VOR Approach Phraseology

[Port Strobe]

Hi there, I'd like to ask a quick question to any ATCOs or people that know better than I regarding procedural phraseology. On Friday at GLA the procedure in use was the VOR/DME 05, with radar vectors to intercept the inbound course, which was 044M. Now the phraseology used after turning them onto a heading of around North was "report established on the inbound 044 radial". I know what they mean, they know what they mean so there's no operational issue there, but the aircraft are really calling established inbound on the 224 radial. Does this phraseology come about because of possibly ambiguity with foreign crews perhaps in case of language mix ups? I know nobody has said the 044 radial either, they used the phrase "inbound 044 radial", but I'm just interested to know why the textbook definition as such isn't used. Please don't take this as criticism in any way, I'm merely curious to know why things are different to how I'd have imagined it.

Thanks for any replies

[mcdhu]

I would have thought the term ''Final Approach track'' takes all the ambiguity out of the situation.
CAP413 is less than helpful about this particular circumstance.

Perhaps the ATCer's manual will have something to say?

Cheers all,
mcdhu

[Chilli Monster]

As you say, the wording is incorrect and therefore shouldn't be used.

Funnily enough there's no laid down phraseology in the MATS pt.1 for VOR approaches. However, giving out the radial when it's not really necessary (the pilot will be operating from an Approach Plate after all) is rife with possibilities for misunderstanding. If comms are poor it might be misheard, and taken as an approval to depart from the published procedure on a totally different radial.

I would use the phraseology "Report established inbound on the Final Approach Track" - it's correct from the ATC point of view, and leaves the interpretation of the approach up to the crew - again the correct division of responsibility.

Having said that - should DF indications show that there's a possibility the aircraft was displaced from the correct path after reporting established then obviously I would query it. However, and again to stop the "wrong way radial" confusion then I think I would use the phrase "Confirm established on the 044 TRACK inbound" - again alleviating any possibility of radial confusion.

[Spitoon]

Well I always use 'Final Approach Track' or 'Inbound Track' - works for NDB approaches too.

[ATCO Two]

On Thames Radar, when using the Biggin Hill VOR/DME approach, we usually just say, "Report established on the inbound radial."

[055166k]

If the situation was as you describe it, the instruction was wrong; end of story! You shouldn't have to guess what the meaning of an instruction is, your own interpretation is spot-on.
Reason could be lack of familiarity with seldom-used procedure, poor training, incompetence, or just failure of the "system" to provide controllers with adequate guidance.
Now do you see why we need Fam Flights!

[2 sheds]

I'm with 055166k.

Why complicate things by even mentioning the radial? If the pilot has been briefer for vectoring for a VOR approach, he will have the appropriate chart.

Of course, this "reciprocal terminology" should be entirely unnecessary. Why the term radial was ever invented, Lord only knows. What is wrong with the perfectly standard navigational terms, "bearing (from)" and "track (to or from)"?

[speedbirdzerozeroone]

Be careful PS it sound’s like you might be illegally ‘sharing’ facts you heard on a scanner, and apparently that’s just not cricket……!

Great question though.

001

(this is how it should be!)

[benedictus]

I was one of the approach radar controllers at GLA on Friday, and to my knowledge, not one of us (at least in the afternoon) said "report established on the inbound 044 radial".
The standard phrase we use for the VOR/DME approach (which is not uncommon to do at EGPF) is "Turn left / right heading xxx, report established inbound runway 05"

If it happened in the morning, it is possible that they were doing some training and the trainee had looked at the plates and seen 044 as the inbound track and got a little confused but no doubt this was pointed out by the mentor.

[Port Strobe]

Thanks very much to all those that replied, I have the answer to my question now. Benedictus it was around 1600(L) I was listening. I think this topic would be best left now because I don't want it to turn into any form of "you said this" and "we said that" exchange. Do not for one minute think I'm trying to pick faults in the service you guys provide, not just at GLA but all over the country, it was just a question that popped into my head that CAP413 couldn't asnwer.

Thanks again

[tori chelli]

i'm with Chilli, Spitoon & ATCO 2 on this one. At Cranfield, the VOR procedure was often used, and "established on the radial"(by inference the inbound radial) or "established on the Final Approach Track" were the most favoured phrases.

Benedictus probably hits the nail on the head when he/she points out that a trainee may have been involved and the confusion of radial from / track to is one that has confused many a trainee ATCO and aspiring IMC/IR pilot...why we persevere with these deliberately confusing semantics is something that has often puzzled me. I suspect it's so we can keep it 'in the family' and charge our high fees ;) :D :D

Tori