Identing before asked -

[Hufty]

On departure from EDI on handover, Scottish always ask us to IDENT prior to being cleared above the stop altitude for the SID. Some people are in the habit of hitting ident on handover in anticipation of being asked, but is this an annoyance to you guys or does it really make any difference??

Hufty.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

There's another thread dealing with a similar question. Pilots should never squawk ident until instructed to do so as it could coincide with another aircraft squawking ID as a result of such an instruction and a dangerous misidentification could result.

[Barry Cuda]

HD, with the greatest of respect, that is pure BS.

If a pilot checks in and says "squawking Ident" on first call, and I can see that the radar return is flashing in association with the correct code/callsign conversion and in the right area, then as far as I am concerned (and Mats Pt 1 for that matter) then we have fulfilled the criteria for identification using secondary radar.

I have heard pilots getting an ear-bashing from colleagues that don't like them identing before being asked, then asking them to ident again... This wastes RT time, which in the TMA is often at a premium anyway, and serves absolutely no purpose whatsoever.


By far the most annoying thing that pilots do, or don't do as the case is, is report their passing and cleared altitudes. I HAVE to check those, and that leads to a hell of a lot of wasted time.

[AlanM]

BC, with the greatest of respect, that is pure BS.

The biigest complaints againest "self - ident" is TMA North

Have a word mate!!!

(personally - I think they should give the details as per the AIP)

[BEXIL160]

BC, HD is correct....

MATS PART ONE actually says

Oberserving an IDENT feature when it has been requested and.....

caution must be exercised when employing this method because simultaneous requests for SPI transmissions withinn the same area may result in misidentification

Your colleagues are also correct...... Does your LCE agree as well, I wonder?

Rgds BEX

[VectorLine]

Get a grip

You obviously have no idea.

Time is a premium, but not to the detriment of safety. Stamp on this gashness, we must (Yoda moment).

Alan and Bex talk most sense!

[Barry Cuda]

Mats Pt 1

Section 1, Chapter 5, Para 4 b.

Recognising a validated four digit code previously assigned to an callsign. Where code/callsign conversion procedures are in use, and the code/callsign pairing can be confirmed, the callsign displayed in the data block may be used to establish and maintain identity.

You therefore don't HAVE to ident aircraft for identification purposes.

AlanM, I have already agreed with your comment about North bank controllers.

Bex, read the above and tell me I'm wrong. Yes I have discussed it with my LCE (many moons ago following a similar thread) and he agreed with my interpretation of the rules. And as for how long have I been valid, what does that matter?

[Pierre Argh]

Didn't a ident squawk used to be necessary to trigger the Code/Callsign conversion?... therefore an automatic ident by the pilot "may" help in this respect if the software still needs it)... but as the similar,current thread points out with some systems it might be problematic... Best to do what you're told, otherwise it might lead to a misident... or more probably uncertainty... which is then time wasting as the whole process needs to be repeated.

A common problem seems to be pilots shortcutting a system, without consultation, because they are always asked the same thing, so think it will speed things up... afraid it doesn't necessarily stop Controllers from having to act/ask a question/ make the same statement... and it disrupts a standard practice, which is often how mistakes are made (on the ground and in the cockpit). If a shortcut can be made, go through proper procedure and get the SOP changed... otherwise leave it alone and do as you're told

[Barry Cuda]

Pierre, I couldn't agree more with your second paragraph. My point is that if a pilot does ident without being asked then I am not going to lose my rag with him because it is not always necessary. I believe that the Ident also has something to do with helping the Auto DM facility, rather than the Code-Callsign conversion per se.

[Over+Out]

I am sure there are no Controllers out there who say 'Squawk Ident' to put it on the tape and then do not look at it, because they are busy and looking at their next task.
I'm with Barry and am quite happy with ident with first call, initiated by the pilot. I wish it was the norm.

[Turn It Off]

Recognising a validated four digit code

If the code has been previously validated then there is no need for ident to be requested or given - thats just a waste of time.

Surely the whole purpose of this thread is to deal with aircraft that are not yet identified?

BC no offense but I agree with the others!

[VectorLine]

Barry you are right about the time valid comment - I have removed it from my previous post.

Back to the discussion, which incidently is about pilots identing on first call and not ident methods.

Sometimes pilots ident by accident in normal flight (the might put something down on the button or put their hand on it by accident)

If you work on a sector where you regularly have aircraft joining controlled airspace from an aerodrome that has no SSR (and often no radar at all) it is imperitive that a/c are indentified.

If a pilot checks in already identing and some other aircraft in the vicinity is also identing, then it has to be requested again.

