitoon]

OK, things have moved on a bit - but not necessarily for the better.

brain, you ask why the threshold elevation is put on the ATIS. Well, here goes my take on it again. BRS IS ON TOP OF A 600ft HILL. If a pilot gets something wrong there's every possibility that the aeroplane will make a dent in the side of the hill before the pilot gets a chance to spot his error. Whilst I respect your experience and professionalism, as Standard points out, not all pilots are as good as you and the belt and braces stuff is for their benefit. Be kind and put up with a bit more info than you need for the benefit of those less fortunate than yourself.

Oh, and

Can't speak for anyone else but the only time I ask what number we are is when I'm hoping we're no 1 so I can ask for a visual! in the interests of brevity and good use of R/T time, why not say "ABC123 has the field in sight and happy to take a visual approach". This will save the controller having to guess why you're asking that question - that we've established is of little value - and clearly indicates your wishes.

Out.

[West Coast]

250Kts posted

"And even when you know where the traffic is on TCAS you STILL ask for further descent. eg "AAA123 approaching FL310 requesting lower"

This came up here on the ATC section of the prune a number of months ago. I as a pilot would wait till obvious TCAS conflictions were gone until making a request. I was told by a controllers not to wait, as the sooner they know about my request, the sooner they can plan and act upon it. Just know your rant isn't shared by all your controller brethern.

[250 kts]

Not a rant. Just reporting levelling at FL310 would suffice. My attention will then be drawn to it for further action.

[Scott Voigt]

This has been GREAT fun to watch <G>... Pilots are indeed for the most part a clueless bunch when it comes to ATC... I too am a pilot and I teach pilots, so the things that I hear in class is quite interesting. Then the comments after putting said pilots through radar simulator is also quite interesting... It ought to be a requirement...

regards

Scott

[West Coast]

Just as controllers should be required to sit in the sim and run a practice QRH on an electrical fire to get an idea of what we are up against.

[BALIX]

Just as controllers should be required to sit in the sim and run a practice QRH on an electrical fire to get an idea of what we are up against

Hey, I'm game, is anyone else???

Seriously, as has been said numerous times whenever debates like this crop up, pilot/ATCO liason should be positively encouraged by our respective employers. It is fine talking about it on Proon but nothing beats experiencing how the other half live in the flesh, as it were. We need regular fam flights. You guys need to plug in on sectors. Might just make us appreciate what the other is has to deal with.

[flower]

Hear hear Balix,
About time we got back into Fam flights and Pilots visits.
I was lucky a few years ago to go to Cranebank and sit in the simulator for several hours with a crew whilst they did there 6 monthly check. I did the ATC RT for them and observed as they went through numerous emergency drills. It was possibly the best emergency training I could have experienced.

I am hoping to set up simulator runs at Cardiff for locally based airline crews this year and I know other units do it as well. The more we understand each others jobs the better for us all.

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

As has been said earlier, when I get the R/T time, I will pass the reason for the vector and the relevant traffic to the pilot. More often than not, if I am vectoring I don't have time, and the only time I will pass traffic is when I want the aircraft involved to know about each other so as to adjust rates of climb and descent to try and avoid a superfluous RA.

Just a tip (especially to the Speedbird moron who flew into Abu Dhabi a while ago), if you are 6 NM behind and 30 Kts faster than the preceding traffic and you have 20 minutes to touchdown, yes you could get your nose in front at some point in your descent. BUT, I have a choice of slowing you and maybe giving you a little turn, and getting my ten (ie. an adjustment of 4 NM) and all the while being able to give unrestricted descent to both aircraft. The alternative (the preferred one for whinging "but we are faster than him, it's not fair" poms) is to restrict the following aircrafts descent, and push down the preceding traffic early, while I try and get the following traffic in front, then vector the crap and slam the brakes on the front aircraft, so I can get my ten (ie. an adjustment of 16 NM).

