RT Question

[MikeeB]

As I've been told the only daft question is that which isn't asked.....

I did a couple of circuits and T+G's under ATC the other day.

While on the downwind leg I was "cleared for a touch and go on 02" which I read back.

Prior to that I'd been asked to join downwind for 02 and report 2 mile finals.

Although I did feel a bit daft, I still reported finals and the clearance was read back to me again.

Should I have still called finals, or had the previous instruction and clearance made it unecessary?

Cheers

[Wheelybin]

MikeeB,

Going strictly according to the letter of the rules. Any subsequent clearance automatically cancels the previous clearance, any restrictions or reports still required should be re-iterated in the subsequent clearance. ie If the controller still required you to report final then this would have been included in your touch and go instructions.
As mentioned above, the controller probably gave you it nice and early because it was quiet and to allow you to concentrate on flying the aircraft for the rest of the circuit. Either that or they were busy counting their Christmas/ Year end bonus.( Yeah right!)
However your report on final shows good airmanship. ( well done fella ). It promotes good situational awareness for all concerned and allows the controller to give you a more up to date surface wind reading.

Wheely

[Chilli Monster]

No need to make the "Final" call (note - no 'S' ;) ) Once you've got the clearance that's it. I've done the same in the past to make life easier as Mike suggests.

I think the comment about situational awareness is a bit of a misnomer, as it sounds like there was no other traffic to be situationally aware. As for the vehicles comment again, another misnomer - you can't receive a clearance unless the runway is available. If there's going to be an incursion it doesn't matter whether you call Final or not, ATC should be checking the runway anyway.

Wheely

Why do you need a Final call to give a more up to date wind reading? You give it if you feel it's necessary, no matter what call you have or have not had made. If it hasn't changed since last given it isn't necessary.

[Wheelybin]

Chilli Monster,
agree with everything you have said but you have in your answer made a number of assumptions and only considered the situation from the point of the controller and not the pilot.
" Sounds like their was no other traffic". Even if this were the case, the full traffic picture is going to be more apparent to the controller than it is to the pilot. ( especially, ironically, if they are giving early clearances in the circuit).
"ATC should be checking the runway" . Again, of course correct but we all have heads down tasks and a final report acts as a trigger point to just have another look to ensure that our clearance remains safe.
Of course as a controller I would pass significant changes in wind direction and strength but again from a pilot point of view, they do not know for sure that the wind has not changed since the time they were downwind just because I have not passed it.
I believe MikeeB showed good airmanship in making the final report and would certainly not discourage any pilot of any experience from doing the same in the future, unless expressly asked by the controller to not make the report.

Wheely

[Chilli Monster]

agree with everything you have said but you have in your answer made a number of assumptions and only considered the situation from the point of the controller and not the pilot.

1) Not knowing the date, time, place and scenario one can only make assumptions based on the evidence given - no other facts being available

2) Situation considered from both angles as I fall in both camps. Having been given landing clearance downwind myself I'm quite happy to a) not bother ATC with "Final" call; b) assess whether the wind has changed dramatically; c) keep checking the runway for possible incursion; and d) trust professional on the ground to be doing the same without any further prompts from me

[Wheelybin]

Chilli Monster,
why is there a necessity to make any assumptions at all? The date, time,location and traffic loading as existed are irrelevant to the question that is being asked.
Let us turn the question 180 degrees. Has MikeeB done anthing wrong in making the final call? The only way that this could be a problem would be from an r/t loading point of view. If this were going to be a problem then the "professional" that the controller is should include a "to not report final" caveat to the clearance. It is, after all, a standard call.
If there is the tiniest possibility that "bothering" ATC by making the call helps to promote situational awareness for anybody involved, then I not only fail to see any harm in it, I also believe it is a small example of how double checking in aviation has promoted a safety culture of which we should all be justifiably proud.

Wheely.

[Chilli Monster]

Rather than get involved in a discusion about semantics, which is what this is turning into, why not look at MikeeB's original question and answer it simply without adding anything else to it:
Should I have still called finals, or had the previous instruction and clearance made it unecessary?

