RT a Dying Skill....

[TopTup]

Is it just me or has standard RT getting lower, and lower, and lower....??!!

So sick of trying to get a clearance, etc and hearing absolute tripe coming from pilots either asking for or confirming ATC instructions.

YOU DO NOT blindly read back, verbatim, every word the controller says to you!

I know that flying schools and instructors do not teach these things anymore (as they haven't a clue themselves). So, you can regurgitate your 1:60 rule, blindly state the FCOM page on wet takeoff procedures but clear, precise, standard RT is of no concern? Not being a native English speaker is no excuse. A hurdle perhaps, which I thoroughly respect many professional pilots overcome, but still no excuse. That does not imply I am picking on non English speakers as my rant stems from a flight I've just come home from and it is almost across the board.

I bought out the Jepps to show the FO what I meant by standard RT and what is required, and what is not. He didn't even know that chapter existed.

Just an example:
ATC: BoBus 123, clear to enter runway 21 and hold position. Aircraft landing on cross strip. Wind 190 at 3 kts caution CB's in the area.

Pilot: BoBus 123 is cleared to enter runway 21 and hold position. There is an aircraft landing on cross strip. Wind is 190 at 3 kts. Caution CB's are in the area.

Are you freaking kidding me!? That's not mentioning basic FIR and/or freq transfers, let alone climb or decent clearances..... The standards just keep going downhill faster, and faster and faster.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

You might like to know that back in the late 60s pilots flying for a small British airline called BOAC used to read back absolutely everything so it's hardly new!!

Sandblasted.... "Wildo" was in use before you were born!!

[criss]

That's quite poor ATC RT in your example.

Everything was better in the past... surely...

[timzsta]

We are not all so bad. "G-AR, extended left hand circuit VFR, cleared take off runway 24, wind 220 at 10 knots, report passing the pier".

"G-AR cleared take off, wilco"

[clunckdriver]

How about position reports which go like this. "At this point in time CF XXX is curently over XXX at 5000, any conflicting traffic please advise" Pure bafflegab!Or our local gliding club, flying out of a grass field call "Haw----Y ground" all the time, the logic they tell me is the person they are talking to is on the ground! They then tie up unicom with endless chatter about sink rate and stuff instead of going to the air to air freq, or the pilots who sqawk ident on "the transponder" what the hell else are you going to sqawk on? {most dont even know the history of the term and what a Parrot was}Im actually a radio examiner and just cant figure how these folks get past the most basic test for an RT lic.

[TopTup]

Timzsta, exactly!

And where the hell did a freq transfer become common place to be [eg] "check'in with ya on twenny one nine..."

ATC: BoBus 123 climb FL360 (eg, from FL340)
Pilot: Cleared to climb 360.

Well you're not going to DESCEND to it are you?

Look up the correct usage of "MAINTAINING" and "TIME" to name but two.

From a previous post when a 175 hr child tried saying that standard RT is not needed when all one really needs to do is just give get the "point" across as that is all that maters :

From ICAO
"Air Traffic Deficiencies in the Asia Pacific Region" (http://www.icao.int/icao/en/ro/apac/..._SG16/wp37.pdf)

"2.2.2 Frequent reports are received from flights operating in Mumbai FIR of exceedingly congested and poor HF communications. This is a busy FIR with heavy traffic volumes. Good regular air-ground communications has to be an absolute requirement for the area, if flight safety is to be maintained."

"2.3 Unintelligible communications due to poor command of English and use of non- standard R/T phraseology.
2.3.1 It is well understood that many ATS units in the region are not manned by native English speakers. Except for a few states there are few if any, native English speakers manning the HF or VHF radios in the ATS service. This does not mean that they cannot or do not speak English. However, we have to accept that there is certainly a strong presence of local accents, both in the ATS and pilot community in this region, which can only make it harder to understand each other. Therefore there is all the more reason for standard RT phraseology to be used at all times. Both ATS and flight crew should be quickly trained and tested to ensure they meet the ICAO level 4 standard.
2.3.2 It is a basic and fundamental requirement that ATS communications are carried out using standard R/T phraseology. This seems to be a simple directive to follow, but this is violated more frequently than we can imagine. The meeting is urged to take particular note of this. We urge ATS Service Providers to carry out unsolicited surveys and checks from time to time to ensure that only standard phraseology is used. With English as a second language, it is all the more imperative that there is strict adherence to standard R/T phraseology, and that communications facilities are of the highest quality."