Bottom line, someone has to be number one and someone has to be number last. The world isn't out to get you if you are number last, and whether you understand why you are number last or not, you will still be number last. Moaning about where and why you are where you are in the sequence, will only succeed in you and your airline's fellow crew members, being number last all the more often.

[DFC]

brain, you ask why the threshold elevation is put on the ATIS. Well, here goes my take on it again. BRS IS ON TOP OF A 600ft HILL. If a pilot gets something wrong there's every possibility that the aeroplane will make a dent in the side of the hill before the pilot gets a chance to spot his error.........

Pilots are very aware of what the airfield/threshold elevation is and these days the transmission of this information is no longer of any benefit.

If a pilot is making an instrument approach, they will make a missed approach at the DA/MDA. The airfield elevation or the passing of that information makes little difference because;

a) The most likey reason for hitting the hill is going below minima

b) The next most likely is not setting the correct QNH or QFE or worse still setting QNH and using an D/MDH i.e. flying into Bristol and trying to descend to 200ft AMSL on an ILS with QNH set.

In those cases knowing that the hill is 600ft high makes no difference because the pilot thinks they are above it.

It is ironic that the field elevation is not passed on departure when QNH is always used and things like 1000ft checks are made at 1000ft ASFC not AMSL.

We have a bug on our altimeter set to the airfield elevation prior to approach and prior to departure not to mention the fact that it is on every chart we have.

I can imaging the guy at Innsbruck saying in a very camp voice.....the runway elevation is xxxx and we have 6000ft hills here here and here and 10000ft hills there there and there now don't go catching your little bottom on any.

On the ILS protection - don't assume that just cause the pilot is visual that protection is no longer required - the aircraft may still be completing an autoland for training or currency or equipment check.

Regards,

DFC

PS British Midland sims in Stockley Park have had lots of guys over from West Drayton in the past and made return visits. I think that the only problem controllers had with it was that they had to do it on their own time.

[atcea.com]

Years ago I worked at Denver Center. We began using a metering program that assigned crossing times at fixes about 150 miles from the airport. We worked a "4 post", so the computer would look at traffic over Arizona, Utah, Nebraska and Kansas and set up the arrival order. As a result, the aircraft arriving from, say, the southeast might be "following" an aircraft from the northwest.

See how it works?

Frequently pilots, when slowed to meet a metering time, would ask, "Where's my traffic?" Try to explain to a guy in western Nebraska that his traffic is just east of Salt Lake City, Utah.

The better informed the pilot is, the more cooperative he'll be - usually - but some situations are too complicated to explain on frequency.
---
ATC 24/7 (http://atcea.com)

[250 kts]

Ah sorry West Coast, i hadn't realised that you need continuous descent because you now have an electrical fire. You only had to say.

Yes we do need fam flights just as we need you guys to visit the ATC units. But it doesn't change the fact that if I haven't got the required separation you ain't getting the clearance.

[Scott Voigt]

West Coast;

I agree, controllers should be able to find out MORE of what goes on on the other side... In fact, next week that is going to be one of the discussions that I have on the panel that I am on for Communicating for Safety. It ought to be an interesting discussion to say the least...

later

Scott

[doody2000]

DFC,

As a mil controller at West Drayton, (recently passed NATS interview awaiting class 1 medical and security clearance) I would be really interested in visiting the British Midland simulator.

Do you have any contacts there or an email address I can go on.

PM me if you have.

Regards

Doody

[Bern Oulli]

tori chelli DAT&S = Department of ATC Training & Simulation. Or something like that.
Who dreams these up?

[BEXIL160]

That'll be the College and the EU then, Bern?

rgds BEX:ok:

[shack]

You are showing your age Bex--it was a School when Bern and I went through it!!

[cdb]

Just as controllers should be required to sit in the sim and run a practice QRH on an electrical fire to get an idea of what we are up against

Would love to! I think you'll find most controllers would be interested. Sort it, and we'll turn up.

On the other hand, pilots have ALWAYS been welcome to visit us, and we're constantly reminding you all on here. But when was the last time I saw an ATPL holder visit the centre? Never, that's when.

