UK - Multiple Instructions - Specific Order?

[IRRenewal]

Just something I was pondering about given how multiple instructions sometimes interfere with our SOPs.

If you give us multiple instructions in one transmission (ie turn right heading 235, climb FL50), do your procedures say the lateral, vertical and/or speed elements have to be done in a certain order, or is it left to the individual controller?

Thanks in advance.

[orgASMic]

As an RAF controller I am not aware of any regulation on this. I stand ready to be corrected (we are good at that on here). The only (RAF) guidance I have ever had on the subject it is to only give one instruction at a time to student pilots and then to give vertical instructions before lateral ones.

As a qualified pilot, I will expect you to be able to take multiple instructions. I would give you the instructions in the order I think most important at the time because, being human, that is the order in which you will usually carry them out. So if the climb is most important, that goes first. If I need you to turn more than climb, the hdg will come first. I will, of course, split up long transmissions so as not to confuse numbers, to allow some poor sod with a snag to get a word in and to prevent our transmissions being DF'd. :ok:

[zkjaws]

There is the standard clearance format:
Authorisation to operate = "Cleared to"
Clearance Limit = usually the destination aerodrome
Route = description of the route to be followed
Level = the cleared level
and then there are the diversionary climbs, intermediate levels, reporting instructions, frequency change instructions etc added on - about 12 different elements if I remember rightly.

It would be logical to follow this format when issuing all clearances ie
"Turn Right Heading 235, Climb to FL50, Maintain 210kts, Report Passing 3000ft"

[The Fat Controller]

It all depends on what we are trying to do !

For example, if we need to climb/descend through traffic AND provide lateral separation, heading first, level second.

If you are climbing or descending and need more of either AND need vectors around a Danger Area, level first to avoid a "stop-off" then the heading change.

In most cases, speed would come last as that takes a little more planning if climbing/descending and turning.

[IRRenewal]

Thanks for the replies.

Reason for asking is because we have an SOP that says that the pilot flying keeps a finger on the altitude selector, exclaims 'SET!' and waits for the pilot monitoring to say 'FL50 checked'. This can cause a delay in executing the second instruction (if the climb/descend instruction came first) which can lead to errors.

We recently changed to this SOP from one which was slightly less involved, and I personally have a feeling I have been using more 'say agains' since, but cannot quantify that. If I am pilot monitoring I want the pilot flying to respond to the ATC instruction, not my read back (or worse, recollection) of the instruction. If they get engrossed in this new SOP we have and forget to change the heading, I don't just tell them the new heading (or what I think you told me the new heading was) but will ask you to 'say again heading'.

The new SOP is to reduce level busts, but how much extra R/T loading we are willing to accept because of it I don't know. Not even sure if that has been considered. I'll continue my own personal research into this.

"Turn Right Heading 235, Climb to FL50, Maintain 210kts, Report Passing 3000ft"

A UK controller is unlikely to clear you to 'climb to FL50'. But I see you list your location as 'emerald isle', where flying at 6000 feet I have often been cleared to 'descend 4000 feet', which means I can descend to altitude 2000 feet. Correct?

[Scooby Don't]

Well, you certainly wouldn't say "climb to FL50" as that could be misunderstood as "climb FL250".

The only guidance I received in the UK was not to give more than three instructions in one go and as orgASMic says, use discretion when issuing instructions to student pilots (and also those with a limited grasp of English or in high-workload situations).

In Canada, the format was generally heading, altitude, speed. Here in the sandpit, I generally try to stick to that although our flight progress strips have boxes for altitude, heading, speed in that order, so sometimes it comes out that way!

IRRenewal - you're perhaps being a bit obtuse there. "Descend 4,000" means "descend to altitude 4,000 ft" to pretty much everyone. When I was in the UK, it would have been correct phraseology to use the latter. Here, we use ICAO phraseology without the word "to", and I have yet to hear of anyone asuming a cleared altitude was an instruction to descend by, rather than to, the altitude given.

[zkjaws]

Sorry I only copied the example you gave ie FL50 - wasn't sure where the Transition Layer was in the UK.
I'm still getting my head around Flight Levels being less than FL130 - learnt my trade where there were some real mountains.

As for "descend 4000ft", I was always taught it should be "descend to 4000ft", so that someone didn't fly into the cumulogranite that might be lurking 1000ft below.

[anotherthing]

The way I was taught, and the way I teach people is the most important instruction comes last.

This is done beause it is the one that sticks in the mind easiest. In a TMA environment levels are usually critical because of crossing traffic. Therefore I would give a heading first, followed by the level.

On hearing the level, it is immediately selected.

When giving the readback it is then easier and flows better in the cockpit (IMO) because you read what you have set.

Was taught this way to me this way in flying job and later when controlling.

This is also how you give a descent to an altitude from a FL i.e. 'descend to altitude 4000', Londond QNH 1007Mb.' The QNH setting is the one easiest to muck up and is therefore given last so is can be set in the subscale pretty much as it is being given to you.

[Cartman's Twin]

There's no specific rule for the order of transmissions so far as I've noticed think the norm in the London TMA is Heading then Level. Any speed instructions would be added at the end.

There is also some Human Factors impact on the order of transmissions. We are not supposed to issue more than 3 executive instructions per transmission and many people start to panic after the second! The above order works reasonably well with this as the speeds flown tend to be pretty standard so demand less active thought to remember for the period required.

