"Left" or "Leaving"...What should I say?

[Bomber ARIS]

Hello.

Having trawled throughout the AIP, I am unable to find any guidance with regard to what to say when descending.

I have heard very many versions, all of which make sense, but I just wanted to know what the definitive word or phrase may be. On any given day, I'll hear most of these:


"Left 6,000 for 4,000"

"On descent 4,000"

"Descending 4,000"

"Out of 6 for 4,000"

Help!!!!!!

[Goat Whisperer]

"Leaving" or "Descending to"

Left is a direction of turn.

Left 350 is a turn to the north.

Leaving FL 350 or Descending to FL 250 uses the preferred tense.

[HappyBandit]

Oh this old chestnut....I recall having an hour long discussion with a checkie in a sim debrief on this very topic. He was adamant I was incorrect in saying "leaving". It is in the aip as an example phrase including the word "leaving". Even showing said checkie the page he still did not accept it and even proceeded to email me a month later asking if I had found any further evidence of correct terminology. Suffice to say I had better things to do with my time. Its leaving!!!

[Jack Ranga]

You blokes are guns :D keep up the good work, nothing worse than making crap up. What you say on the radio leaves an impression of your professionalism :ok:

[Snakecharma]

Bandit,

What, out of interest, was the "correct" phraseology according to the check pilot?

"On climb" and "on descent" drives me nuts and it really shouldn't as they are only words, but the fact that the AIP has been messed with so badly that no one knows what they are supposed to do these days annoys me.

As I was once told "specificity is the key to all good communication" and the way that the AIP has been hacked and destroyed makes it nearly impossible to find definitive answers on many things - perhaps this is the intended result! If it isn't easily found then no one can say you are wrong.....

[maverick22]

"Pending clearance..."
"ABC, IFR taxi"

:}

[Jack Ranga]

It keeps getting hacked because people make sh!t up ;)

[Kooka]

out of

Its not a direction. Says you have actually vacated the level.

[Capt Fathom]

'Elvis has left the building.' Or is he leaving? :E

[thorn bird]

Oh good grief guys...who gives a sh..t!!! what the words are as long as you "Communicate" !!!!. I once worked for a company that insisted on "Canned" briefings, one Captain had made a tape with silence gaps where things needed to be inserted...he'd play the tape and verbally insert the bits needed in the silence break..do we really need to get to that level of anallity!!

[lilflyboy262...2]

I always thought it was "FL245 descending FL165"

If you use the word "for" can add confusion for the number.

I dunno, my understanding anyway. Happy to be proven otherwise.

[Kelly Slater]

Yes and yes it seems wrong but it is not

[Straighten Up]

I just had a wrong answer on the Bristol QB for selecting the response "descending FL310". They have the correct answer as "leaving FL350 descending FL310" ie both flight levels need to be referenced.

[nitpicker330]

Well the mob I work for advise under Radar control we don't need to report leaving.......I haven't said it for years in Australia and ATC have never said anything......:)

[Wally Mk2]

G'Day "JR" good to see you have been let out the 'cooler':ok:
You must have been as naughty as I was, banned:E
It's 'leaving' but common sense seems to have left aviation long ago with fancy words now like HR, CRM & all the feel good crap that goes with it & being politically correct:ugh:Listen to the yanks, they rapid fire off R /T chit chat so quick being 'perfect' is near impossible!

'fpvdude' brings up a good point. 'Leaving' & 'left' mean two diff things where 'leaving' is ref to the present now(as in it's happening at the present time ) & 'left' is past tense (he left the district years ago).
I say "out of", no ambiguity there:ok:
Being JEPPS perfect is overrated:-)

Wmk2

[nitpicker330]

We operate as per ICAO and our book states----

Flight Level and Altitude Reports by Pilots The vertical separation standards applied by ATC stipulate one aircraft may be assigned the Flight Level or Altitude previously occupied by another, after the latter has reported “Leaving”, except when turbulent conditions exist,. The word “Leaving” means that a positive movement has been observed on the altimeter. This call shall not be made until climb or descent has commenced. “Leaving” is not a statement of intent, it is a statement of action. The call is not required when under Radar Control.

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

While native English speakers have few dramas with the radio, it would be handy to remember that many pilots who are not from an English background are assisted by standard phraseology. There have been accidents where both ATC and the pilot contributed to the problem with colloquial phrasing. As already pointed out "left 250" could either be taken as a level or heading change.:ok:

ps. "Leaving" is the correct phrase for a level change when not radar identified.:cool:

[Hempy]

tbh it's not 100% clear..


a. CLIMB (or DESCEND)
followed as necessary by:
(i) TO (level)
(ii) TO AND MAINTAIN (level)
(iii) TO REACH (level) AT (or BY) (time or significant point)
(iv) TO (level) REPORT LEAVING (or REACHING or PASSING or APPROACHING) (level)
(v) AT (number) FEET PER MINUTE [MINIMUM (or MAXIMUM)]

[LeadSled]

Folks,
Leaving is the report, Left is a direction ---- something that the Australian AIP had wrong for many years.
The was never any "confusion" except in Australia's non-conformity.
Non-standard radio phraseology can be very dangerous, it was a major contributor the night the TAA B727 hit the Canadian Pacific DC-8 at Mascot.
Non-standard (by Australia) phraseology ( of which CAA/CASA and ASA had been aware of for years, also resulted in a horribly close near hit between an executive jet and an airline aircraft (from memory a DC-10) of the NSW coast.
See Annex10, Vol.11.
Tootle pip!!

