"Standby for..."

[bookworm]

What do the words "standby for..." mean?

Under what circumstances do they modify an existing clearance?

[Chilli Monster]

Means what it says - standby for something else, but under no circumstances does it alter an existing clearance.

[bookworm]

That's what I thought. Here's the scenario departing Rotterdam this morning:

Ground cleared me to destination on a REFSO2B departure from Rwy 24, which consists of a climb straight ahead to RTM 2.8d and then a right turn to intercept an outbound track from RTM.

When lined up, Rotterdam Tower said (in the same transmission as the
take-off clearance):

"After departure, standby for right turn to REFSO".

I interpreted this as

"Expect an instruction to make an early right turn to REFSO shortly after departure."

Passing RTM 2.8d I turned right for REFSO according to the SID. Tower queried this. He expected me to maintain runway track. He had intended the instruction to mean:

"Climb straight ahead and do not turn right until advised."

I suggest that the words "standby for.." are ambiguous and should not be used in an attempt to modify an existing clearance. The instruction must be positive e.g. "After departure, climb straight ahead until advised."

Thoughts? Is "standby for..." regularly used in that way?

[BOAC]

Well, bookworm, I would have done exactly what you did.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Yep - looks like the Tower Man was somewhat imprecise with his instructions. BUT - if you are ever unsure, ask.

[Chilli Monster]

Very poor phraseology from the tower man - "Change to your clearance, continue straight ahead until advised, climb FL......" would have been a better, safer, unambiguous way to do it.

[Nogbad the Bad]

DOOMBRAINS the lot of ya......

Everyone knows it comes from Thunderbirds :

Standbyyyyy for ......action!

Cue the drum rolls :}

[Gonzo]

Errrr, no, you mean Stingray! :ugh: :} :E

[Courtenay]

Anything can happen in the next half hour...........

[Nogbad the Bad]

I've been Aqua Marinad !

You're quite right of course ! (I fancied the brunette anyway) :8

[bookworm]

However obviously he wasn't clear enough (hence many other posters would have done what you did), and it was just a cock-up on his part.

It usually takes two to have a misunderstanding and it goes without saying that if I'd had the presence of mind to ask the controller to clarify the instruction, the situation would have been avoided. For all I know the phraseology may be quite standard in the Netherlands, and I wouldn't go as far as to suggest that the controller made a mistake. I think my interpretation was also reasonable.

However, I've written to Rotterdam ATC suggesting a review of the phraseology used in those circumstances. If they reply and permit it, and assuming that I don't end up in a Dutch jail, I'll report back.

Thanks for all the replies.

[NIMFLT]

Personally I would have performed the departure as the controller intended.


There should be no room for pilot interpretation of a controllers instruction. It should be clear.

Either the controller used non standard RT or the RT should be modified to align with ICAO. The word standby has a clear (aviation) meaning.

[CloggyUK]

I'm not a controller at Rotterdam, but as a controller in general i think it was an ambiguous clearance.
You were given a SID, that is what you fly. If he didn't want you to turn right until later than on the SID he should said something like: "Revised clearance, after dep, climb straigh ahead, climb alt xxx." Then once airborne tell you when to turn to REFSO.
My two cents...

C

[bookworm]

To close this, I received a constructive reply from Rotterdam ATC in response to my note. I'm not sure if I've persuaded them that "stand-by" in this context should be entirely avoided, but they do agree that a positive instruction would have been better. We also agree that I should have asked for clarification, which is undoubtedly true.

[KiloKilo]

Stanby for...
Alters nothing of your clearance received. It just prepares you to expect a certain clearance.
---
There are a lot of options to make the point the ATCO wanted in an unambigious way.
**Continue RWY-hdg, standby for REFSO**
We use it quite often to already prepare you to prepare the FMS for the route/direct you are about to receive.

(To give an idea why you don't get the route/direct straight away, might be coordination civil/civil, civil/military or to wait until clear of military airspace)

[BOAC]

As Cloggy says, it was, I'm afraid to say, simply poor R/T from which we have all learnt. The trouble withWe also agree that I should have asked for clarification, which is undoubtedly true. is that you have to have doubts in order to query.:)

[bookworm]

Exactly BOAC. The dangerous one is not the instruction that is unclear. It is the one that both pilot and controller find perfectly clear but interpret in different ways!