Furthermore, in a string of instructions the item most likely to be recalled is the final one, and as a wrong level will more often than not result in a quicker loss of separation, adding it at the end may also have safety benefits

CT

[Cartman's Twin]

Oh yes, and one more thing!

I've just looked at CAP 413 and while it doesn't shed any more light on this matter I would like to raise your collective awareness to item 1.2.3 under Transmitting Technique where it clearly states:

1.2.3 After a call has been made, a period of at least 10 seconds should elapse before a second call is made. This should eliminate unnecessary transmissions while the receiving station is getting ready to reply to the initial call

So next time you check into a busy London frequency, please wait 10 seconds to allow us sufficient time! :}

(Seriously though, one of THE most frustrating thing is when people jump straight onto the frequency after QSY without first taking just one moment to see if we're waiting for a response. PLEASE listen first and transmit second)

Sorry I digress....

[spekesoftly]

Just an amusing observation, but more often than not, pilots read back instructions in the reverse order given. So if I say turn/descend, they reply descend/turn, and vice versa !

[zkjaws]

Scooby Don't

Not sure how your example can get misunderstood.

If the to in "climb to FL50" was to be confused with two, it would end up as "climb two FL50". Getting "climb to FL250" would require rearranging the words.

The problem arises when you leave out the "Flight Level" part of the instruction. Just like leaving out the "Heading" part of the instruction. When you do that you are opening up the possiblity for pilots to climb to the heading and turn on to the flight level.

[Scooby Don't]

zkjaws - ICAO phraseology is "descend flight level xxx", NOT "descend to flight level xxx". The reason is exactly as I stated above. Everyone is capable, once in a while, of confusing the order in which something was said to them when they recall it. Thus "to FL50" can be heard as "FL250".

[criss]

Scooby Don't - I'm not sure what ICAO phraseology you refer to, but if you check DOC 4444 chapter 12, you'll see what you state is not correct.

[GunkyTom]

CRISS

below is an extract from the CAP 413 RT Manual.


1.2
Level Reporting
1.2.1 Only basic level instructions are detailed in this Chapter. More comprehensive phrases are contained in subsequent Chapters in the context in which they are most commonly used.
1.2.2 The precise phraseology used in the transmission and acknowledgement of climb and descent clearances will vary, depending upon the circumstances, traffic density and nature of the flight operations.
1.2.3 However, care must be taken to ensure that misunderstandings are not generated as a consequence of the phraseology employed during these phases of flight. For example, levels may be reported as altitude, height or flight levels according to the phase of flight and the altimeter setting. Therefore,when passing level messages, the following conventions apply:
a) The word 'to' is to be omitted from messages relating to FLIGHT LEVELS.
b) All messages relating to an aircraft’s climb or descent to a HEIGHT or ALTITUDE employ the word 'to' followed immediately by the word HEIGHT or ALTITUDE.
Furthermore, the initial message in any such RTF exchange will also include the appropriate QFE or QNH.

This was introduced in the UK a few years ago and is certainly picked up by UCEs if not adhered to

[criss]

Tom, Scooby referred to "standard ICAO phraseology", which in fact includes word "to". UK phraseology is a different thing.

[Scooby Don't]

criss - would you care to enlighten us with a cut and paste from your copy of Doc4444?

[anotherthing]

Just an amusing observation, but more often than not, pilots read back instructions in the reverse order given. So if I say turn/descend, they reply descend/turn, and vice versa !
Which is why the most important instruction (wrt safety), or easiest to get wrong, should be the last one in a string of instructions...

It is the way the brain works

[criss]

Scooby - you don't suggest it's only in "mine version"?

15 ed. of 4444, chapter 12. It was also reiterated in the recent upgrade concerning "climb now" procedures on departures, amendment has specific "climb to FL60" examples. And it has been that way for years, instructors tend to teach differently and that's where this misconception about ICAO phraseology comes from.

[IRRenewal]

Thanks for the replies.

As the title of the thread suggests I am interested in what the current UK guidelines (if any) are. There is no point turning this into another p!ss!ng contest about RT standards and phraseology, this has been done to death many times before. Only thing I can say that as a user of the system I like UK ATC because of its consistency.

Scooby Don't wrote:

IRRenewal - you're perhaps being a bit obtuse there. "Descend 4,000" means "descend to altitude 4,000 ft" to pretty much everyone.

Yes, I know what it is meant to mean. The fact you say it means that to 'pretty much everyone' indicates that there might be a few people out there who don't understand it and descend to the wrong altitude. Which is exactly the point I was trying to make. RT phraseology should be designed to be understood by 'everyone', not 'pretty much everyone'.

Ps: ICAO docs, including rev 15 of DOC 4444, can be found here (http://dcaa.slv.dk:8000/icaodocs/)

[Scooby Don't]

criss - you may be right, but since I don't have a copy of Doc4444 to hand I was hoping you'd give us the actual wording from it! If this is a case of UK phraseology having been adopted by an ICAO unit, I'm happy to stand by it. No one is confused by "climb FL 190".

IRRenewal - I work in a unit with a huge variety of nationalities, both in ATC and even moreso among the pilots to whom we provide a service. There has never been a case to my knowledge of a pilot misunderstanding the intent of "descend 4,000", which is the most minimalist phraseology available, and used in particular by North Americans here.

[criss]

Scooby - it's a bit difficult to copy and paste due to format of presenting phraseology in 4444, I might insert a screenshot later. Anyway, phraseology according to ICAO is:

Climb to 5000 feet
Descend to 5000 feet
Climb to FL80
Descend to FL80