[Bladeangle]

Jepp AU-806

3.5 CHANGE OF LEVELS

3.5.1.6 The pilot in command of an aircraft, receiving an instruction from ATC to change level, must report:

a. when the aircraft has left a level at which flight has been conducted in the course of climb, cruise or descent; and

b. when the aircraft leaves a level for which ATC has requested a report

How is this interpreted? Only report when asked to? Or in both cases?

[Capn Bloggs]

It was always "Left Flight Level 250" until the ICAO masochists came along, then that (and other clear, concise calls) were removed.

In my view, "Left" is best and most commonsense. You are either at a level or you are not.

There are only two real examples in AIP (CPDLC notwithstanding):
- GEN 3.4 Page 31, which is an ATC call so not definitively a pilot call and
- ENR 1.1 12.1.4, which is such a non-sensical example that it has no credibility (in CTA, there is absolutely no need to say "Left" [or "Leaving"] and then saying "cleared to" in the same breath).

As for confusion between Heading Left and Level Left, ATC will never say "Leaving" in the context of a heading command so there would be no of confusion there. And all levels should have "Flight Level" at the start!

So I'm at 390, cleared to leave, start descent, and due to radio fluff, can't get in for a few thousand feet.. Am i still "leaving FL390"..?
Of course not. That is probably why it was always "Left". But let's not allow practicality to get in the way of the MIGHTY ICAO! http://www.smilies.our-local.co.uk/index_files/worship.gif

ps. "Leaving" is the correct phrase for a level change when not radar identified.
Got a reference for that? ;)

The call is not required when under Radar Control.
When in Ozzie do as Aussies do: ENR 1.7 4.1.6. :ok:

Be interesting to know what MATS says. Jack knows but isn't saying! :E

[Jack Ranga]

G'day Wal :ok: parole is almost as bad as banned ;)

Cap'n, I cannot get involved in these discussions anymore as it raises my blood pressure :mad: there's a reason for standard phraseology. I think most Australian ATC's (second best in the world :ok:) plan for 'non standard' phraseologies ;)

Lead sled :ok: (see that? I'm now reformed)

[Capn Bloggs]

See Annex10, Vol.11.
$76!! I don't think so.

[Wally Mk2]

Jesus "JR" live a little there buddy, don't let tyranny rule it's bad enuf up there in China where the Mods don't live (then again!)!:EWhat have those Mods done to you mate?:-)
You can always come back as "JR Mk2", we'll still luvs ya:E

I can't believe there's so much fracas over this, I mean how the hell did we ever got on b4:ugh: I always say "out of xxx", never had an issue am sure ATC get a ruff idea what I am doing:-)


Wmk2

[kellykelpie]

It's Leaving and Descending to/Climbing to - end of story...

[Capt Fathom]

It's Leaving and Descending to/Climbing to - end of story...


Well that's settled then! :}

[blackteal]

Seriously another how do I say something on the radio thread get your hand off it boys and girls and just be practical.
:ugh:

[Wally Mk2]

'blackt' you cannot have 'practical' here in Oz where Aviation is concerned, we also cannot have happiness breaking thru with 'practicable' on the radio either mixed in with it, it's not allowed & neither is it on PPrune, stick with the facts quote the Jepps & we will all live happily ever after!:E


Wmk2

[UnderneathTheRadar]

Nervously stepping into the fray.... I confess I thought there was a use for both in a pilot report? Procedural controlled airspace (does it still exist with ADSB?) with step climbs and step descents. Pilot 'blocking' the following traffic should report 'Left' the level in order to allow the following guy to be cleared to the next level (or even that level?).

I do use both -
- leaving when given a "when ready, descend to xxxx" *
- left when asked to report on descent (doesn't happen often but it has) or being situation-ally aware of someone being on top of me.

Maybe it was a european thing i read doing JAA ATPLs? But leaving was good enough - as you were still there. Left was a required statement as it meant you had vacated and weren't going back?

Anyone who thinks a pilot reporting 'left' instead of 'leaving' is a safety issue needs their head read. At most you'll get a query from ATC if they misunderstand that you're turning when you're climbing/descending - but it's a report, not an instruction.


* Who can think of a more concise way to get around the verbal diarrhea that occurs going into Essendon from the north? "XXX, when ready, descent to niner thousand, QNH 1030, with a requirement to reach niner thousand by two zero Melbourne". Can't it just be an Essendon 1 arrival or something? Drives me nuts - and I only have to read it back once (or twice if recleared ) a flight.

