Readbacks: The essential word?

[GuruCube]

Grrrr!
Yesterday I gave a conditional line-up..
"XXX****, after the landing 737, 2 miles final, line-up runway XX"
The response came;
"The landing 737, line-up XX"
Of course, I respond;
"Confirming, AFTER the landing 737, line-up"
And I was given;
"Yes, THE LANDING 737, line-up"
Now, Ive heard this a bit recently and took it just to be slow fingers versus quick lips, but this instance made me rather concerned! I mean, they often miss out the type or the distance but Id have thought the most essential part is the word AFTER?!
:ugh:

Think I will be making use of the Watch Managers recording option and send it to airline Ops in future!! :=

[Dr. Evil]

Agree, lack of correct readback is dangerous! Technically speaking its kind of a runway incursion isn't it, since you were in doubt and wasn't sure if he would wait for the line-up AFTER the landing traffic!!!

Guess the UK CAA rules are a bit different from some ICAO rules, well seems to be in this case with conditional clearances. ICAO Doc. 4444 Chapter 12:

12.2.7 Conditional phrases, such as “behind landing aircraft” or “after departing aircraft”, shall not be used for movements affecting the active runway(s), except when the aircraft or vehicles concerned are seen by the appropriate controller and pilot. The aircraft or vehicle causing the condition
in the clearance issued shall be the first aircraft/vehicle to pass in front of the other aircraft concerned. In all cases a conditional clearance shall be given in the following order and consist of:
a) identification;
b) the condition;
c) the clearance; and
d) brief reiteration of the condition,
for example: “SAS 941, BEHIND DC9 ON SHORT FINAL, LINE UP BEHIND”.

Note.— This implies the need for the aircraft receiving the conditional clearance to identify the aircraft or vehicle causing the conditional clearance.

And how many times shall an ATCO ask for a correct readback?? Untill he reads back 100% what was said? I would in this case ask him once more as you did or perhaps a second time pending my mood, and if I wasn't satisfied I would instruct him to cancel last transmission and HOLD POSITION. We're just trying to be flexible and expeditious but if they don't want to play along then hold and wait until its safe to proceed.

[javelin]

Sort of deviating but on a similar thread - when guys get a clearance from Gander for the eastbound clearance, the clearance is to EXPECT FL XXX from ABC.

What really riles me is the number of people who obviously go transatlantic each night but can't remember what is required for the readback, they say 'cleared FL XXX'.

It usually takes 2 transmissions to rectify the problem which takes ages.

Pay Attention folks :O

[45 before POL]

guess if you cannot get through on the instruction.....and any doubt best thing to do............ cancel it..........that is surprisingly difficult when in this situation, a case of thinking quickly..and then give clearance AFTER aircraft landed( maybe even vacated, depending on pilot!!!) :} :} :}

[happ1ness]

With conditional clearances being a useful tool for ATC. Pilots should be aware that controllers are looking for a correct readback verbatim to ensure its been properly understood. I think the UK have filed a difference with ICAO using the phrase "after". Hope this helps otherwise it should open up some more interesting debate !!!! AIC 11/95 gives some insight into runway incursions which I suppose are the result at times of misunderstanding a conditional clearance ?

[niknak]

Guru,

This ones a no - brainer and I can't help thinking you are the one who is at fault!

Clearly either the pilot didn't understand or was distracted by pre departure checks, in which case you should have cancelled the clearance and only permited him to line up when the landing had passed the hold.

It may take up a little more R/T time but it's easier than explaining away the runway incursion for which you may have been mostly responsible.

[AWYRCYMRY]

As a training pilot at cardiff i think that sometimes the ATCs are too far up there own arse and expect every thing to go smoothly. the other day i was up in the circuit and i was told to land after the 737 number 2 for touch and go orbit and at my discretion join base and call final, the ATC said it so fast i had to ask him to say again and he did but he was much faster but this time he mumbled so again i said say again please (at that point i began to orbit) when he did reply he said, right then SIR listen this time and dont even think about touch and go you can land as soon as you have left the orbit.

THE POINT I AM TRYING TO GET ACROSS IS THERE ARE STUDENT LIKE ME THAT ARE VERY NERVIOUS (even after 26 hours) SO DONT BE SO SPEEDY WITH R.T AND MINIMISE THE INFO :ok:


CHEERS:ok:

[Nogbad the Bad]

NO niknak, YOU are the one who is wrong here.

Pilots should read back clearance correctly, especially at crucial positions like the holding point for an active runway.