No - because the previous instruction and clearance had made it unnecessary.

[Wheelybin]

Bookwise I think that is what I said in my first post, some time ago.
In the real world however, if in a particular situation where any little doubt exists. make the call every time.

I'll even forgive you for calling it Finals!:D

Wheely

[MikeeB]

Thanks for the answers !!!

Cheers

-
Mike

[Barnaby the Bear]

To add my ten pennies worth. When quiet, or need to do other operational tasks (obtaining airways clearence etc.), I quite often clear an aircraft to land or touch and go prior to the final call.
I do not require a final call to be made after this time, and do not expect one. Otherwise i would wait every time for the final call before issueing the clearence.

You are not in the wrong, and if you feel comfortable doing this then carry on. But from my point of view, the final call is not required if you have been issued the clearence.

The controller would have sterilised the runway as soon as he/she has cleared you.

Safe flying. :ok:

[Pierre Argh]

The controller would have sterilised the runway as soon as he/she has cleared you. Actually, at the risk of sounding pedantic, I think (s)he should have done so BEFORE they cleared you?

[av8boy]

Ah, for the bad old days. One of those stories you'd hope would be apocryphal, but I actually witnessed...

VFR tower controller at a very slow airport had a Cessna taxi out for some pattern work. Pilot called ready to go. No other traffic seen or anticipated within 30 miles. Controller said, "Left closed traffic approved. Cleared for takeoff. Cleared for the option until further notice. When you're done, let me know how many you did."

That's wrong on so many levels.

Dave

PS Dunno if "option" is a term in use on the other side of the pond, but here it allows the pilot to do a full stop landing, a stop and go, a touch and go, or a low approach.

[WireFired]

MikeeB,

Indeed, the only daft question is the one that's never asked. Personally, I would only clear an aircraft for t & g/low-go or to land on the downwind leg if it were carrying out a PFL or glide approach.

You keep making the normal & correct circuit position reports, even if you've already been cleared, calling final will get you the wind velocity again. :ok:

[Keygrip]

Happened to me many years ago at Blackpool - taxiied out to renew my night "rating" (as it was called then).

Departed, turned, and called "Downwind".. Tower controller said, "Hey, don't even consider bugging me with all those radio calls - unless you hear something else on the frequency, just do your own thing and tell me when you've landed for the last time".

I was the only aircarft in the circuit - but it felt wrong.

[Pierre Argh]

I can say I'm blameless and always use perfect RT... but surely one of the reasons for sticking to standard procedures (and inherrent in that phraseology) is predictability... and routine. At both ends of the radio we react to certain prompts/clues to complete essential actions. Short-cuts or changing the procedure (even with the best of intention) will likely cause distraction or confusion... and may lead to an incident.

[flower]

As most of the pilots doing T&Gs are under training I tend to wait until the final call before issuing a T&G clearance. However as a single manned VCR where one ATCO is doing everything sometimes due operational necessity I will give the clearance early.
I do not then expect a Final call from the pilot, but as again most are training i do anticipate i will get one. It would be good if the FIs taught a little bit more on the RT front to students, it appears to be a low priority however.

[mad_jock]

I have had a look at CAP 413 but can't find it.

There is a "theory" out there that the "final" call is manditory. In cpl training I was taught this and also got the thick end of the mike for not reporting "final" and got told it was manditory when I wasn't requested to after a "roger" when I reported downwind.

Even in a multi crew enviroment when flying a visual and we have been cleared to land before final it is common for the PF to ask the PNF if we are cleared to land. There is alot to do on base and it is very easy to forget because its not the time to be writing things down. And for the pilot its better to make the final call and get the clearance re-issued than get reported for landing without a clearance.

And from another pilots point of view its actually very handy for a light aircraft to report final even though they are already cleared. It improves SA awareness may allow to become visual with number 1 if you haven't got them.
The calls in the circuit give alot of information for SA to everyone not just the controller.


MJ