If we stick to SOP, even if there are no other a/c, and make sure pilots do too, then it reduces the opportunity of a 'cock up' that we don't notice during a busy period.

[Barry Cuda]

VL, no need to edit but I appreciate the sentiment. The original question was about outbounds from an airfield within CAS (I believe), not aircraft joining from outside CAS. In that case it becomes an entirely different situation and more care must be taken when an a/c has 7000 or similar selected.

My initial point was not that HD's comment was wrong, it is in the book after all, but blanket statements like that (and in the book there are many) do not take into account the everyday situation. Maybe thebook needs rewriting... Any volunteers?

[The Fat Controller]

As this thread was started referring to Edinburgh departures, and this applies equally to all aircraft arriving on a Scottish control frequency that HAVE NOT been transferred from either London or Manchester Control.
It is a REQUIREMENT as stated in the ScATCC MATS Part 2 that all aircraft are identified by requesting the aircraft to "squawk XXXX and IDENT".
This is required whether or not the aircraft has been worked by another SSR equipped unit, with the exceptions as mentioned above.
So, to answer Hufty's original question, yes it is a pain, and please wait until we ask you.
As was mentioned elsewhere, this also happens regularly with Belfast TMA departures that have worked Aldegrove radar, so they get to press the IDENT button twice !
As an aside, the lack of a level report (and SID if appropriate) on first contact is also annoying, as we are required to check that as well.

[Barry Cuda]

But surely, Fat Controller, a modicum of common sense can be applied when an aircraft checks in telling you that he is already identing?

[Northerner]

Barry Cuda,

[Recognising a validated four digit code previously assigned to an callsign. Where code/callsign conversion procedures are in use, and the code/callsign pairing can be confirmed, the callsign displayed in the data block may be used to establish and maintain identity]

just remind me again then how the code that you are observing has been previously validated?

I agree with Bex, you're supposed to ask, then they push the button, then you watch to see it...

I'm all for time saving, but have no wich to cut corners too tight.

Cheers,
N


"Keep smiling, it makes people wonder what you're up to..."

[The Fat Controller]

I do not write the rules, just follow them.
All I would expect on initial call would be callsign, SID identifier (if applicable), passing level and cleared level.
I would not expect "squawking 4455 and Ident" to be included, as it's certainly NOT part of the expected STANDARD phraseolgy .
As BEXIL160 previously posted, ATCOs request idents, and pilots therefore should not offer them.
I will say no more.
Good evening.

[Barry Cuda]

I'm not arguing with how it is supposed to be done, all I am saying is that if a pilot checks in with an ident added on then don't tear him a new a'hole just get on with everything else you have to do. Like I said, common sense can have a place in ATC (and not to the detriment of safety).

[BEXIL160]

BC you asked me to say you are wrong. Well, okay. "You are wrong".

You are interpreting the rules, not applying them. A "non adherence" if you want the actual term, and one that doesn't play well at subsequent boards of inquiry, believe me, I know.

Somebody idents when you haven't asked for it? In the current climate this could so easily be construed as an unusual happening. How do you know that the crew aren't trying to alert you to something serious happening on the Flight Deck?

Again, it won't play too well in court if the only signal the crew were able to give that they were being unlawfully interferred with was identing, when not asked, and you didn't question why

Busy TMA frequency? Well if its SO busy that you are unable to apply the rules as stated then the sector needs to be split, or some form of flow applied.

It is a safety issue, not a contest. And time since valid has nothing to do with it (I certainly didn't mention it)

Rgds BEX

[onlygoteyesforradar]

Has anyone mentioned the fact that Edi are not required to validate and verify a/c on departure, so scottish have to? sorry I kinda skimmed over the bickering. As for the whole 'previously assigned code' etc . . . . we all know the system sometimes doesn't work. I'd rather not have to argue my case with such dodgy legal mats 1 jargon in a court of law. But I am a big girl.

Personally I'd rather a/c did not call me already identing just in case i have a whole load of other a/c (not all on my frequency) 'flashing away' or in the case of most scottish sectors which have rubbish radar cover it's a waste of time cos you wont see it.

[Spitoon]

If we're starting a vote I think BC is wrong too.

But I though most NATS aerodrome units verified and validated the SSR on the ATM before transfer to the centre. If that is the case, why does the centre need to repeat the exercise?

For the benfit of those in other countries where I'm not sure the same procedures apply, in certain circumstances in the UK we can deem SSR data to be validated and verified if the aircraft is coming from another unit that is capable of doing this.

[VectorLine]

There was an incident a few years ago where two aircraft flying south through UK airspace were on transposed SSR codes.

The incident caused a great deal of confusion to both pilots and controllers.