Guru said and did nothing wrong - it's clearly the pilot who is at fault here, for goodness sake !!!!!!!!!

:* :* :* :* :* :*

[bookworm]

Pilots should read back clearance correctly, especially at crucial positions like the holding point for an active runway.

I think you miss the point of readbacks. They're required because voice radio communication is imperfect. You have no idea what may have interfered with the radio communication. You have no idea what the pilot heard, and what other noises were going on in the cockpit at the time. To say that a pilot should read back clearances correctly is like saying that the air should be smooth. Occasionally, nature conspires to make that impossible.

niknak makes the point well. I'm not excusing sloppiness on the part of pilots, and I appreciate that it's annoying and disruptive when pilots deliberately or negligently fail to readback clearances accurately. But that does not affect the correct ATC response to an incorrect readback.

[Nogbad the Bad]

Miss the point of readbacks ???? :* :* :*

The point of a readback is to make sure that the pilot copies the instruction given to him, and reads it back correctly.

END of game !!!!

[Gary Lager]

AWYRCYMRU - I think you should visit the tower & App room at CWL and have chat with the boys and girls there before you declare then to be "sometimes too far up their own a*se". I think you will find quite the opposite.

A visit to ATC is especially useful for student pilots, who a) are nervous about flying & RT and b) not as situationally aware about what is going on around them - a short tour of what does what and when and a demonstration of the kind of things which help them can be as useful as the opportunity to give them some feedback about your experiences. They're just a phone call away! It can be an enormous confidence booster to put some faces to the voices of authority. Do it this week.

Re: cr*p readbacks - from a pilots pov I believe that distractions in the cockpit/checks etc. are the very reason why ATC must insist on correct readbacks - if the chap is too distracted read back the clearance properly, how do we know he (or his mate) was even listening properly in the first place?

Excuses and explanations aside, proper workload management is an essential skill for airline crews, particularly (as has been pointed out) in safety critical situations like at the hold or when changing level. If you haven't got the required knowledge of CAP413, go back to school; if you haven't got the capacity or time to pay proper attention, then you need to learn better workload management and/or how to say "standby".

'Good enough' isn't!

[flower]

OH dear AWYRCYMRY how to win friend's and influence people.

I know you and I have corresponded already by email at work ( yesterday) regarding visits and would suggest you take it up soonest. I'm sorry you think you had a raw deal, but a phone call after landing to find out exactly what happened is the best course of action in this instance.
You could of course asked the ATCO to say it more slowly for you, that wouldn't have been a problem. Perhaps when you do visit it will become more clear to you

[AWYRCYMRY]

I posted a reply in the "club meeting " forum. i shouldnt have said you are up your own arse that was VERY VERY FOOLISH:{ :{ :{ you do a great job in ATC and i was out of order (as you wil agree) so im VERY VERY SORRY for being an idiot and having a go at you all. (i was a bit wound up) but that is no excuse to have a go at some of the people that need more respect than have allready got..................


SORRY


:( :( :(

[AWYRCYMRY]

AWYRCYMRU - I think you should visit the tower & App room at CWL and have chat with the boys and girls there before you declare then to be "sometimes too far up their own a*se". I think you will find quite the opposite.

A visit to ATC is especially useful for student pilots, who a) are nervous about flying & RT and b) not as situationally aware about what is going on around them - a short tour of what does what and when and a demonstration of the kind of things which help them can be as useful as the opportunity to give them some feedback about your experiences. They're just a phone call away! It can be an enormous confidence booster to put some faces to the voices of authority. Do it this week.

Re: cr*p readbacks - from a pilots pov I believe that distractions in the cockpit/checks etc. are the very reason why ATC must insist on correct readbacks - if the chap is too distracted read back the clearance properly, how do we know he (or his mate) was even listening properly in the first place?

Excuses and explanations aside, proper workload management is an essential skill for airline crews, particularly (as has been pointed out) in safety critical situations like at the hold or when changing level. If you haven't got the required knowledge of CAP413, go back to school; if you haven't got the capacity or time to pay proper attention, then you need to learn better workload management and/or how to say "standby".

'Good enough' isn't!