** Heard it given to Qantas yesterday - first time for a ML arrival I've heard?

[glekichi]

AIP GEN 4.14
Where circumstances warrant, and no phraseology is available, clear and concise plain language should be used to indicate intentions.

i.e.

When blasting off and letting ATC know you will be climbing to a particular level in controlled airspace but won't enter without a clearance, one might say 'pending clearance', or similar.

or

When having already left a flight level some minutes ago but unable to get on the radio for whatever reason, using 'left FL290', rather than 'leaving FL290'.

etc.

Nothing wrong with clear, concise plain language use in radio calls.
No need to get your knickers in a knot Jack Ranga :}

[nitpicker330]

Or how's about "now on descent passing FL281..."

I still maintain it's not required under Radar control, it's the way we've done it for years all over the World.....no issues at all.

Typical Australia. :D

[Jack Ranga]

Glekichi, no knots here mate :ok: previous to my ban (sentence) I was the Wil Anderson of prune i.e. The more you yell & swear the funnier you are ;)

I do like your reference, it's cool & apt. Sometimes I catch myself talking a lot of sh!t on the radio. I think to myself, dood, you could have said that in 5 words of standard rather than 20 words of crap, kinda like requesting traffic & code when the worlds' second best controllers give that to you without thinking about it :ok:

[Awol57]

UTR sadly us procedural tower types still need the report... can't use ADSB/TSAD for separation.

As alluded, it's not too difficult to work out if you say left 4000 that you aren't headed... well who knows. Leaving or left both work for me :ok:

PS I am pretty sure there is a reference in AIP that you don't have to advise vacating a level when you are identified. I will look it up tomorrow at work if someone doesn't beat me to it

AIP ENR 1.1-16 8.4.3 Note is the bit about not needing to advise vacated when identified

[Centaurus]

Depends on how you interpret it. The original AIP statement was "Left (9000)" indicating you were not at 9000 anymore since you had "left" it behind.
You couldn't get more positive or concise than that.

The along came good old ICAO and said the word to be used by everyone should be "Leaving (9000). That could be interpreted as "I intend to leave 9000 when it suits me" As the song said "I'm leaving on a jet plane" but I haven't actually left yet.
"Leaving" leaves doubt in other pilots minds as to has the bugger left 9000 yet? IMHO of course:ok:

[compressor stall]

"Leaving" leaves doubt in other pilots minds as to has the bugger left 9000 yet? IMHO of course


Why does that matter as the other pilot can't go to 9000 until you're confirmed through the next level anyway. You might have "left" 9000, but still be at 8950...

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Incredible! The answer is in the two words "left" and "leaving". ATC can use the first to provide separation but not the second.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

I guess 'Have a nice day'....would not be kosher...??

:(

or...'Area QNH 1013...":eek:

[Howabout]

Onya Bloggs, as usual. Our slavish adherence to ICAO has created more confusion than clarity.

For a controller to assign climb or decent, in an instance where there needs to be certainty, then 'leaving' means stuff all.

'Leaving,' 'leaving' - are you still there?

'Left' is certainty from a controller's perspective. The level has been vacated. No ifs, no buts.

And don't start me on read-backs. Once, we read back the SID, ALT/FL and anything preceded by the word 'amended.' How many prangs were caused by that? But we had to be ICAO compliant and now read-backs just take up airtime for no reason other than being 'compliant.'

[Jack Ranga]

What a classic! One word creating this hoo-ha :ouch:

I'd say G'day to ya Griffo :ok:

[Oakape]

It is comforting to know that some have the big issues in aviation so perfect & error free, that they have all the time in the world to argue about this nit-picking, inconsequential, crap! :hmm:

Everyone has an opinion, they are all different & everyone thinks their opinion is the correct one. You have to ask yourself - "In the overall scheme of things, is it really that important?" Perhaps it is time to step back & take a look at the forest.

[AerocatS2A]

PS I am pretty sure there is a reference in AIP that you don't have to advise vacating a level when you are identified. I will look it up tomorrow at work if someone doesn't beat me to it

AIP ENR 1.1-16 8.4.3 Note is the bit about not needing to advise vacated when identified
No, that only applies to a frequency change, ie on initial contact you don't have to advise your vacated level.

[Wally Mk2]

Hey "JR" if we didn't have this sort of thing on PPrune just think how boring it would be in here buddy...yawn!:E

NO ONE is word perfect even ATC (sorry 'JR'), we are all meant to be professional pilots/controllers (well most of you guys are anyway:E)so we adapt where necessary to the situation like pilots have being doing since the 'Wrong Bro's left the ground:-)

We drivers could write volumes about nothing, this thread is volume 1:ok:

Wmk2

[Capn Bloggs]

When blasting off and letting ATC know you will be climbing to a particular level in controlled airspace but won't enter without a clearance, one might say 'pending clearance', or similar.

