RT; Callsign discipline

[ATCO1962]

Please, please, please, pretty please with sugar on top, etc could everyone please use your full callsign in transmissions when vital instructions are given.

I know that this topic hits the boards regularly, but I'm losing my sense of humour, especially with the sheer number of occasions recently when frequency change instructions have been met with a "Thanks, goodbye" response. All very cheery, but not what I want to hear. I have no way of knowing who's taken the call and even when I ask for the callsign readback, the offender has gone. It's led to a number of incidents that had the potential to really bite back.

Sometimes, we have upwards of 15 of one operators aircraft on one sector freq alone so it becomes vitally important that the right aircraft respond in a manner in which we are assured that the right guy's got the right information.

If training captains could send a little missive to all and sundry as a reminder, it will hopefully save a red face, or worse, in the future. Thanking you all in advance for your friendly cooperation; it only takes a liitle discipline and I'd equally be pleased if you remind some of my fellow ATCOs , including me, to sharpen up on sloppy comms.

[turtleneck]

i really want to back you up on that!

another topic who might enhance discipline aswell and make pilots a little less word-stingy:
would someone be able to recall to the upper levels why the atis had been introduced? right, so that once the pilot stated the correct and current code, neither controller nor pilot had to confirm and reconfirm the qnh and active runway and by that blocking frequencies unecesserely.

[Homer J. Simpson]

Amen...turtle.

And what's the deal with having to bleat out your a/c type and sid/star? Are we not in a radar environment? Do you guys not have progress strips with that info on it?

[loc22550]

..i´m not an Aussie ..but still agree with ATCO1962...Sometimes here we are 1000 miles away from the standard phraseology...Not even talk about the Standard "inshallah......":)

[fatigueflyer]

Agree with all the above comments including the Aussie bash. Seems a lot worse around religious events and holidays. Flew the other day and my colleague was communicating with a Middle Eastern ATC. After listening to them talk for approx 20 secs, all I understood was habibi. We were actually cleared to a lower alt and I made him confirm it in English! :confused:

[White Knight]

Come on Muttley - using the callsign is not anal:= It's required, as well as being the safe and sensible thing to do............. Especially when EK 29,39,49 and 59 are all heading for europe at about the same time:{

[ironbutt57]

pls be sure to include "gidday" to ensure full understanding of the clearance:} must admit it is a problem though

[AndyMann]

Actually ATCO its not such a bad request.

What I believe could use some RT cleansing is the readback of totally un-necessary things such as "expect rwy 12" or "expect further descent in 10 miles" and the like, which occupies air time without cause.

There are a lot of foreign operators in and out of Dubai so RT standards need to be maintained but not over done!:oh:

Now, if we could just get a separate clearence delivery and ramp control frequency in Dubai. :ok:

[fatbus]

Sid/star name reqd as per DXB charts.Dont like the pilots how speak before they think and then do their thinking with the mic keyed.

[loc22550]

or readback the wind when clear to land...well i known it´s not a big deal... but as far as i known we are ONLY supposed to readback the Instruction and NOT the information...!

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Yes I am an Aussie, and yes I require a callsign when recieving a readback. If some here think that is anal, then so be it, I am anal. I call it safe. If Aussies have the reputation for being in your words anal, in my words safe, then I am proud to be Aussie. We now have every night a rush of 20 QTR flights all Eastbound with as many as 10 on one frequency at one time with all very similair callsigns, and with an amazing propensity to answer each others calls. Frequency transfers are bad enough, and do take up a lot of time locating the aircraft and getting them back with who they should be, or just confirming the correct aircraft did change, but sometimes you have QTR aircraft taking company traffics descent and turn instructions with no callsign. Again if I am anal for not just sitting back and accepting that sort of airmanship, then so be it.

[Desert Budgie]

We were told that on first contact with DXB App we had to state our Altitude passing, STAR, information received, aircraft type and souls on board. Although the other night, UAE approach was telling all aircraft to say ONLY airspeed and altituude passing. Airspeed because of control going into DXB. I agree with the fact that this is RADAR control, so do you require all that stuff, or can we clear up some mike time???????

Cheers

DB :ok:

[square leg]

I think that's very usefull (expect further descent). This allows me (us) to put the level off arrow approximately 10 miles beyond my (our) current position thus allowing for a continuous descent or at least an almost-continuous one. It's all about style! (displaying [good] style enhances safety, economy, puntuality and pax comfort)

Now don't forget to mention the ATIS and the runway and the QNH in your next transmission.;)

[ATCO1962]

Square leg; you beat me to it! I was going to say to Andyman that that particular call about "expect further descent/climb" is to allow our piloting brethren the chance to set up a smooth climb/descent without actually having to level off.

