request/confirm

[redflyer]

Over the last few years I've heard alot of guys and girls who wanted to do or ask for something and begin there transmission with "request" and wait fot the usual response " pass your message" even when the frequency was quiet. And also guys reading back a clearance with the word "confirm" at the end of it. I personally find it annoying being flight crew. Alot of these types of transmissions result in 5 transmisions instead of 3. Surely if you want to request something just do it staight away. If you are unsure of what you have heard you should just say "say again". I know it sounds petty but when you hear it every day it starts to grind. I don't ever recall being taught this kind of RT at ppl level.

[rolaaand]

You're right, if you haven't heard me properly, don't take a guess at the clearance and tag confirm on at the end, a simple say again is all it takes. As for the "request" transmission. Don't bother with it for anything run of the mill like a level change, direct route etc. It's just a waste of time on the frequency. Although I will say that if you are going to make a request that involves me taking down notes (message to pass on to someone, details of medical emergency etc) then it might be worth teeing me up for that just to make sure I'm ready to copy.

[chevvron]

redflyer; Can you see what the controller is doing when you launch into a long tirade requesting something? They may for instance, have an emergency and be communicating with rescue services by telephone.
Apart from that it's bloody rude.

[redflyer]

I'm not talking about requesting to tell the controller my whole life story and what he had for breakfast. I'm talking about people just saying request when they want to avoid weather or want a different cruising level. Only recently the guy sitting next to me just said "request" with usual response by the controller of "pass your message". All I wanted to do was turn right 20 deg for weather. So five transmissions later I got the turn. Surely all these extra transmissions for day to day things make more unnecessary work for a controller. It is just a pet hate of mine along with people saying "with you". Now that really is stating the obvious.;)

[chevvron]

Even a short message passed while the controller is working on something with higher priority may be either 'stand-by'ed or ignored, so don't do it.

[redflyer]

CAP 413 was created for a reason and that was not to add ambiguous phraseology. The above phrases are definitely not in CAP 413. If a controller is busy dealing with an emergency I'm pretty sure I would have heard it having been on the frequency. I certainly wouldn't be requesting requests.

[Request Orbit]

Emergencies can occur on other frequencies which will affect your controller without you ever knowing about it. Even if there's no emergency and the controller is just on the phone carrying out co-ordination it's possible he wouldn't catch your message the first time.

[redflyer]

So let's just have 5 transmissions everyday for day to day things. Ok, sod CAP 413.

[rolaaand]

Jeezo, the pilot makes a good point and gets flamed for it! Redflyer I absolutely get where you are coming from!

[redflyer]

All I would like to hear is my colleagues being more disciplined when it comes to RT. rarely do I hear an atco stray from what's expected of them. On my line checks we are checked on RT discipline. I constantly hear controllers telling pilots to "continue approach" with a response of wilco, at worst a double click of the PTT. This sort of lack of discipline from the basics does cause accidents and history has proven so.

[eastern wiseguy]

Redflyer

As a fairly recently retired controller I agree with every word. If the guy on the ground is busy and has to PRIORITISE the responses then "stand by" is what you will expect. If there is all hell breaking out then the imposition of SILENCE is available.

Chevron.....what is more likely on a minute by minute shift? Regular requests and bread and butter clearances or constant emergencies on multiple frequencies which requires your steely eyed missile man input?

LCE's constantly checked that my R/T was up to scratch. The tapes were pulled on a random basis and analysed,you NEVER knew when it was your turn. If you failed ( in any way ) it lead to a chat with the LCE .

CAP 413 is there for a reason.

[mikk_13]

My advice is it depends where you are flying.

If you are flying through EU- just go straight into it. There are usually 2 controllers working one sector- one executive and one planner.

If you are flying through a second tier airspace eg- China, russia, Middle east, indonesia or a third tier' provider eg- australia, Moresby, give the controller a warning if it something complicated. The reason is this- they are on their own- eg they have to co-ordinate everything while listening to the frequency, or, the English become a problem when it something non standard.

have fun

[renard]

"Continue approach". "Wilco"

Got me thinking, what's wrong with that?

Looking at CAP413, section 2.1 Table 1 it looks like an instruction to me.

That table says if the instruction is short, clear and unambiguous then "Roger" or "Wilco" as appropriate is preferred for the sake of brevity in the use of r/t time.

[redflyer]

CAP 413 chapter 4 page 14/15 should make it clear

[zonoma]

And what does CAP 413 give as a guidance on a "quiet" frequency that may just have several/many data-linking capable aircraft....... It is very easy to assume. If it is an unusual or long request, I would much prefer a pilot to say "request" and wait for a "pass your message", even more so as I'll be scrabbling around to see who has a scrap of paper and possibly a pen that works so I may even write some of it down.