If ATC wants us to say "pending clearance" to let them know that yes, I promise I won't enter CTA without a clearance, then they would have it put into AIP. What next, call the tower and always say "holding short", just to let ATC know you are not going to take off without a clearance?

Why does that matter as the other pilot can't go to 9000 until you're confirmed through the next level anyway. You might have "left" 9000, but still be at 8950...
Nice try, but no cigar. Of course it won't work to 9000ft, but the other pilot can certainly start descent to 10,000 from 11,000 the instant you call "Left 9000".

Glad we had this discussion; today I said "Left 9000" and the ATC asked me how many orbits was I going to do? I said 9000 divided by 360.

[Creampuff]

I know! How about “lefted”: ABC lefted niner thousand on descent to six thousand. :ok:

(I was taught to use “left” niner thousand.)

[underfire]

Its simple, 'left' and 'right' are only directional instructions when you are on the ground!

[Big Pistons Forever]

Heard on the freq today(Seattle FIR) "OUTA Two For Oh for Three Oh Oh". Yah I guess it doesn't meet the anal retentive standards of the ICAO weenies but everybody understood what was being said, and North America still has the least number of airline accidents per 100,000 hrs flown, than anywhere else in the world......

[spelling_nazi]

It's "leaving".

Many moons ago a memo/aic or something was put out stating NOT TO USE "left" due possible confusion with a heading instruction. In the wake of an incident that involved this very subject.

End of story

[Square Bear]

..due possible confusion with a heading instruction.

How does one misinterpret a pilot reporting "Left FL X/ X000'" with a heading instruction?

I doubt very much that there is that much lack of common sense out there!

[Mach E Avelli]

Reading this rubbish is doing my head in. From this day forth, I am going to say 'going UP' or 'going DOWN' (as the actress said to the Bishop.)

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Bladeangle

As to reporting requirements when identified...

AIP Enr 1.1 para 11.3.5
Pilots must report maintaining an assigned level, unless ATC has advised IDENTIFIED.

The principle is that on first contact with a station, you verfify your altimeter reading so that ATC can confirm it is within 300' of what you txpdr is broadcasting. If you are identified, they can see on radar when you reach or depart a level, hence no need to report unless requested.

Nitpicker has it right.:ok:

Capt Bloggs

Reference?
AIP Gen 3.4 para 5.14.8
Item 2 Airborne Report. PASSING (Level) CLIMBING TO (Level).:cool:

[spelling_nazi]

How does one misinterpret a pilot reporting "Left FL X/ X000'" with a heading instruction?

Because of lazy RT.
A response of
"Left 200" meaning "leaving fl 200" is easily interpreted
as "im turning left heading 200".
Something like this is EXACTLY why the incident occurred and hence
emphasis on correct RT and use of "leaving" was highlighted.

Two different words is impossible to confuse.

You often hear people drop the "flight level" part . If you use "left" instead of "leaving" it is easy to see how confusion can occur .

[glekichi]

If ATC wants us to say "pending clearance" to let them know that yes, I promise I won't enter CTA without a clearance, then they would have it put into AIP. What next, call the tower and always say "holding short", just to let ATC know you are not going to take off without a clearance?

Well, some controllers do make another whole extra radio call just to tell you not to enter controlled airspace without a clearance, and the 'pending' is an attempt to let them know that, yes, I am aware FL2xx is in controlled airspace and I'll level off at FL180 if you haven't given me a clearance by then, so don't make that unnecessary radio call. To be honest I haven't actually said 'pending clearance' for years, mostly because controllers in the sectors I've been flying haven't been doing the above.

The point isn't just about 'pending clearance', however, its about using plain language to get a particular message across - the AIP states very clearly that this is what you SHOULD do in the absence of a standard phrase.

'Leaving FLxxx' is the standard phraseology, 'left FLxxx' is plain language that tells the controller its now past tense. Its not the big deal some want to make it out to be.

[Capn Bloggs]

"Left 200" meaning "leaving fl 200" is easily interpreted
as "im turning left heading 200".
Something like this is EXACTLY why the incident occurred
Exactly what was this incident?

As the call you mentioned would have been done only by a pilot, surely the only result would have been from ATC: "WTF are you doing again?". The aeroplane wouldn't have been turning, it would have been doing exactly what ATC thought it was going to do, leave FL200. Apart from a slack-@rse driver, what's the problem?

If you are identified, they can see on radar when you reach or depart a level, hence no need to report unless requested.Nitpicker has it right
No, you must report leaving/left when you whenever depart a level, even if identified, reference already provided in post #22: ENR 1.7 4.1.6.

Reference?
AIP Gen 3.4 para 5.14.8
Item 2 Airborne Report. PASSING (Level) CLIMBING TO (Level).
That wasn't what I was asking. You said ""Leaving" is the correct phrase for a level change when not radar identified". Where's that in the book?

[27/09]

Only in Australia would you have have a thread on a subject like this and it runs for 3 pages what's more.

I found this to be rather unusual but then again I had to remind myself we are talking about Australia, where they often do it "better" than the rest of the world.