I'm hoping that the comments about callsign use were just tongue in cheek! No one can seriously assert that any dropping of ones callsign has any place in ATC comms except where positive two-way has been started.

It's truly getting busier and busier on our freq's so we are having to insist on much more concise and standard phraseologies to assist the cause of "safe, expeditious and orderly" flows of air traffic. Back to ATC101!!

Be safe.

[Fox3snapshot]

Very dissapointed...

"As for the callsign issue..... you must be an aussie controller to insist that pilots actually follow standard phraseology so religiously. Apparently only the aussies are so anal as to so outrageously expect the proper use of callsigns....."

I stupidly assumed all this time you may have been a professional. :(

Next time I have a QTR899 and a QTR889 an 7 other Qatari's on frequency when assigning descent I will follow your fantastic philosophy, not be so anal and let anybody who is thinking about descent help themselves, great stuff I always said that you can learn something new in this job everday. :rolleyes:

[Trashed Aviator]

The middle east RT is a joke, its too busy for all the ma-salamas and crap talk some people go on with.
Not to mention the controllers when you call ready and they say hold short of the runway , what a waste of transmission............

[jumbo1]

instead of pointing fingers at everyone else why don't we all just do the RT the correct way, and that includes callsign readback. It is all too easy to readback someone elses callsign these days, especially with so many similar callsigns, not just EK 39, 49 59, but quatar 39, 49 and 59 as well etc etc etc. Personally I would rather not have someones unwelcome landing lights in my face due to a callsign error. And yes, it has happened to me too, in spite of trying very hard to listen out carefully.
Happy landings fellas and to our ATC colleagues, "anal Aussies" and all, thanks for he great job you guys do.;)
In spite of management we seem to get the job done
J.
incomiiiiing...................................:eek: :eek: :eek:

[ATCO1962]

Yeah, I thought that was the case, Muttley. And that was because of my sharp KIWI intuition and a shared sense of high standards.

Keep up the good work:ok:

[divingduck]

guys, guys, guys....... jeesuzz, I was being sarcastic. Aussie high standards are mistaken for anallity around other parts. Me I think the high standards should be the norm.
Fair suck of the sav. Anyway I can say it because I'm an aussie too.
Once more for the hard of hearing.... I was being SAH-CAH-STIC...... :ugh:
:p

I didn't have a shot at Muttley either for the same reason...but leave Foxy alone..he has only just got back from splicing mainbraces, tacking and other nautical stuff:E

BTW ATCO'62...it's the funny accent you have that sets you apart from the crowd:ok:

Whilst we are having a whinge....can the Indian Airlines guys PLEASE listen to instructions, and after the readback, don't wait (what seems to be the norm) 60 seconds and ask us to ...."Confirm?" whatever instruction had been just given. I know you guys are busy up there, but having to say everything twice just doesn't help anyone...if you don't hear it the first time, or the other guy up front isn't listening, confirm it straight away!!!! Asking a minute later just makes you sound thick, and annoys the beejeezus out of us anal Aussies:ugh:

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Sorry for snapping and not seeing the sarcasm Muttley, but this topic has been bought up heaps here, and the problem is just getting worse. These days with QTR we honestly have days where we have the 2 outbound for China with callsigns QTR898 and QTR888 and the 2 inbound from China with callsign QTR889 and QTR899 all on the one frequency at the one time. This with the other 6 or 7 other Qatari aircraft on frequency at the same time, and some brain surgeon flying his bus decides a callsign is optional when responding to an instruction.

As the shortage of staff bites in the Middle east, it has become more and more obvious standards are dropping, and I would guess that standards of R/T are just the tip of the iceberg.

BTW Maybe we should change the name of this website to Formula 1 PPRUNE, cos I think the website is starting to resemble a Ferrari F1 car with the random splattering of Google Ads everywhere. Hey guys there is a little spot between the quote button and the check spelling button that you could squeeze an ad into.

[turtleneck]

we all know that the gus pilots give us a hard time with their not understanding r/t and with their
underperforming equipment. it now appears that one or two new m/e companies, allthough enjoying the latest
toys, gives us new headaches with lower quality jockeys and bad r/t discipline, just echoing a lot of
subcontinent carriers.
if this should be the reason or excuse to introduce or uphold unneccessary constraints, bigger separations,
triple reconfirmations of the simplest basics and god (or allah) knows what traffic hindering measures more:
i'm sorry but we should not accept this. there's a thing called asr and a regulator who is required to act upon.
if not, for all the habibi factors around here, there are many ways to get the problem known. pprune for one,
but there are more. if you atc guys have a story to tell, then do it. i always file a asr if there has been a
situation that concerned my flight and i insist on a answer. admittedly i'm not always successful, but if we all
try and don't duck, the pressure rises and eventually becomes effective.
i would just ask every pro in this environement not to accept the lowering standard by some new clowns. it
should be them improving or beeing shown the door, but in no way us lowering the standards, regarding safety
or efficiency, just to suit some wet dream of megalomaniac "leaders".
i therefore back every effort to increase r/t discipline while imploring both sides to fight against any silly
quadruple a..covering measures.
ttn