OK. I really need a beer!!! Let's raise the damn bar and not accept the new lows as a cheap excuse to be lazy.

[aguadalte]

Best place to learn Standard RT is to fly in Europe, starting by the UK (yes..maybe avoiding Spain and France...their chauvinism prevents them to speak English to their fellow countrymen - although legal, that procedure prevents non native speakers to be aware of "local speaking" traffic) and let me tell you that I find the UK ATC very professional (they even go to the point of speaking slower and clearer (quite contrary to what we see in the US) when they know they are addressing a non-native pilot.
I would say that, generally speaking, most of the European ATC's and airline pilots use standard RT.

[Basil]

Just to be clear; for a simple climb clearance the following is standard:

G-CD, climb FL70

Climb FL70, G-CD

[xuejiesandi]

This is from an actual FAA transcript of a fighter pilot talking to a local tower, presumed to be from somewhere in the Southern United States.
Pilot: This is chrome-plated stove-pipe triple-nickle eight ball, angels eight, five in the slot, boots on and laced, I wanna bounce and blow.
Tower: Roger, you've got the nod to hit the sod.
The translation goes something like this:
Pilot: This is silver jet, 5558 (callsign), height 8000ft, 5 miles inbound (to the runway), gear down and locked, request permission for a touch and go.
Tower: Roger, cleared for touch and go.
The transcript has appeared in many aviation magazines and probably quite a few websites.

http://everything2.com/title/Pilots%2527+Jargon

[Dream Land]

YOU DO NOT blindly read back, verbatim, every word the controller says to you!

Are you freaking kidding me!? That's not mentioning basic FIR and/or freq transfers, let alone climb or decent clearances..... The standards just keep going downhill faster, and faster and faster.
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

And in the same part of the world, why is "ready" not good enough, one must be "fully ready"?

Questions...:confused:

[Pull what]

"G-AR cleared take off, wilco"
How is adding 'wilco' to that make it standard RT, plus the callsign should be at the end of the message not the start?

[FlyingStone]

How about controllers demanding full readbacks when doing traffic patterns with 10 kt headwind on active runway and CAVOK - is this good RT practice?

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<is this good RT practice?>>

If it's a training airfield, absolutely 100% yes. Not sure of the significance of the 10kt headwind?? Does that nullify readbacks?

[AJArkley]

From my current flying training, I've always been taught to only read back the necessary information, and in a way that reduces ambiguity. This lack of ambiguity is drawn to the point that on downwind, when asked to "report final," we are to respond "Wilco." This is to alleviate the chance of the AFISO confusing "Report final, G-VN" with "Final, G-VN."

[Sir Herbert Gussett]

I love how non-standard RT from a controller can also completely lose the faith us pilots have in them. :) Flying out of Birmingham the other night and it was rather dark, female controller said "good afternoon" when giving us our clearance.... then stumbled around realising what a silly thing she had said.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Sir Herbert... It happens all the time with radar controllers. They're either in a dark room and don't know that it's daytime or in a 24hr daylight room and don't know when it's night!

[Dufo]

Or 'fully ready when reaching'.. :ugh::yuk:

[Sir Herbert Gussett]

HD.. this was a tower controller I forgot to mention! I appreciate the darkness in the radar cab but this lady would have been looking down on an apron of lights and looking up at a star sky (one would hope!!)

SHG

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Could be, Sir H. I used to wear sunglasses in the tower just about all the time. One busy afternoon the sun set and I still had them on. When asked why, I gave an appropriate answer but my colleagues thought they'd fix me by turning the lights out over my workng position. No problem - I always carry a torch so there I was working busy departures, wearing sunglasses and using a torch!

[AdamFrisch]

I would have to agree with the OP.

I do mistakes and non-standard RT all the time (I think we all do), but if there's one thing I try to do is to keep it short and without ambiguity, reading back the necessities only.