Originally Posted by Make it happen captain
If you are identified, they can see on radar when you reach or depart a level, hence no need to report unless requested.Nitpicker has it right
No, you must report leaving/left when you whenever depart a level, even if identified, reference already provided in post #22: ENR 1.7 4.1.6.


I would have put my money on Nitpicker and Make it happen Captain as being correct, that's how it is in other parts of the world.

[spelling_nazi]

Can't recall but that's the gist of why the
emphasis on "leaving". I remember getting the memo/ AIC or whatever it was very clearly.
Google it. It will be out there somewhere . Gotta go. I'm needed to fight trolls back in the RPT thread.

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

So Bloggs, why don't you show everyone here where it says "LEFT (level)" in the book?

The phraseology for pilot responses uses;

CHANGING TO,
MAINTAINING,
DESCENDING TO
CLIMBING TO
LOOKING,
RESUMING,
HOLDING,
LINING UP,
HOLDING SHORT,
TAXIING,
TURNING,
HEADING,
TRACKING....

Still that difficult to see the pattern?

ps, AIP ENR 1.1 12.1.4 Uses the phrase "LEAVING FLIGHT LEVEL TWO NINER ZERO".:E

A SID can use the phrasing LEFT (OR RIGHT) (three digits). NOWHERE is a level change referenced as "LEFT".

Comment reserved on identified requirements...

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

As an aside, this report is quite enlightening...

http://www.equinoxpub.com/journals/index.php/LHS/article/downloadSuppFile/9957/2350

Drifting, but humorous excerpt...

(a) JNB:​Bankstown Tower. Juliet November Bravo, 2RN inbound with alpha.
(b) Tower:​Juliet November Bravo. Bankstown Tower.
Follow a Cherokee turning downwind.
(c) JNB:​Looking for traffic. Juliet November Bravo.
Unable to locate the turkey.
(d) Tower:​silence.
Juliet November Bravo. Preceding traffic is in your 2 o'clock and it is a white and blue CHE-RO-KEE. Report sighted.
(e) JNB:​Traffic sighted. Sighted Cherokee.
:}

[Capn Bloggs]

So Bloggs, why don't you show everyone here where it says "LEFT (level)" in the book?
That's the whole point; it doesn't. Nor does it say "Leaving". And as I said before, that example is so non-sensical that it cannot be credible.

Tally Ho the Turkey! :}

[Bladeangle]

As to reporting requirements when identified...

AIP Enr 1.1 para 11.3.5
Pilots must report maintaining an assigned level, unless ATC has advised IDENTIFIED.

The principle is that on first contact with a station, you verfify your altimeter reading so that ATC can confirm it is within 300' of what you txpdr is broadcasting. If you are identified, they can see on radar when you reach or depart a level, hence no need to report unless requested.

Nitpicker has it right.

Understand the concept, thats not what my post was referring to though!:eek:

[Compylot]

Love it!!


My favourite is the 3rd post by Happybandit, you Sir are an inspiration!


Not only did Happybandit in one post combine "This old chestnut" with "said checkie" they also peppered their response with gems such as "correct terminology" and "Suffice to say".


Keep up the good work

[underfire]

All this talk about left isn't right!

[haughtney1]

Only in Australia would you have have a thread on a subject like this and it runs for 3 pages what's more.

I found this to be rather unusual but then again I had to remind myself we are talking about Australia, where they often do it "better" than the rest of the world.


Don't cha just love them? You should try having a training department full of them, many of whom (not who) will argue for 6 beers and 3 hours over the words "should" or "shall".

[HappyBandit]

Compylot

Personal grudge??? What exactly is your point?

[ranmar850]

Don't cha just love them? You should try having a training department full of them, many of whom (not who) will argue for 6 beers and 3 hours over the words "should" or "shall"

What's hard about that? :} Shall is a mandatory, Should is an advisory or recommendation. Part of my role is delivering training on a specific subject-those who have trouble with the difference have it expressed as "you *effin will or I or someone above me will have your 4rs* or "it would be a good idea to":ok:

[triton140]

Nope, yers all wrong. All about consistency.

It's "leaves" to be consistent with "ABC turns base ...", etc :E

[Capn Rex Havoc]

Lido-General part - COM page Section 90

LEVEL CHANGE- PILOT- When in radar contact and changing altitude, the report LEAVING is compulsory. Report REACHING only on request of ATC

For info LIDO is the Lufthansa Systems (Jep equivalent).

"The General part contains a brief summary of standards and recommended practices based on ICAO,FAA EASA/JAA guidelines as well as operational standards and guidelines based on EU/EASA-OPS and FARs. This ensures that all applicable world-wide standards are covered in the RM."

(Emirates uses LIDO)
:ok:

[MyNameIsIs]

Nope, yers all wrong. All about consistency.

It's "leaves" to be consistent with "ABC turns base ...", etc :E And Finals :ok:



In all seriousness, how hard is it?