[Flying Daggers]

turtleneck spot on mate!! U got my vote. As much as it pains me but I lost my trust in any improvement in this part of the world. I seriously cant figure it out what causes people being so negligent or sloppily. Me thinks its mentality. Its simply easier to ignore the problems rather then to solve them especially when the environment supports it. The best excuse I heard was its anyway all up to the almighty.:ugh:

[ATCO1962]

Duck,

Whatever are you talking about? I don't have an accent.

[divingduck]

Ozzie ATC's
100% agree that repeating the callsign is required in any communication with ATC. BUT, there IS a fine line between being proffessional/safe and being anal - I'm affraid that a lot of Ozzies tend towards the latter. Especially those in Austalia. MATE.

Try not to take offence Warlock me old, but if you want to call yourself one, try learning how to spell PROFESSIONAL...remember, 1xF 2xS.

If in real doubt, perhaps cast a glance at the top of the page...you'll find it there:ugh:

As to being anal...please tell me what you would prefer, and I'll see if we can get the R/T sorted out for your personal enjoyment:rolleyes:

[Fox3snapshot]

Geeez mate, ya had me there for a minute!

My brain was still doing 'island time' 10 days bobbing around the Caribbean scoffing rum punch and enjoying the company of fair wenches has corrupted my PPrune vetting skills...back on top of it now :cool:

ATCO be careful using 'sharp' and 'Kiwi' in the same sentence, you will confuse the readers...now as for the accent :E

[puff m'call]

One of the big problems in EK it that there is no formal RT training for new joiners and established pilots alike. Alot of our new pilots are joining from parts of the world where bad RT is a day to day norm and the bad habits are not being ironed out in training.

The poor RT disipline is only going to get worse before it gets better, you only have to see where all the new pilots are coming from, and they don't say "MATE".

It's up to us all to improve the standards, Captains when flying with F/O's who display bad RT should be pulled up and corrected, (not sure what the F/O will say to the Captain!), and during training, the training Captains need to jump to poor RT standards.

Just my thoughts on the matter. I'm sure there's alot more that can be done.

Happy flying and controlling. :ok:

[divingduck]

Ahhh MATE! Really sorry for the typo mate. AND well done on picking that up. :D
No prizes for guessing where you're from.
If all you can reflect upon from the posts above is a spelling mistake then I'm sorry to say you're a SAD B@STARD. Get a life and get with the program. Or is that programme? Mate? :rolleyes:
Get the picture?

Actually I have a really good picture of the airspace, and it is filled with pilots just like you:=
Each one of them prattling away with what they think sounds like way cool, hip and trendy R/T....or not:rolleyes:
The pity is that we don't all talk just like you do:rolleyes:
I wonder if, perhaps, you could fill me in on the reason standard phraseology exists at all?
Anyone else want to jump in here?

You seem to have quite a chip on the shoulder there Warlock...any reason for that?

BTW, as professional aircrew, I would have thought that you could spell it... perhaps Mum and Dad's hard earned was wasted and they should have sent you to the local comprehensive?:(

For the record, I don't usually jump up and down about spelling, only in certain circumstances, and this just happened to be one of them:bored:

But why are you banging on about Australian controllers in Australia when the thread was started by a Kiwi, in the Gulf (at a location, known to only a few) about appalling R/T here in the Gulf? Could this be an attempt at deflecting the issue?:=

I mean, Jeeezzzz, just bl**dy read back what is supposed to be read back and shut the f:mad: :mad: k up with all the other stuff.

Rant over

note to self, don't post after half a bottle of red....:uhoh:

[ATCO1962]

Hey , foxxy, be careful how you slander the fair isles of the east. I mean, you wanted to be or are one of us, aren't you??:E

I just got back from an evening shift, where I started to count the number of times I didn't get a readback of a callsign when vital instructions were issued. I stopped counting at 20.:sad: I say again....20!! Really, that's appalling and they were from every operator under the sun.

What to do?? I thought of various methods of torture but I think the Geneva Convention has put paid to those delicious thoughts:*

As always, it seems that the best way is to model good standards, kind of like parents to their children, and hope that the good ones will take the baton and pass it on.

Safe and happy flying, aviators!!

