More or Greater

[RheinControl]

Hi Folks

I guess it's been two years now since ICAO advised us to use the word "Greater" instead of "More" - is there anybody who regularly uses that word? I mean, I do it now and then, but in the majority of cases I tell them to "climb at 2000 or MORE" and it seems to me that most of the pilots and other ATCOs prefer "More", too...

BTW, does anybody know the reasons for this? I find the word "Greater" doesn't sound right here. And when do they force us to use "fewer" instead of "less"? ;)

[Scooby Don't]

I often use it - "speed 300 knots or greater" - usually when a B744 is up the chuff of an A343 :}

[workman01]

If you have been reading the NATS application thread you will probably know I'm no ATCO as I only went for my Stage 1 last week.

I tend to associate the "greater" or "less" instructions with speed control so like scooby Don't said you might tell a 744 "200kt or less" and the a343 ahead "200 or greater" but in the case of speed control instructions like above greater sounds more suitable than more, howeever although I have never heard it in the UK the example you gave with climb instructions does sound better saying more.

[Scooby Don't]

Heard on a sim exercise way out west...

"Give me your best rate of climb or greater!" :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[clr4takeoff]

Sometimes I really feel like saying that to a A343 on initial climb :}

[Giles Wembley-Hogg]

RheinControl

Is there a particular reason why you guys specify rates of climb and descent rather than specifying a position at which we must reach a level (eg "descend FL150 level TIGER)?

G W-H

[Skyjuggler]

From my very first shift under duel I was taught to say "or greater" and it's never quite sounded right. I think you've hit the nail on the head as to why...
Standard R/T aside, in english you shouldn't say "ROC 2000ftpm or greater any more (or greater:) than you should say "ROC 2000ftpm or smaller".

I'd be interested to know why the change in R/T came about though. It usually happens to avoid either ambiguity or the potential for misunderstanding but I can't think of what it could be...:confused:

[Talkdownman]

What is wrong with 'minimum' or 'maximum' ?

[belk78]

Down here in Spain we use "more" and "less". Never heard "greater",and i agree, it doesn´t sound right. I´ve heard maximun and minimum when adjusting with mach number though..

[airac]

What is wrong with 'minimum' or 'maximum'

Or even absolute minima which is definitely less than minimum:D

[055166k]

"More" is in common usage in UK. Never had a problem with it.
There are tactical control differences between UK and European controllers; I know that you sometimes specify rates of climb/descent whereas in the UK we tend to issue a target point to allow pilot/aircraft flexibility. Control methods and phraseology are passed down from one controller to the next controller during training and throughout one's career. Different systems evolve because no country will admit that another might have a better system.
I wouldn't worry too much about ICAO guidance......the whole world is a patchwork of different methods/phraseology/measurement systems.....and a piece of paper on the use of this word or that word is an indication of exactly how far ICAO is detached from recognising the need to introduce one global standard for the whole planet.
Here in the UK, if the authorities don't like a particular directive, they merely file a difference and ignore it. Perhaps you should do the same.
Examples: altimeter in inches or hectopascals.....however the Brits loathe anything that sounds slightly French so we stick with millibars even though it is numerically identical.
Distance measurements in miles, kilometres/metres [visibility]....except vertical distances which are in feet.
UK wake vortex categories are unique in the aviation world.
Avoiding action phraseology unique to UK....no problem though....it is changed every few months to keep the pilots confused.
Lots more [but not for now]