The other day it was mad busy on the LARS frequencies, and I was appalled at how many pilots goes on for hours after the initial "pass your message". It's inconsiderate - that time could be spent handing out collision avoidances and much needed traffic information instead.

Personally I have a tendency to not use my callsign at the end of direct established communications. I should become better at this, but I don't feel it's a huge safety issue:

Lydd: G-ZZZZ, report passing Tenterden.
Me: Reporting Tenterden.

It's wrong of course, but there's no ambiguity and not much risk for a misunderstanding as he's addressing me specifically.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<Personally I have a tendency to not use my callsign at the end of direct established communications. I should become better at this, but I don't feel it's a huge safety issue:

Lydd: G-ZZZZ, report passing Tenterden.
Me: Reporting Tenterden.
>>

It's a massive safety issue Adam. I can't believe that a pilot would omit his callsign from a transmission. On a busy LARS frequency it could be a nightmare for the controller. In the case above all you would need to say is "Golf Zulu Zulu passing Tenterden".

[AdamFrisch]

Sorry, I was being unclear - this was just acknowledging his request for me to report at Tenterden when I get there. When I reach Tenterden later I will of course use my callsign as some time then has passed and we have to re-establish communication.

Another example:

Farnborough: G-ZZZZ, re-contact me on 123.225.
Me: Re-contacting on 123.225.

I feel there's not much ambiguity here as it's specifically directed at me, although I should prob end with my callsign. It just feels like a bit of a waste of time as he knows it's me - who else would respond to that callsign?

[Captain Smithy]

Lydd: G-ZZZZ, report passing Tenterden.
Me: Reporting Tenterden.

...or a simple "Wilco, G-ZZ" would be suffice.

Some get their knickers in an awful twist over RT. The fact is we're all human and we all make mistakes. Although some don't seem to think before pressing the Tx button...

"Engage brain before opening mouth"

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<I should prob end with my callsign. It just feels like a bit of a waste of time as he knows it's me - who else would respond to that callsign?>>

All manner of people; you'd be amazed!

Please get used to using your callsign every time. It's no big deal and may prevent an incident.

[Centaurus]

#3 (permalink)
HEATHROW DIRECTOR

Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 65
Posts: 4,605

You might like to know that back in the late 60s pilots flying for a small British airline called BOAC used to read back absolutely everything so it's hardly new!!

Don't I know it. I was flying a DC3 on radio navigation aid calibration duties around Sydney airport in the early Seventies. BOAC or was it BA by then, arrived and in that affected drawled manner used by some members of the Royal Family, proceeded to read every bloody word of ATC transmissions back much to the annoyance of all aircraft on the frequency.

When someone jacked up and had a go at this idiot, he replied loftily that it was a requirement to read back all ATC transmissions. After this aircraft left tower frequency for ground frequency, bugger me he read back everything all over again. Highly unprofessional and distracting to others captive audience to his blathering..

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

They all did it! We used to refer to them as "Captain Parrot"!!

[Agaricus bisporus]

Readbacks are required for a specific number of things.
Any clearance.
Runway
Altimeter setting
Level.

No doubt others can add more.

If it isn't a clearance then don't read it back, just acknowledge with a Roger or Wilco.

And never, NEVER use the word "Fully" fer chrissakes. It is so very very gash. Quite apart from being a tortology.

(Nearly as bad is a cringe-making and pretentious "the" prefixing a callsign )

Please don't use "please" as in "Request taxi please". We're communicating, not being drawing-room smarmy-polite.

etc!

[bfisk]

Apart from the obvious, such as what has to be read back, callsign use, general RT practical use etc, I have another little thing that I learnt during one of my first line checks during commercial aviation: "every number has a name".

Trying sound cool, like all those other pilots, I'd say something like "Callsign XXX, 159 for 240 to YYYYY". The check pilots logic was that since "every number has a name", it should be "Callsign XXX, flightlevel 159 climbing flightlevel 240 inbound YYYYY".

Obviously, since my callsign that day was "xxx 61" it would sound like "xxx 6115942402yyyyy", which makes a whole lot of sense to me, since I said it, but it might not to others.

I've never seen said "rule" in any book, but I think it makes good sense.