[divingduck]

Duck, But you got him with the "professional" spelling blunder. What a to$$er!!



I thought I was being fair and just Mutt:E I didn't mention at any time how he spells "affraid":}

Hey Warlock, now that I have added a couple of single malts to the reds.... you wouldn't be the one that the Gatwick controllers have to add additional miles to in the sequence would you? Both arriving, 'cause you can't get off the runway quickly enough, and departing, 'cause you can't get off the runway quickly enough)?
Could it be that you can't keep up with the pace of life in the real world either?:ooh:

Pot to kettle, pot to kettle, come in please!

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Ok Warlock back to the topic, are you saying that a New York ATC'er is happy to work without any callsigns in readbacks. Are you saying they rely on their voice recognition skills instead? Because you are saying that Aussies are pedantic for needing readbacks as specified in all documents, and that we wouldn't be able to work in the US for that reason. Is that what you are saying?

BTW before you play your little violin to yourself about having to talk to more than one controller at a time, with 2 guys up the front to do it. Spare a thought for the one guy trying to talk to 20 aircraft at the same time, with noone beside them doing the Sudoku, who they can ask to make that call for them.

Your posts really stink of someone who has never stepped foot inside an ATC centre and so has no appreciation of the challenges that are faced everyday on the other end of the radio.

Not trying to be anal but 3 easy rules to follow,

1. Use callsign always.
2. Meet any restrictions as outlined verbally or in documents unless otherwise cancelled by ATC.
3. Say your level passing and cleared level on first contact.

Easy really isn't it.

[puff m'call]

This started off as a very good topic, shame it's turned into a slagging match. :=

[4HolerPoler]

Oh, it's great - I should have waded in with my censors scissors & spell-checker but what the hell, it's great debate & nice to see the guys hanging it all out. And I've learnt a few things to boot.

4HP

[A300Man-2005]

Agreed. I am thoroughly enjoying this thread from afar.............quite a while since we have seen anything as lively (and multi-relevant to all of you) in the ME Forum for a while.

[divingduck]

Divingdick
You can't fight your own battles?
Good advise, you're making a right prat of yourself!
And before you do again please remember that not everyone on these forums has English as a 1st language. Mine is and I made a spelling mistake - now there's a SERIOUS incident MATE. Did you get the gist of the message? Ah, maybe a lesson you could apply to your controlling.
Yawn....

No Maaate, I don't need anyone to help, that's what the hold is for:E

I asked for others to give their versions in the vain hope that you may get the point if it were plugged from several different sources, seemings how you don't listen to ATC's.

As one of the other posters said do you seriously think that we should use intuition rather than correct readbacks (ie I THINK I know he received and understood the message, but did he REALLY get the gist)?
This is the second or third time you have been asked this question but you seem totally incapable of answering it other than to abuse the person asking it.

The attitude you are displaying is one of "I am a Sky God, and the only one in the sky that knows what is what".

Sitting there in your comfortable aluminium cocoon, I really wonder if you have any idea of the maelstrom that is going on around you?
As ANSA said, we don't just sit there waiting with rapt attention for you to speak to us.
On one of our sectors in UAE we have to coordinate with Tehran, Muscat, Bahrain, UAE central, UAE East and Dubai Approach. Every level change, speed control assignment, time revision etc must be passed on.
That same guy handles the upper DESDI hold, all the climbing stuff out of Doha via the northern routes, all the departures thru PAPAR, all the overflying and landing stuff via ORSAR and AMOLI, all the stuff overflying MENSA, LALDO and GISMO.
At the same time he is identifying traffic from Tehran's FIR (that's why we want squawk and level passing) passing clearances (which require readbacks) and doing all the other sequencing, monitoring and separating stuff that we get paid for.
Now with that tiny grain of awareness now firmly in your mind, ask yourself, do we want to hear a readback so that we can get on with the next task in the job queue, or do we want to go back to you to get a REQUIRED readback which wastes our very valuable thinking time, and bumps something else that really needs to be attended to?

Another question I have is just where would YOU like the line drawn with non-compliance? YOU have English as a first language, many of the pilots out there do not. Just because someone has a different accent do we require them to readback correctly? What about when you are not flying in home airspace? Do you then comply with other FIRs different interpretations? Imagine the chaos if that were the case.

Standard phraseology is there just to stop this kind of thing, we all play from the same page, no mistakes, no misunderstandings.

Oooh I know, lets not use UTC, lets use local time...that should help...the argument is the same.
If you are a troll, well done, you have certainly got several bites with that cheap bait, but if you are serious:ugh:

ps regarding your spelling....are you advising me or giving advice?:E

4HP sorry about the length of this post, any spelling errors etc, but not for the content (or what I was trying to say anyway)...