ENR 1.7-8 "Change of Levels"

ATC approval required:
"The PIC of an aircraft, receiving an instruction from ATC to change level, must report:
a. when the aircraft has left a level at which level flight has been conducted in the course of climb, cruise or descent; and
b. when the aircraft leaves a level for which ATC has requested a report"

My bolding. So, you've had level flight. Your cleared to change to a different level. Based on the written word above the report would be "Left (alt/FL such and such)"
If you have been requested to report as per b, it would be "Leaving (alt/FL such and such".

Now, when ATC Approval Not Required:
4.2.1 "In airspace where ATC approval is not required to change level, the pilot of an IFR flight must report present position and intention to ATC approximately 1 minute prior to making any change"

This one is a little harder, they don't differentiate. Just say something that everyone can understand!




As for the "Left 200" confusion thinking they are turning left to 200 degrees because they didn't say Flight Level, pfft. They are in the wrong and they should be corrected to say "Left FL(figure)".

Gen 3.4-13 4.4.3, Radiotelephony procedures - "Reported level figures of an aircraft must be preceded by the words "FLIGHT LEVEL" when related to standard pressure and may be followed by the word "FEET" when related to QNH".




So my pigeons, I feel like throwing you another cat. Is it PASSING or THROUGH?? :}

[Wally Mk2]

'myname'.............."out of" covers all contingencies:ok: Meow:E

Said it all day just yesterday, seems ATC got the idea without a hitch!:ok:


Wmk2

[Nautilus Blue]

Well, some controllers do make another whole extra radio call just to tell you not to enter controlled airspace without a clearance, and the 'pending' is an attempt to let them know that, yes, I am aware FL2xx is in controlled airspace and I'll level off at FL180 if you haven't given me a clearance by then, so don't make that unnecessary radio call. To be honest I haven't actually said 'pending clearance' for years, mostly because controllers in the sectors I've been flying haven't been doing the above.


I agree, however (last time I looked), the "remain outside .." is required by our books. If I don't tell you to remain OCTA and you enter without a clearance, our safety people will regard that as my fault. Its an unfortunately not uncommon example of a procedure not to provide a service or to improve safety, but to pre-establish blame if anything goes wrong.

With regard to left/leaving, I probably hear it hundreds of times a shift, and honestly can't remember which one has been used.

Just to stir things along an bit, how many crews know the difference between "left of track" and "left of route"?

[Jack Ranga]

Some controllers HAVE HAD to say remain OCTA after having Kingairs climb into controlled airspace without a clearance. Guess who gets their arse kicked if this happens? Some controllers have had this happen several times (:ugh:). Some controllers assume that a professional pilot WITHOUT an airways clearance would level out at the base of controlled airspace :ugh:

[Capn Bloggs]

b. when the aircraft leaves a level for which ATC has requested a report"
Wrong context there, Bloggs. This is referring to passing through a level say during during a step climb or descent, so the following aircraft can get assigned the next level. It's not meant to be for departure from a level that you have been maintaining; that's what a) [LEFT] is for. And for reasons already stated, the call has to be LEFT, otherwise ATC won't actually know when the LEAVING sequence finishes! If you're in one of those long French thingees, how do you know when the tail has LEFT after you have called LEAVING? :8

Guess who gets their arse kicked if this happens? Some controllers have had this happen several times
This is ridiculous. Who needs enemies when you have "friends" like that?

how many crews know the difference between "left of track" and "left of route"?
Dunno. I have heard plenty of "Left Track" when it should have been "Leaving Route". :}

[fujii]

Some controllers HAVE HAD to say remain OCTA ...... And they'd be wrong.
It's "REMAIN OUTSIDE CLASS (Insert class) AIRSPACE."

[CaptainInsaneO]

AIP ENR 1.1 Section 12.1.4:


After any frequency change, pilots must advise the last assigned level and, if not maintaining the assigned level, the level maintaining or last vacated level; eg, "MELBOURNE CENTRE (CALLSIGN) CLEARED FLIGHT LEVEL TWO ONE ZERO, LEAVING FLIGHT LEVEL TWO NINER ZERO".


*Don't forget the note guys!!


Note: The "last vacated level" may be omitted by identified aircraft squawking pressure altitude derived level information.

^^^
That's pretty clear to me that if it's present tense use the word "LEAVING". If it's past tense (maybe 10 - 15 seconds ago) I'd use "LEFT".


Notice guys that the AIP reference doesn't use the word "LEFT"...?


It's ironic this thread popped up when it did, I've been flying around CTA for about 10 years and have never given this topic a moment of thought, until about 2 weeks ago, I said the "LEAVING ___" as at that exact point in time we commenced our descent. I was then corrected by another crew member that I should use the word "LEFT" because it isn't as confusing as "LEAVING" ......wtf!? I just smiled and nodded to keep the peace but I don't understand how it's confusing.