[dwshimoda]

"standing by XXXX"

MAN - DLM - MAN the other day - my Skipper and I were discussing this thread, and so were listening avidly. On 6 occasions when asked to stand-by, the pilots reported standing by! :ugh:

I don't want to turn this into a nationality thing, but all of them seemed to be Middle Eastern / Asian or Mediterranean. Perhaps it's harder when English isn't your first language?

DW.

[parabellum]

And never, NEVER use the word "Fully" fer chrissakes. It is so very very gash. Quite apart from being a tautology.

At LHR it was quite normal for the clearance delivery frequency to say, after receiving a correct clearance readback, "Call fully ready on xyz.ab".

In places like Palma, being told to call 'fully ready' was the normal, as so many operators would call, 'ready' knowing it would take a while to get their clearance, but with steps still at the aircraft and passengers boarding.

However much one may not like the word, 'fully' it didn't creep in without good reason.

[bfisk]

I fail to see the problem with just "ready", not "fully ready". Isn't it obvious the "fully ready" came in because people called ready when they really weren't? If you're not ready, don't :mad: say you are then, it's that easy.

[Centaurus]

this was just acknowledging his request for me to report at Tenterden

And that is a classic example of verbosity. There is no requirement to read back the ATC request for you to report when you have passed Tenterden. Simply acknowledge the ATC request by giving your callsign only.

ATC: "XYZ report passing Tenterden"

Your reply "XYZ".

[PENKO]

With you.
So very many native English speakers (ha!) use this utterly pointles and timewasting sorry piece of non-standard RT. ;)
London, good morning it's the birdseed 989 with you flight level 380 on course to bla bla bla
With or without you mate, life goes on!




And since more than one of you brought up the native tongue, a big please to all native UK-English speakers: ICAO pronunciation for two is too, three is tree. Two and three, pronounced in your native UK accents are often indistinguishable from each other to non-natives. Both sound like thuuei to our ears! UK ATC is the most professional, pleasant and non-arrogant ATC unit in Europe if you ask me, but this too/tree issue really needs to be sorted out.

[parabellum]

If you're not ready, don't http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/censored.gif say you are then, it's that easy.


bfisk - If your age given in your profile is accurate you obviously were not around in the days of the 'double Palma' etc. from UK and other European cities. It was common practice for operators, particularly Spanish ones, to call for start when clearly not ready, thus blocking all who called after them, (first come, first served), and who were (fully) ready. Delays of two or more hours were common and made for a very long four sector duty day.

The Scandinavians had the right idea, on any Saturday in summer it was a common sight to see five or six stretched DC8s on the tarmac at Palma or Ibiza etc. One round trip, well over 200 punters out and back, no problem.

[Fredairstair]

RT wise, we all live in a glass house, so I'm reluctant to criticise (except for fully ready!!). However, why is is that some professional pilots don't have the wit, courtesy or common sense to wait just a few seconds before transmitting when they change frequency? Do they think they're the only aircraft in the sky?

Fred

[RAPA Pilot]

SIDs

xxx approach this is xxx123 passing 2100ft climbing FL50 Ortac 1 Alpha departure.

SIMPLES!!!!!!!!

When I used to teach fresh PPL's from Southampton I used to drill them on RT because if it came naturally and was diciplined it allowed more capacity to fly the aircraft. But its not always the pilots, I had cause once to ask a tower controller when was the last time he had read cap 413, radio silence ensued!!!!

AND
AdamFrisch USE YOUR CALL SIGN everytime please.

[Torque2]

Fred I'm sure if you tried you would find that after a certain frequency range change the antenna needs to retune, which is done by pressing the TX switch. Until this point you may not have heard the first exchange that you have just cut into. There is also the case of a controller transmitting on more than 1 frequency simultaneously in which case you may not hear the ongoing transmissions from another aircraft.

Posiible case of unnecessary sarcastic criticism?

[Fredairstair]

Hi Torque2,

No, sorry, I don't buy that. Nice try though.;)

Fred.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Parabellum, to continue your "logic" if people start to call "fully ready" with doors still open I suppose the European RT language modification facility at Palma will begin to insist we call "Completely fully ready????" Five years later it will be "Completely fully utterly entirely doors shut stairs removed poised to leap into action like a striking slug ready".