[what_goes_up]

Terminology differs from place to place, as do RT procedures, if pilots were expected to be 100% proficient with each country's RT peculiarities a flight from DXB to JFK would take 2 weeks to flight plan!
[/I]

That is exactly why there is a STANDARD phraseology, isn't it?

[what_goes_up]

Yes it is, but standard phraseology differs from place to place. Like I said above, I don't think anyone is denying that.

No actually it's not. Some places adhere more to it and some less. But there is only one standard laid down by ICAO. Bare in mind, I am not talking about how this issue is handled all over the world!

Start with: Why I never made it through pilot’s course!

Buddy I've done both. And belive me, it was much more demanding to become a ATCO than a pilot. The later was a piece of cake!!

[divingduck]

Bottom line:
PS: I didn't realise that PPRUNE had become a spelling bee contest! :ugh:
Come on guys, from people professing how others need to become more professional - childish!

To risk the ire of the mods....the gentleman who first brought up the professional thing was no other than the Warlock.
The tongue in cheek comment seems to have really brought up some issues that the chap has:p
And if I may point out to him and others, all the slanging seems to have been from him and generally directed at me (or others who hold dissimilar views).
At no point have I called him a sad B@stard, slagged off his nationality, said that I don't care what he is getting up to whilst working, to grow up,called him anal, that I needed counselling etc etc.

All I , and others, have tried to do is to get everyone on the same page...

Warlock me old mate....I assume that as English is your first language, you could get the irony of the smilie just after the hold statement? If not:ugh:

Similarly, you have not given one useful idea to the thread since you started personal attacks, how about you answer the question about where to draw the line? Hmmm?

As for your throwaway about getting the coord right the first time, that isn't even worth wasting bandwidth trying to educate you.
There are a multitude of threads about speed control into Dubai...read them and learn something before cooking off again:rolleyes:

Funnily enough, I see my "mission in life" as you called it, to keep the metal apart by the required distance in what can be loosly termed a "safe, orderly and expeditious" manner.
Standard phraseologies help me in doing that, if you can't or won't see that point, there is really no further point discussing the matter with you.

For the record, never been a pilot, never wanted to be.

[what_goes_up]

My yes it is referred to your That is exactly why there is a STANDARD phraseology, isn't it? question.
To be clear, what are you talking about?
:confused:

ha, ha, sorry man. Misunderstanding. Didn’t mean to pinch on you. Just wanted to highlight, that there is only ONE standard. There is just the operating standards that change.

And yes I am guilty as well not always adhering to standards. Where do I draw the line? Where safety is exposed. Not reading back an instruction or not mentioning your full callsign when doing so is a safety issue. Step into the controllers shoes.

ABC123 climb FL350
Rog 35oh

The controller has two possibilities. Either he jumps at you and asks for a proper read back or, in case of an accident, will be held liable for.
(I know of a case where the ATCO was held liable for an accident not for the wrong word but for the wrong tone!!- According the lawyer he scared the pilot so he fell out of the sky. No joke!)

Same for the passing level. ATCO has to check your mode C readout to be within 300ft (if my memory serves me right... long time ago) otherwise he has to disregard the readout and will always have to ask about your passing altitude.

There again. If he asks back... what a moron. Doesn't he have a radar?
If he doesn't and you have a close one.... picture yourself.

There are two things I took from my old days as an ATCO.
CYA (Cover Your Ass)
and even more important
Never assume (because it makes an ASS out of U and ME

Happy flying guys!!

[ATCO1962]

I would like to register my agreement with all those who've advocated or implied that we should all be heading towards ICAO standards, something that I foolishly thought we all did anyway!

I've listened into a number of web sites where you can hear ATC comms and in some cases, I've hardly been able to understand what's going on, and this after 25 years in the job. It only seems right that all ATCOs, no matter where we are, should be positively encouraging a much higher standard of comms, setting the bar higher, so to speak, and then enforcing them in our 6-monthly checks. An almost impossible dream in our part of the world, but one that is going to have to be more seriously looked at in light of the huge growth in movements here.

To all the guys and gals that we serve in the air, please don't take this as a cheap pot shot, or another us vs them thread. I'm only asking that we take pride in our collective efforts to get the travelling public safely to their destinations and this topic is one that really needs to be addressed in order that we don't needlessly endanger anyone. We don't have the right to insist that we can use our own methodologies in radio comms because of our personalities or temperaments or the need to sound cool or friendly.

Bottom line, we're paid to be professionals and, even after all these years, I still want to be a better controller.

[aimscabinet]

Bottom line: English is not everyone's home language - how would you guys feel controlling in Chinese / Russian / French etc? I agree that a minimum standard needs to be maintained, but a lot of the times certain people (and I'm not going into nationalities here) are just being pedantic at the expense of others.