Also if you think about the way SSR works and what ATC see, I tend to say "LEAVING ____" (if it's present tense of course) because I understand that there may be a few second delay on their screen. Otherwise if I were to say "LEFT____", ATC may look up at their screen and think.."no they haven't", wait and stare for those few seconds at the screen to make sure the pilot is behaving himself - which could distract them from another task. Maybe that is drawing quite a long bow though....


I'd be interested to hear if anybody can tell me why using the word "LEAVING" is confusing (especially because there is a clear example in the AIP!!)

[Wally Mk2]

'InsaneO' "leaving" isn't confusing at all, that's the craziest thing about this thread :)
"Leaving" "Left" "out of" FL390, they all describe the same event & they are all used at one time or another & you know what? Planes continue to fly, oh the horror of it all:ok:


Wmk2

[Jack Ranga]

Some controllers HAVE HAD to say remain OCTA ...... And they'd be wrong.
It's "REMAIN OUTSIDE CLASS (Insert class) AIRSPACE."

lol :D

And this is an example of the worlds second best controller :D

Pilots of Australia, this is what you're dealing with from 'your' ATC

[Di_Vosh]

Nautilus Blue

Just to stir things along an bit, how many crews know the difference between "left of track" and "left of route"?

Does any other country in the world bother with such a difference? When I read that one in the AIP it just confirmed what I've said on a previous thread:

The rest of the world communicates; in Australia we have procedures.

Seriously, I'm flying from point A to point B and require to go Left or Right to aviod something. Does it really matter if point A was a waypoint or not?

IME pilots rarely get it right. Sometimes some ATC get it wrong. However, 100% of the requests are granted if there is no conflicting traffic regardless if the pilot/ATC say "route" instead of "track".

DIVOSH!

[Wally Mk2]

'Di_V' I agree there we tend to over complicate things here. One often hears the 'trk/route' thingy, tech there is a diff as we all know but sheeez I wanna go left/right,can I? How hard is that!!:ugh:

Wmk2

[Nautilus Blue]

Seriously, I'm flying from point A to point B and require to go Left or Right to aviod something. Does it really matter if point A was a waypoint or not?

What happens when you get to B and are still off track, and there is a turn to point C in your route? Left of track is then significantly different to left of route.

It has resulted in a loss of separation, hence the AIC and directive for us.

I'm not sue but I suspect left/right of route is ICAO, and we are coming into line.

[FGD135]

"Leaving" is present tense. "Left" is past tense.


If you have left your level several minutes ago, but have been unable to report that (due frequency congestion, say), then to say "leaving" is wrong - and would certainly feel wrong.


Nothing in the AIP gives us licence to cease using proper english!


"MELBOURNE CENTRE (CALLSIGN) CLEARED FLIGHT LEVEL TWO ONE ZERO, LEAVING FLIGHT LEVEL TWO NINER ZERO".
This may be what it says in AIP, but this is wrong. Sometimes there are typos and misprints in the AIP. This is one of those times.


If you were passing FL245 at the time of the call, then you should have said "DESCENDING TO FLIGHT LEVEL TWO ONE ZERO, LEFT FLIGHT LEVEL TWO FIVE ZERO"


Diversions around weather? Why do Qantas pilots insist on saying things like "require 20 miles left of track to avoid weather", when they don't really require that?


Sure, they may require a diversion, but the amount is really just a request. If they really want to use the word "require", then they should say "require diversion due weather, request 20 miles left of track".


To say "require 20 miles left of track" is to say that 19 miles left will not suffice, nor will 21, 30, 40 or 50 - it must be 20!

[Capn Bloggs]

That AIP call really is a doozy as it is totally farked and non-sensical.

If you were passing FL245 at the time of the call, then you should have said "DESCENDING TO FLIGHT LEVEL TWO ONE ZERO, LEFT FLIGHT LEVEL TWO FIVE ZERO"

Actually, the call would be "Descending to FL 210, Left FL 250" being the last vacated level, not your original cruising level. :ok:

"up to, up to 20 I asked for!".;)

[LeadSled]

Bloggs,
It would be "passing" FL250, NOT left. "Left" is a direction, period.
All this has nothing to do with "tense" and all to do with standard aviation phraseology.
Forget what you grew up with, there were some really dangerous gotyas
in Australia's "standard phraseology, until we adopted ICAO Annex IX, Vol. 11 on the subject.
Tootle pip11

[Wally Mk2]

interesting how such a fairly innocuous few words can lead to pages & pages of dialogue, keeps us amused I guess:)

Ah center BogunAir 234 where lookin' at some wx up ahead here ....ah request 20 L of trk..........seems to work every time & is riddled with common sense:ok:

Wmk2

[ANCPER]

Di_Vosh

Thanks for nothing (for reminding me).

Australia, home of Capt and ATCO Pedant. Well, that isn't quite true, flt crew are 10 x worse that ATC.

Edit: Only here could you get an AIP on track/route, WTH!

[compressor stall]

Leadsled, I almost agree with you 100%.