If the codes had been validated correctly, then it probably wouldn't have got as far as it did.

Stick to SOPs, question things that don't seem right and ask for idents when you are supposed to.

[onlygoteyesforradar]

Spitoon, ATM is not used to validate and verify. It has a whole load of uses including checking that correct callsign appears after dep, observing that it is following correct route, being able to see order of a/c on final approach, judging approach spacing to decide on lining up a/c etc . . . . I'm no longer an aero atco so I forget the rest. I'm sure some kind soul will quickly list them. But, atm is not a radar and cannot bed used as such.

[Slaphead]

I can only offer an opinion from a TC perspective but my understanding is;

Before we can give an aircraft a radar service from LTCC we have to ensure that the Mode A is validated and the Mode C is verified BUT

Some of the LTMA airfields have enhanced ATM procedures so departures from certain airfields will have had the Mode A validated and the Mode C verified by the AIR controller, examples of this are BB and GW but this doesn't apply to departures from LL and KK.

This could lead to some confusion-if you are a TMA North bod you would need to validate the Mode A of a LL departure but not a GW departure, you wouldn't need to do it for a SS BUZ because SS Fin will have done that for you but you would need to do it for a SS CLN because they (normally) come straight from the tower and SS aren't one of the units which validate it for you.

If in doubt I guess the safest thing to do is to get everyone to squawk IDENT becuase that way you don't have to remember which unit will or won't have done it for you. If the pilot squawks ident without asking and you don't challenge it you haven't complied with MATS Part 1 or 2

PS Ident is not required for DM purposes because departures from the LTMA auto DM.

[terrain safe]

Slaphead, SS will check that the a/c and code are correct before they are transferred so perhaps your pt 2 needs to be updated.

TS

[BEXIL160]

PS Ident is not required for DM purposes because departures from the LTMA auto DM.

Not all the time, they don't. As I recall AUTO DM is at the bottom of 9020D / HCS's "to do" list. Hence it's possible to get airborne without the flight being activated, particualrly if the P time is wildly inaccurate.

Not always obvious to TC either of course. In BYPASS the squawk would convert anyway.

Result. LTMA deps can arrive on AC sectors with NO warning, no strips and as BACKGROUND or RSE raw tracks (not always easy to spot, particularly if you aren't looking for/ expecting them)

rgds BEX

[StillDark&Hungry]

FC

Question, not criticism -

Take your point about what the Manual says, but, can't you identify aircraft on departure? to save the hassle?

Down sarf! as someone has previously mentioned, the majority of times we need to get an aircraft to ident are not for identification puposes but to trigger off computer tracking (not quite code callsign conversion but along the same lines) This sometimes fails to happen automatically if, say, an aircraft is on a direct track and some significant distance off route when entering UK airspace. Or it has arrived at the boundary very early or late. Unfortunately, as pilots, you'd never be aware of when this has happened until we ask you to ident - It's not that we can't see you it's that the computer can't!!!!

[Slaphead]

Terrain Safe;

The current version of the LTCC MATS 2 doesn't say that SS tower will validate/verify Mode A or C and does say that CLN, DVR and LYD departures need to be identified by LTCC so you're right; it does need updating

Bexil160

The current version of the LTCC MATS 2 states that for departures from airfields with an Auto-DM capability it is not necessary to get aircraft to squawk ident to initiate flat tracking (nothwithstanding the need to get some of them to squawk ident for identification purposes.) I wonder if the incidents that you refer to relate to departures from an LTMA airfield which has auto-dm and no requirement for LTCC bods to ident?

[The Fat Controller]

At ScACC we cannot ident on departure.
We do not have AUTO DM at all, and airborne times are manually input, to start NAS processing and tracking.
Aircraft show on our system as soon as they are visible to the radar, whether DM'd or not, but we are still required to ident them to validate the Code-Callsign pairing and to verify the Mode C irrespective of whether they have been worked by the departure radar controller.
We are endeavouring to remove this requirement for aircraft that have had their SSR code validated and verified by a "capable" unit, and as I previously mentioned, that only applies at present to LACC/MACC who use the same code-callsign database as us.
To those "down sarf", we do not have background tracks, we can filter manually by height and also by code (rarely used) so if the aircraft is coming our way we always see it.
The main problem is with direct routes, NAS does not always produce a time update, and the aircraft can get transferred before the flight details are sent by OLDI, apologies to Amsterdam and Maastricht (LOL) as this is where it normally happens.
So, referring to the first post of this thread, expect ScACC to ASK for an IDENT on departure, and kindly do not offer one on first contact.
Thank you one and all, I think we have done this to death now !