PS We get 15 hours flying training (used to be more) and many hours of lectures (and part of several exams) on aircraft characteristics, physics of flight etc. How much does a CPL holder have to learn about ATC?

[055166k]

Given that the aircraft commander is ultimately responsible for the safety of his aircraft and passengers, I don't find the request at all offensive. Its all too easy to think of ATC as a real-life video game....there are real people on the other end of the radio!
With sectorisation and procedures in use to-day it is quite likely that some of the conflicting traffic may be on a different freq, and it is not always possible for the pilot to be situation-aware from R/T traffic.....and more so when he/she has just checked in.

[West Coast]

"PS We get 15 hours flying training (used to be more) and many hours of lectures (and part of several exams) on aircraft characteristics, physics of flight etc. How much does a CPL holder have to learn about ATC?"

ATC is in the service industry, here to provide a product to pilots not the other way around. That said, pilots don't know as much about the ATC system as we could. However the nature of the relationship requires you know more about my needs than me of yours.

[Scott Voigt]

West Coast;

Actually we are more a Safety Industry ie fire service etc... We are here to move aircraft first of all safely and then expeditiously. All the other stuff has always been on a as time permits basis. Our job is to safely move aircraft from point a to b, but we are not here to answer to every whim as many feel. Do we try to do what we can when we can? Certainly we do, that is what we all try to do, but if things are a bit busy for us, we will load shed all the nice stuff that many pilots expect or sometimes even demand.

regards

Scott

[West Coast]

After thinking about it, your correct, more in common with the field of safety. Still providing a service however. I have no heartburn with not approving direct or answering all the ride requests, etc.

[Fly Through]

Whilst the Septics are here......;)
Why is there sooo many ride reports/requests here.....especially from Minibus pilots?

I have noticed that US pilots (Most not all) in Canada seem a bit behind the drag curve when it comes to the RT. Surely when they fly around places like ORD they have to be alert and responsive? My instructors insist I only give American pilots one instruction at once or they won't get it, this has been proved by experience.

We had a similar problem with Emirates pilots in Dubai, relaxing a little too much because "ahh its only Dubai, it's not that busy". Speaking of Dubai, I know a simulator swap was arranged and it went down real well with the few who were involved but sadly it fell by the wayside due to lack of staff.

Rgds FT

PS. This ain't Yank bashing before anyone starts.......I'm marrying one!!

[divingduck]

Over here in the sandpit, we seem to have this problem mainly in the enroute phase of flight.

Usually when someone doesn't get the level of their choice.

And no, to all you pilots out there, we haven't chopped you off at a level for controller amusement.
When it's busy asking who is the traffic stopping me getting the level of my choice, what is his destination, can I speed up or slow down etc etc isn't going to help the situation.

I understand that you all would like to get your planned levels, but when several aircraft from the same company depart with minimum runway spacing, going into procedural airspace, I'm here to tell you, you will NOT get the same level!

So either give a bit of thought to your departure times, or liase amongst yourselves to decide who wants what, BEFORE you enter our patch. (lets not forget there are other users apart from yourselves).

Muscat is between the rock and the hard place. UAE at one end, Tehran, Karachi and Bombay at the other.

As someone said previously, the conflicting traffic in some cases is not within a bulls roar of where you are now....he will be in 40 minutes though.

Right, off to work!

[UnderRadarControl]

However the nature of the relationship requires you know more about my needs than me of yours.

If this were the case, a ton of pointless unnecessary questions wouldn't be asked. If some of you had a cat's notion of what exactly we do during a shift it would be great.... :sad:

But when was the last time I saw an ATPL holder visit the centre? Never, that's when.

At the last station I worked at, we made simulator time available together with a station visit so we could try and make a pilot informed about what we do - needless to say the project was shelved as nobody was interested. Busy filing deficiency reports instead :yuk:

[Tower Ranger]

Where`s your traffic?

He`s just taxying past stand 5 to fit into the 8 mile gap I`ve just made which you seem determined to close by not complying with the speed control I gave you 12miles ago so welcome to the world of extra track miles!