"fully" is meaningless b&llocks and should not be used. We'll be saying "like" or "sort of thing" in every sentence next!:ugh:

[parabellum]

AB - it was ATC that asked for 'fully' ready, knowing that there were cheats out there abusing the system, (Palma) and at LHR it was just what was said, "clearance correct, call fully ready on xyz.ab", maybe people had been cheating there too, who knows? In Spain particularly people were calling 'ready' when they were not and thereby screwing up the system.
Not sure if it still happens but things got so bad at some airports that ATC required a call from the ground crew as well, confirming all doors closed and stairs removed.

Oh yes, 'my logic' said nothing at all about calling fully ready with doors open.

[TopTup]

A few more that come to mind over the past week or so traveling the skies....

"Check'in wid ya on twenny one nine...." heard it (diff freq's of course) all too often. Why not just give the standard & required call? I know it sounds cool to you but others think you sound just plain unprofessional.

The correct & proper use of the word HEAVY. On first contact with the TERMINAL RADAR AREA prefix the callsign with "HEAVY". The ICAO standard is for any aircraft taking off with a gross weight of 300,000 lbs (140,000 kgs) or more to use the term "heavy" in radio communications BELOW 18,000 ft AMSL. In the US, the threshold for "heavy" is 225,001 lbs (115,700 kgs) or more. The term HEAVY may be omitted after initial contact with ATC.

As a Capt, or especially in anyone in the training department of any size operation, carrier, or airline I believe it is your / our responsibility to set the standards. (It should be bread & butter at flying schools). Where knowledge is missing employ some basic CRM and use the time in cruise when able to pull out the books! That also means that you have to allow the FO to point out a few things in your direction.... At the end of the flight I'm sure many beers will be owed to each other. Part of the fun & part of the professionalism.

As some others mentioned, there is a definite trend to some airlines and some regions. Waaaay back when I was on the receiving end of a hard-ass (but fair) Capt he commented that poor RT by the FO is a reflection on him as Capt as it is his name on the flight plan, let alone the others at your airline or operation. If ATC get the ****$ & wish to file a report, whose name do they see? And "we" have a preconceived collective opinion gained already be these previously mentioned regions and / or carriers by way of example.

Set a standard, not stoop down to one.

[Zippy Monster]

Heard a new one today from a colleague parked a few stands down in Malaga... "xxxxx, approaching being fully ready, could you send a ready message please..."

"Approaching being fully ready"???!!! :ugh:

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<at LHR it was just what was said, "clearance correct, call fully ready on xyz.ab", maybe people had been cheating there too, who knows?>>

Probably in the thousands, for years and years and years..... (Probably changed now I've gone!!)

[FlightDetent]

SIDs
xxx approach this is xxx123 passing 2100ft climbing FL50 Ortac 1 Alpha departure.
SIMPLES!!!!!!!!
"XXX Approach ABC132 2100 feet climbing FL50 Ortac 1 Alpha" ?

Me splitting hairs ? .. never happened. :)

FD (the un-real)

PS: The too / tree point is very valid, IMHO. It also applies to us non-native speakers who try so hard to impress yet forget to use the correct standards that were implemented to help us in the first place.

[Casper87]

Whilst we're being pedantic, it should be the SID designator, SDR or heading first. :E

C

[isi3000]

to all native UK-English speakers: ICAO pronunciation for two is too

Bit confused as to how else the word 'two' could be pronounced...:ooh:

[TopTup]

And it keeps getting better.....

http://www.pprune.org/showthread.php?p=5836054&posted=1#post5836054

[de facto]

Just read your CAA relevant RT papers and use them!
There may be few differences between ICAO and JAA but all in all if they are recognized by your relevant authority where is the problem?

I personally think the UK CAA RT is of the highest standard for many reasons and is always improving based on Human errors and potential incidents and pilot recommendations...

Using proper RT is essential in an increasingly busy airspace and not maintaining a proper level of RT is a sign of poor airmanship and lack of professionalism.
If the frequency is very busy and you think the proper phraseology would not be appropriate,just check in with your call sign initially and if ATC is ready for your more info he/she will say some like GO AHEAD and you can revert to std RT.