I definitely offer the same service in reverse......

[10W]

If it's a level change, heading change (for weather, etc), or a route request, just ask for it. In the unlikely event that I have higher priority tasks, I will ask you to standby or will have already imposed radio silence. Increasing RT workload by pre-empting run of the mill pilot requests with a 'request' for a request is crazy.

On the 2nd part of the post,you can either use 'Say again' or ask me to confirm cleared level, heading or waypoint/route. I would rather we were both clear on the clearance issued in all circumstances, than leaving it to an assumption on both our parts.

[Plazbot]

Is this HF you are all talking about or are you suggesting that VHF needs this 5 instead of 3 transmission thing?

[redflyer]

I totally agree with unusual and long requests. Considering nearly everyone who takes an RT written exam gets 100% at ATPL level it still amazes me at the lack of correct phraseology once on the line. Don't jump on the the band wagon when you hear a phrase like "request" or "confirm". It's not correct and if you decide to use it, as some posts have said, use it when it's an unusual request.

forgot to add "with you". Please!

[172_driver]

I know for sure I will get flamed for this.. but it needs to be said:

Why is it always the Brits that start threads like this??

I know UK is land of order, SOP and enforcement. I live there. But common sense, please! Believe it or not, there is a world outside of CAP413. And IMHO, the best ATC system in the world is in the US. Able to handle all sorts of traffic with efficiency and they'd be laughing at this hair splitting.

confirm, request, with you.. not technically in any book but has it killed anyone so far? And without writing a book as to why, I think they all have a useful purpose (except for possibly with you, that's just cool :cool:)

Ok.. hat, coat, door

Over to the Brits!

[redflyer]

All I can say is the that US pilots are definitely the best at saying "say again" as a good few seem incapable of listening and reading back atc instructions first time whilst flying in european airspace. :}

[172_driver]

And I can say the same when I started flying in the US ;)

[gusting_45]

Take on board all of the above opinions, I fall generally on the side of good discipline. However, IMHO a much bigger problem is the apparent need of many pilots to speak insanely quickly and (some) so heavily accented that it is impossible to understand a single word that they have said.

They are speaking plenty but communicating nothing. For heavens sake slow down, it's not a race.

Regarding the accented comment above, please don't consider this a racist jibe as I come preprogrammed with an accent. I do however make a point of neutralising it at work.

[eastern wiseguy]

172_driver.......is the OP a Brit?

My location does not describe my nationality.:ok:


he probably is though :)

[172_driver]

Admittedly I had to look it up..

Oxon
Oxon may refer to:
An abbreviation for the English county of Oxfordshire (from Oxonia, Latin for Oxford)

and for you Mr. Wiseguy, no American would spell Prioritize with an S :p

[OhNoCB]

Scottish ABCD request?
ABCD Scottish pass your message
ABCD request left 10 due weather.

This one annoys me. Although I will request first if it's something longer or more unusual to make sure the controller has time to listen properly, otherwise they just have to get me to repeat anyway and it wastes time.

I do however have to admit to occasional use of confirm. :O

I just feel that whenever I have heard a frequency for example 95% well and maybe just not 100% sure if that one digit was a 2 or a 3, I think it's so much quicker for it to be like:

ABCD contact london 121.025
london 121.025 confirm acbd?
affirm bye

rather than

ABCD contact london 121.025
say again ABCD
ABCD contact london 121.025
london 121.025 ABCD

[Mhayli]

Don't controllers listen to the readbacks? Where I work, you read back the wrong frequency, I will correct you. No need for you to say 'confirm'. If I don't correct you, then you got it right the first time. All about read back and 'hear back'.

[jmmoric]

We do listen to the read-back, and correct if wrong.

But there are times when a pilot, being one myself as well, where you hear an instruction, but are not certain if what you heard was correct, then, as a pilot, I would use "confirm".

There are also times when you can hear on a pilots voice that he's not really certain if the instruction he heard was correct, not using the exact word "confirm". In that case I put in the word "correct" before going on to the next task at hand. I'd rather have a pilot lingering around who is confident in what he is doing, than someone who is uncertain about if he's following the right instructions. Pilots are emotionel people, and they need caring :)

[JeroenC]

Don't controllers listen to the readbacks? Where I work, you read back the wrong frequency, I will correct you. No need for you to say 'confirm'. If I don't correct you, then you got it right the first time. All about read back and 'hear back'.
Because you NEVER miss an incorrect readback? Well done.

[toroa]

What irks me more than 'request/confirm' is when I say "standby" expecting silence so I can quickly transmit to the next aircraft, but there is a response of "standing by" or "roger, standing by"... grrr. When I say 'standby' I do not wish to hear a response, it means I'm busy, remain silent and wait, I will call you back!