Fully agree.
In my opinion, I believe pilots and controllers talk too much in this part of the world. Also, there is this silly requirement to pass a lot of information to the controller on the first contact; so much for the need to establish contact first;then, start the exchange.
I actually witnessed the UAE Center Ozzie controller tell off the Indian pilot the other night (a while ago, actually). That particular Indian was very annoying! He would receive the instruction, read it back correctly, pause for a few seconds, and then, ask the controller to confirm the same thing again!!!

We all talk too much in this part of the world. I wonder whether we would survive in areas like O'Hare, JFK, Boston, etc,.
The air traffic in the area is becoming busier by the day and the need to update and modernize the procedures is paramount.

Another annoying habit that is creeping into the Dubai tower system is that of issuing takeoff clearance, ask you to maintain tower frequency and call you back, right at lift off, instructing you to call departures. Keep in mind ATCOs, that at that time, one pilot is concentrated in getting the airplane off the runway and the other, closely monitoring the actions of the PF and the status of the airplane. It is a bad time to be called with instructions for this or that. :=

[poorwanderingwun]

Full marks for the ATCOS.... the comment made earlier about phraseology varying across the world prompted me to consider how many countries I'd had to fly in and out of over my career... the approx number was something over 50 and I can honestly say that I've never run into a problem using standard ICAO phrasing... on the contrary... the less well English is spoken and the more remote the area the more likley it is that standard calls will succeed... I've also noticed that it's almost entirely the pilots not ATCOS that deviate from the correct phrasing... why should that be ? ... both are under pressure to perform professionally....
I've only recently begun operating out of the Emirates on a regular basis and so have limited experience here but I will say... having looked at the area charts before my first arrival... 1) I was extremely relieved to here ex-pat voices responding to calls... and 2) I've been thoroughly impressed by the standards displayed ( so far )... In an area where it must be tempting to let everyone fly a full STAR we have a bunch of enthusiastic controllers jockying us around with vectors to get the whole thing working as efficiently as possible...
Here at least are my thanks for a job being well done.

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Thanks for your words of support poorwanderingwun, they are really appreciated. We are currently under the pump big time here in the UAE where traffic has risen by about 50% in the last 5 years, and is increasing by almost 15% annually at the moment. In that time our number of controllers on nightshifts (by far our busiest shift), has only risen by 1, from 5 to 6. The procedures have pretty much stayed the same, and to compound that we have been having to give Dubai double the usual spacing due to the single runway ops, resulting in ridiculous holding stacks almost every night into Dubai. We are seriously being stretched at the seams, and we need all the help we can get from our pilot friends.

So in light of this, and remembering that pilots and ATC'ers are on the same team, and should be trying to look out for each other and help each other as best we can, things like prompt correct readbacks, make the world of difference.

If pilots flying into the UAE all gave there level passing and cleared level on first contact, readback their clearances with a callsign as required by ICAO, and then continued to listen out, and respond promptly both in word and action, the difficult situation we are experiencing right now, will be made
that bit easier.

I know there will be some on this forum that will have switched off to all that, because it is just ATC blah blah blah, but to the prof(f?)essionals out there, if you help us out by doing these few things, it may just give us the minute or two spare to call Dubai, and try and negotiate with them high speed and direct UKRUM, rather than chasing up required readbacks we should have got in the first place. Thanks.

[Desert Budgie]

Would like to say all the guys I speak to going into the UAE and certain other gulf states, nice work. Wouldnt like to have your job I tell you! I believe a big part of your job is risk management. If you had to argue with every pilot on reading back an ICAO standard clearance, single runway ops would not work at, especially at DXB.

Example : "Salam alah ekoum, xxx123 320 for 10000 inshallah tugos maybe 2200 yellah masalamah"

Maybe a bit of an exageration, but makes me giggle every time!

Keep up the good work guys and gals. And since on the ATC subject, whats up with that beacon on 121.5 between DXB and BAH for the last week.

Cheers

DB :ok:

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Thanks Desert Budgie. As far as the beacon goes, we fax off ELT reports every shift to the authorities, and then it is up to them to do something about it. Unfortunately here they don't seem to take them as seriously as they should and they just keep going until the battery runs out. In Oz if we get an ELT report, we get reports from all other aircraft in the area, telling us when they get the signal and when they lose it, did it come in intermittent or strong etc etc., and then the authority triangulate the responses to narrow down the search area and they go out and search for it. Here we say a guy got a report at this level in this place, and thats it. But I guess in Oz we are anal about SAR, and over do it like everything else. Honestly there is hardly a day at work where 121.5 isn't blocked by some sort of interference.:ugh:

[ManaAdaSystem]

-What if we read back clearances, instructions, rwy in use and QNH like we are supposed to, and left it at that? Reading back the wind information is not a requirement. Maybe in India, but not here. No, you don't sound more professional when you do.