As an FO a few years back,my captain (from a distant eastern country) had the bad idea to use poor RT during departure...it went like that..

Captain:"Amsterdam departure,#### 123, Airborne"
Amsterdam ATC:"####123,CONGRATULATIONS,say passing altitude"

Needless to say i was so embarrassed i wished i weren't flying that day..

Yesterday flying over Hong Kong FIR:

ATC: "USA airline 123, descend to FL 240"
USA Airline123:"departing 360 4 240"

A few seconds later:USA Airline123:"say again cleared level?"

Obviously his poor RT messed himself up....

Be professional,keep your RT sharp!

About the FULLY READY thing, it may also be due to the fact that even though the flight deck is ready for departure, the CABIN may be not!
It has happened that a HEAVY US airliner in CPH blocked the runway for at least 3 mins because he accepted a line up clearance without its cabin being ready...:=

[error_401]

Question for ATCO's

What do you think of LH's RT putting their callsign always at the beginning?

[beamer]

A few aggravations..........

1. UK PPL's talking to major airport controllers for advisory service and giving their life histories whilst commercial operators are trying to get a word in edgeways.

2. Spanish and to a much lesser degree French pilots and controllers talking to each other in their native language at major international airports. I can manage most of the latter but very little of the former - hard to keep track of whats going on both in the air and on the ground. Its not that they cannot do it - they just don't !

3. Endless US carrier chit-chat across the pond on 123.45.

4. The 'Guard-Police' who don't actually listen to the transmission on 121.5 before jumping in.

5. The incredibly slow Italian Volmet service and the almost impossibly fast Greek equivilant - somewhere in-between will be just fine guys.

6. Frequency changes at BHX on departure just as we are cleaning-up and completing checks.

Grumpy Old Man - yep:E

[Biggles78]

Had a beauty in NZ years ago. There were 2 aircraft, one was DBC and the other EBC (they may not be their real identies). The habit from a controller was to use the last 2 letters in their callsign to give instructions. One day "Bravo Charlie cleared for takeoff". Problem was one a/c was on Rwy 20 and the other was on Rwy 11. It was a near miss at the runway intersection. :eek:

After that it was ALWAYS the 3 letter callsign.

I later discovered the importance of always using your callsign. I had flown a particular aircraft for several months so the callsign was burnt into my brain. One day flying a different machine I kept using the brunt in callsign much to my embarrassment :O and ATC annoyance. Lesson learned.

[olster]

de facto -I have been the captain of a 'heavy' cleared to line up @ LAX -all checks and cabin secure given -due to a serious incident in the cabin we were unable to accept take off clearance,ostensibly 'blocking' the runway while the problem was resolved.Sometimes it would help to have the awareness and intelligence to understand each other's jobs;it did not stop the tower controller sending a tirade of criticism in our direction -completely unprofessional imho.It works both ways.

[de facto]

Olster,

Obviously I wasnt there in LAX with you and I have no idea whether your cabin was ready when they gave you the go ahead or what the "incident" was all about.

What i know is if your cabin brings up a cabin problem after line up is received (obviously telling you briefly what the problem is),one can find out if the delay may cause a problem to ATC.

I am pretty sure that all aircraft have by law 90 seconds on the take off point before being on their way.
But standing there for 3 minutes by just stating the cabin is not ready and not exiting the active runway will cause problems to all around you...

Just a thought...

[TCAS FAN]

"RT" is dead, the correct abbreviation is "RTF", which has been so for many years.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<I am pretty sure that all aircraft have by law 90 seconds on the take off point before being on their way>>

Not in any civilised country I am aware of! I've seen aircraft line up and then been unable to take off. It's no big deal to see what they want to do get them off the runway.

[error_401]

Had a technical malfunction on the runway once.

CAPT went back to idle to check and I on the mic to tell tower we needed 30 more seconds to figure out.

Reply: No worries and to the aircraft in approach. Expect late landing clearance, prepare for go-around runway still blocked.

The guys acknowledged. Unable for a quick fix we told TWR that we would taxi forward for the next exit to sort out the problem OFF the runway. Other aircraft landed.

My opinion: Whatever you do, just let the other party (ATC) know in a timely manner. Never had a problem so far.