[Jerricho]

However the nature of the relationship requires you know more about my needs than me of yours.

And Westy, this isn't a go at you mate, but as some of my compatriots here have highlighted, we issue control instructions for our needs (and procedures), not for the hell of it.

[West Coast]

Jerricho

No offense taken. I agree with your statement, but your still here to provide a service to the pilot are you not? If I was up because you were down there, I would have a general knowledge of your needs, limitations, etc. BTW, I have been up there because your down there. Doing practice ground controlled approaches for student training. I asked what they wanted, needed, expected and didn't want of me of me before I launched every time.

Fly through

Your phraseology is different than what I'm used to hearing. Not much, but enough that sometimes I digest it slower than what I'm used to hearing rapid fire in the states. If I do need it twice, so be it. I would rather clarify it than assume and dick it up. What's up with having to end all transmissions up there?

[En-Rooter]

In our part of the world, they only let pilots in to have a look when you're far from busy, pretty useless really:ok:

[scrubed]

If I was up because you were down there......I have been up there because your down there WTF....????? :confused:



Hey it's interesting how CUR takes a characteristic shot at pilots then, despite the thread actually turning into a productive exchange (or maybe because of it) she doesn't return to take part in the discussion.

When I was in the RAAF, the studs gradually picked up from the instructors a disdain for ATC, mainly civvy, which our instructors had picked up, themselves in turn, when students years before. It wasn't actively encouraged but it sure wasn't discouraged.

We didn't know why, we just noticed it, and being young, impressionable and pilots, not to mention cool and good-looking, we thought it was funny and carried it on.

Dunno what it's like these days in the RAAF but the relationship is a lot better outside in the civvy world.

A bit of extra info, when time is available, goes a long way to developing SA, as already mentioned. Even the best ATC occasionally make mistakes and it isn't unheard of for a pilot to point it out.

Just because pilots ask for the info doesn't mean ATCOs should develop an obsession with trying to put them off asking, like CUR obviously has. It's like a pilot saying:

"Require HDG ###" and adding: "for weather 1-0 ahead."

Usually the guy's gonna turn anyway and the ATCO might just think to himself, "Hmmm. If there's weather there, maybe I should vector the next tool around it, too."

What's the prob.............. :cool:



I like ATCOs because they are pseudo-sharps who are generally fatter than pilots, can afford to buy more beer than engos and don't provide real competition for the moisties at our parties.

I even like you, CUR, and you too, Jizzmacho!

:ok:

[Jerricho]

A bit of extra info, when time is available, goes a long way to developing SA

Mate, couldn't agree more. I'm a huge fan of drivers who know what's going on, and when it gets busy are fully prepared to help out as much as possible (and the occasional little prompt is we're kept them a little high or fast without letting them know the reason) ;)

[scrubed]

Hey that's just a little challenge. Get high? Can we get down without resorting to popping the boards???

Nowadays the above is an unpopular sentiment because the desk-bounds have brain-washed all pilates into thinking if you're enjoying yourself you are being irresponsible.

In the mundane life of an airline pilot, I find I get a certain amount of satisfaction from working wiv an ATCO who sounds like he knows what he's doing and keeps us in the loop without even having to spell it out.

Even more so is he's a sexy-sounding she with a French accent because I'm basically a sexist.

Oh and I'm also greedy.

:}

Some friends of mine used to let me sit in the tower and record the ATIS - with suitable retarded comments added by me.

Also, I was allowed to occasionally work the GND freq which I enjoyed. It seemed like a fun job.

[eastern wiseguy]

Also, I was allowed to occasionally work the GND freq which I enjoyed

Where was that? (like you're going to say)
and what licence did you use ?:yuk:

[scrubed]

It was at a RAAF base (Willy) and I used my poetic licence due lack of any other.

Unless my R/T licence counts.......

[Jerricho]

An, the biggest Willy by the sea ;)

[tobzalp]

I am fairly sure that an ATC qualification is not required to work Willy positions. Or so it seems.