-What if we give the call sign and FL when we change freq? Or passing and cleared FL? This is normal practice in the civilized world. I don't know if it's an actual requirement (in UAE it is), but it will normally save a couple of Txmissions. No, you don't have to say "We are on hand over". If you have not been handed over, you're not on the freq. Maybe in India, but not here.

-What if Bahrain could see us without "Squawk Ident"? The rest of the world can, so why not you?

-What if numbers could be said like they should be said? It's heading three hundred, not three zero zero. Two thousand five hundred feet, not two five zero zero feet.

-What if we didn't have to say POB all the time?

-What if we didn't have to state requested FL? Aircraft type? Isn't that what the filed flight plan is for?

-Read back the f@cking call sign! There is no excuse for not doing so.

Proper R/T saves lives. It's as simple as that.

[Ray Darr]

Two points:

1) What about lovely Dammam "Radar"?

Had a chat with some friends that ride their machines through Dammam's claimed part of space recently, and they are astounded at how low the quality of Dammam's "controllers" are. They apparently sound like they are fresh out of school - let alone ATC school - and just don't "get it". Case in point...

Eastbound, Bahrain clears you down into their airspace, la? Dammam takes over (usually after a reminder call to ask for lower..refer to point #2 below).

WHY must Dammam, each and every time, babble on and on about the precise position in space the flight is, relative to the KFA VOR? "Roger you are eyedentifieed forty-seven miles west of Keelo Fax Elpha (WHO CARES!!!) (and this even when the flight isn't "Direct KFA")...in the meantime, the lower limit Bahrain cleared them to is (was) maybe 200 feet to go, and while the crew are patiently waiting to be cleared lower, this knucklehead yaps on and on about you are 34.528 NM west of some point they think is their "Star Gate" zone...engines either spooling up (with a new peelot) or levelling off and slowing down as they approach said altitude...

Dammam needs to revisit how it works, because it's broken.

Time-warp to the future: "ABC123 identified. Descend 7000 QNH 1013" Wow. Amazingly hard, la?

2) Why must most pilots remind controllers they are approaching whatever altitude limit, and have to request higher (lower) altitudes? Are they (the controllers) simply too understaffed to the point they don't see the altitude read-outs, and therefore continue the climbs (descends) as if they are step-climbs (descends)?? And I don't mean this when the skies are crowded, or another flight would interfere with a continued climb, etc... This happens CONSTANTLY.

3) (A bonus point)...why is there such a need to turn flights inbound for Bahrain towards Kuwait (for example) every evening during rush-hour? What happened to co-ordinating speeds better between the various ATC units (and not just Dammam, either!)...or flow-control...or stacking them over KFA (hey THAT place again!) or whatever? I heard the main user of Bahrain carries lots of extra petrol around due to the "Shiraz 1 Arrival" or the "Doha 2 Bravo Arrival 30 R". Would make a LOT more sense to manage the flow a wee bit better, chaps. Maybe plunk this on the bosses desk?? Any other ideas??

Note all three points here involve RT at some point. :p

Back to the races...Happy trails.

Good thread, by the way. :ok:

[turtleneck]

my dream:
"zzz approach good evening, abc123 level xxx descending level xxx, information Y."
"abc123 salam aleikum, cleared 3000 feet, cleared maddog-1c approach, report established."
"abc123 cleared 3000 feet and maddog-1c approach, will report established."
everything is clear, the atis code was identified as correct, thus rwy in use and qnh are known,
the sid clearance issued and read back correctly. if no vector will be assigned, abc123
will call established and will then be tranferred to twr.
not rocket science and standard r/t. all it needs is a intelligent layout of airspace,
star/sid and coordination between atc centers. different a/c speeds and conflicting incoming
traffic would be separated as follows: on the star/sid the speeds are mandatory, begin of star 300kts,
below fl100 250kts, within 25nm/td 220kts, 15nm 190kts, 8nm 170kts, the star's are designed as tubes with
~2.5°descent slope (sid's between ~2° and 6°), therefore fixed altitudes and speeds are flown throughout the int appr and to separate incoming conflicting traffic there are 4 different tubes (maddog-1a,1b,1c,1d)
each one 2nm longer, which can be assigned to sequence the following a/c without vectoring.
there would be a lot less blah blah's, re-reconfirmations, may we's, unable's, misunderstandings and
no more need to boast your superiour a/c type.
the one's not coping with the layed-out constraints could be given a escape vector, just to start and try the procedure all over again. they won't screw up twice!
but as i said: my dream ......... too many narrow minded and short sighted ego's around this place.
ttn

[airwjo]

hi folks
just read this forum
found it sometimes amazing sometimes disgusting
I also fly to dubai from europe and I am ashamed about the standard there according Rt.
Is it so difficult to stick to the standard ATC phrasology?
Do you feel tread on somebody´s toes if you adhere to a high standard phrasology?
For me a high standard is necessary especially in qtr and dbx since there are lots of similiar call signs
thanks
PS: If ATC want another phrasology (Call sign only or report just altitude and what else) they will tell you!!!