When im in the aircraft i want to be as profesional as i can but i clam up at the crunch so i think a tour of the ATC is a GO AHEAD :ok: I need a push and a big confidence BOOOST;)

[GuruCube]

Guru,
This ones a no - brainer and I can't help thinking you are the one who is at fault!
....in which case you should have cancelled the clearance and only permited him to line up when the landing had passed the hold.
It may take up a little more R/T time but it's easier than explaining away the runway incursion for which you may have been mostly responsible.
Woah, niknak. This is NOT a no-brainer?! Well, actually, it is. But not in the way you are referring....:rolleyes:
My main point in response is that I didnt actually say what I did after that. I merely gave you a section of the R/T as I remembered it. My actions were not what this thread is about. It is about saying 'after'. Yes, holding him and giving him a straight forward line-up is the next part of the system, and most definitely the safest.
Clearly either the pilot didn't understand or was distracted by pre departure checks
Clearly thats irrelevant. He is number 1 at the hold and given a simple conditional line-up clearance. If he is busy, he should tell me to standby. If he didnt understand, then I have a suspiscion he would have said something different. Besides, this was a VERY regular operator and a/c type. They know the general running of the airport etc etc.
MY ORIGINAL POINT WAS... the missing out of the word 'after'. So even if he misunderstood, he makes no actual reference where he must line-up with respect to the lander. Even after I say it again (And my repetition did include clear emphasis on after!)
niknak makes the point well. I'm not excusing sloppiness on the part of pilots, and I appreciate that it's annoying and disruptive when pilots deliberately or negligently fail to readback clearances accurately. But that does not affect the correct ATC response to an incorrect readback.
Actually, niknak doesnt make the point well. In fact his response missed the point altogether, but that really is distracting from the original post.
Regardless of who everyone thinks MUST do what, Pilots should be alert at the hold and we should be there to make sure that it is readback correctly for whatever reason.

So, for the benefit of staying on topic...
The point here is that the pilot didnt readback where he should line-up in reference to the lander. I repeated the instruction with emphasis on AFTER. He then repeated it, with (Possibly sarcastic?) emphasis on 'YES' and still missed out the key word in the clearance.

[robin]

... it would be nice if a few ATCOs could come up with us from time to time and see what we are going through when they give instructions

Sometimes the radio is not of the clearest, or we have our hands full and want to keep things simple. After all, we, in SEPs and single crew, are taught to 'avoid, navigate then communicate'

Please don't just tell us to get a better handle on cockpit workload management - there are times when I can't do the simplest of calculations, and dealing with an over-precise read-back would just overload my poor brain.

[GT3]

... it would be nice if a few ATCOs could come up with us from time to time and see what we are going through when they give instructions
Sometimes the radio is not of the clearest, or we have our hands full and want to keep things simple. After all, we, in SEPs and single crew, are taught to 'avoid, navigate then communicate'
Please don't just tell us to get a better handle on cockpit workload management - there are times when I can't do the simplest of calculations, and dealing with an over-precise read-back would just overload my poor brain.

I'm afraid imprecise read-backs lead to incidents. Missing out the most important part of a clearance when reading back is a no no.

[Gary Lager]

Please don't just tell us to get a better handle on cockpit workload management - there are times when I can't do the simplest of calculations, and dealing with an over-precise read-back would just overload my poor brain.

...you better learn to say "standby" more often then. An improper readback has the potential to kill you, just as much as getting those simple calculations wrong, perhaps more so. Prioritise, fine; but you cannot neglect such a safety critical task becasue you consider yourself a bit busy!

[lobby]

robin

Sometimes the radio is not of the clearest, or we have our hands full and want to keep things simple. After all, we, in SEPs and single crew, are taught to 'avoid, navigate then communicate'

Is the phrase not "Aviate, Navigate and Communicate"?

[skiesfull]

As I am currently flying for an airline whose first language is not English, I'd like to make the following observation. Not all pilots have an excellent grasp of English, especially at busy times when the clearance is delivered rather quickly. So please try to make allowances with foreign registered airlines, when issuing such clearances - they do not want to 'get it wrong' but sometimes their command of the language requires them to mentally translate it into their own language before replying. The clearance you mention is perhaps the most confusing of all, especially as it is expected to be read back in full under pressure. Whatever the conditional clearance, there will always be room for error.
Recently I was given the following clearance "XXX123 behind the landing YYY 737, line up runway 00L behind" - is this not the correct terminology ( I don't have access to any R/T phraseology literature at the moment). I'm sure that you appreciate that acrooss the 'pond' verbage is often different!!

[Lucy Lastic]

robin

Sometimes the radio is not of the clearest, or we have our hands full and want to keep things simple. After all, we, in SEPs and single crew, are taught to 'avoid, navigate then communicate'

Is the phrase not "Aviate, Navigate and Communicate"?

'Bl**dy keyboard!!!!!!!:O