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

We seem to be all agreeing that Standard R/T is the way to go, and callsigns should ALWAYS be used. Unfortunately the pilots not using callsigns and not reporting level passing and cleared level on first contact, are in all likelihood not the guys reading these forums. Maybe you guys who do read these forums need to get in the ears of the guys you fly with that are guilty of these errors, and also in the ears of the check captains who may be able to improve the standard across the airline as a whole.

As far as aircraft being levelled off rather than having continuous descent or climb, I can't speak for Dammam, or Bahrain or Doha, but I'll try and explain the challenges we face specifically in the UAE. From the Southern Emirates (AUH) to Muscat the standard coordinated level for departures is FL210, and from Northern Emirates (DXB and SHJ) to Muscat is FL250. Depending on the runway in use, the aircraft type, long haul vs short haul, the air temperature etc etc. these FL's can be enough to allow us to transfer the aircraft to Muscat at the boundary and still allow continuous climb. Alot of the time though, the aircraft needs climb prior to the FIR boundary, and that means in the case of the Nth, we need to coordinate with both UAE Nth and Muscat for higher, which depending on our workload, or theirs, may not be possible. If that is the case and I have the time available I will always try and tell the aircraft concerned as early as possible the expected delay for higher so as to allow the pilot to reduce the climb rate so as to hopefully allow continuous climb. A major reason for FL210 out of AUH to Muscat is that Muscat descends the African/Yemen traffic from the south going to Northern Emirates to FL220, and these routes cross the AUH eastbound route just inside Muscats airspace, so if all else fails due to workload, frequency congestion or radio failure, we have separation established. So again, we will try to get the aircraft higher if we can but due to a number of reasons this may not be possible. Again if that is the case I will try and tell the pilot asap of this being the case and hopefully when they can expect to get higher.

These examples are just the tip of the iceberg, and there are these sorts of restrictions all over the airspace (eg. FL220 by DUMPI, at the moment not below FL160 inbound DB/SHJ till clear of Muscat FIR due NOTAMed restricted airspace, etc.) These restrictions are so that if all else fails hopefully we will have vertical separation with crossing traffic. We don't intentionally stop aircraft from climbing or descending on profile, but in a lot of cases there is a very good reason why a level off is unavoidable.

I hope that clarifies everything a little bit. Cheers ;)

[W.O.Bentley]

hey guys and girls, sorry in advance for any spelling errors.....


thanks to those of you who have shown their support to atc for our work done and a HUGE thanks to those who follow ICAO r/t and help us have a bit more thinking time instead of wasting time chasing up poor r/t.:ok:


to those who believe that atc(not just those from down under) getting correct readbacks is anal, is it also considered anal if you wait till the correct speeds to pull flaps/landing gear etc or just following sop's? :confused:


i would have thought that reading back the correct instruction with correct callsign would have been as big a safety issue as ensuring you aren't doing 300kts ias while trying to lower the landing gear. think i'm joking? UAE967 4 a/c below UAE97 in the stack a couple of weeks ago. every f:mad: ing tranmission given to UAE967 was either read back by both a/c or just by UAE97 including decent. safe as houses eh?? :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

thanks to the other 3 uae a/c who reamed him out on "the numbers". he seemed to get the idea in the end. :D

so to all those g&g at the pointy end of the tube, sort out the folks who don't read this thread/give a f@$$ and get them to use std ICAO r/t and we will try to do the same with our buddies on the ground.:ok:

[ATCO1962]

.....and one more recent observation that causes us ATCOs some consternation: a lot of guys who've been transferred to our freq lately have not paused and listened before they checked in, needlessly interrupting a dialogue between myself and another aircraft, meaning more precious time being wasted. On a number of occasions, not too many admittedly, some of these culprits have pressed the button even while two way comms are being conducted, thereby giving us that real satisfying squeal on the freq:ouch:

OK, that's off my chest. I'll stop complaining.......for a nanosecond:E

Have a good one and to all those who know you're doing a good job with your comms, thanks for making ATC a pleasure when you do just what you're supposed to do. We do notice.