My only disagreement is that it's not Annex IX vol II. It's Annex X vol II :cool:

And the final nail in the coffin of the "left-ers" is in the ICAO radio telephony manual doc 9432. :ok:

[Pinky the pilot]

Traffic PPrune; Pinky the pilot leaving `left or leaving` thread, for a less pedantic thread and another glass of red. :E

Will report when bottle empty.;)

[MyNameIsIs]

"Left" is a direction, period.
Not so, Mr Sled.


"Left" is only a direction when it is paired with the word "Turn" or I think even "Assigned Heading" for a SID (I don't have these in the back blocks where I bash around so am a little rusty) - you will find no reference to any instruction in the AIP where they just say "Left 200", it is always "Turn left 200", or after take-off "Left turn...."




While it isn't overly hard to know when to use certain phrases, I don't get Nazi over things like "left" or "leaving". I believe that the vast majority of English-to-English speakers do understand both.


How bout we just say "I'm not at FL250 any more, it doesn't matter that I've left it or im leaving it right now, I'm just not there, and im on my way up/down to (insert altitude/level here)"

[compressor stall]

It's not that they won't understand it. You and I both know what it means on a nice day.

It's for the time when there is some interference in a very busy RT environment and the "turn" is overridden and the receiver thinks he hears something else. You have one word that means two very different things but would need to be paired with another word to be interpreted correctly. Miss that paired word and all bets are off.

Using "leaving" for altitudes and "left" for headings removes this problem - and a layer in the accident chain.


Several hundred people would be alive today if the term, "We are at take-off" was uttered a different way.

[Capn Bloggs]

Forget what you grew up with, there were some really dangerous gotyas
in Australia's "standard phraseology, until we adopted ICAO Annex IX, Vol. 11 on the subject.

Given that it's Annex 10 Vol 2, where exactly, in that document is "Left vs Leaving" addressed?

As for your ICAO radio telephony manual doc 9432, Compressor Stall, it hardly has any credibility when it contains this tripe:

ATC: "Fastair 345 when ready descend to FL 180"

Pilot: "Fastair 345 descending to FL 180 will report leaving FL 350 Fastair 345"

Even AIP is better than that nonsense.

[FGD135]

... interpreted correctly. Miss that paired word and all bets are off.That would be a good time to ask the controller to "say again". To not seek clarification would require you to make an assumption about the instruction.


Since when can the phrase "left two zero zero" be mistaken for a heading instruction? ATC will never give a heading that way. Headings are always given with the word "heading" before the numbers, e.g "turn left heading two zero zero". The pilot read back should also include the word "heading".


When a flight level is being referred to - by either pilot or ATC - the words "flight level" will always immediately precede the numbers, e.g "left flight level two zero zero".


If pilots and ATC are preceding the numbers with those terms then it is impossible for confusion to be created.


Stally, can you give an example of a set of RT exchanges where such confusion could arise? You can include any amount of over, or clipped transmissions, but you cannot omit any of those above key words.


Several hundred people would be alive today if the term, "We are at take-off" was uttered a different way.Actually, I don't think anybody heard that transmission, as it coincided with a transmission from either the tower or the Pan Am aircraft!

[Kelly Slater]

The pilot readback does not include the word "heading", though perhaps it should and you will never be chipped by anyone other than a pedantic checkie for saying it.
There is the right radio call and then there is everything else. The fact that discussions like this continue only proves that the AIP does not cover radio transmissions adequately. CASA will not clear up your questions but merely refer you to your training department or flying school as the case may be and those people only have the same resources as you to determine word perfect radio procedure.

[LeadSled]

CP,
Thanks for that, my error, it is most certainly Annex X.

Whether some like it or not, Australia adopted ICAO phraseology, and dropped our ratbag local ways (at least in theory), in the mid-1990s.

For those of you banging on about tense, ICAO usage takes precedence of "standard English" (whatever that is, these days).

Tootle pip!!

[Capn Bloggs]

Ledsled, Again, where in Chapter 2 does it mention anything about Left/Leaving, or is this just another one of your sweeping Fastair generalisations?

[LeadSled]

Bloggs,
Download a copy of Annex X, Vol.11 for yourself and looks it up.
Your "If you don't show me, it ain't true" approach cuts no ice with me.

If you want to continue on in blind ignorance of what ICAO docs. actually say, bolstered by the Australian aviation aversion to change, that is your decision.

To me (and the rest of the aviation world outside Australia), the whole issue is quite clear, has nothing to do with tense or "standard English", the ICAO lists of standard words and phrases are mercifully short, compared to the Australian approach.

Indeed, ICAO "Aviation English" and standard English are two very different things, it is aviation English competence that pilots have to demonstrate, and you may have noticed that an increasing number of pilots, whose first language is not English, for many of these English "tense" is a meaningless concept, but they nevertheless ply the world's airways safely, communicating efficiently.

Australia is a very small (and getting smaller) part of the aviation scene.

As I have said, so many times before, the rest of the aviation world communicates, Australia has "radio procedures", whether "communications" results from voicing Australian "radio procedures", communications is not a necessary outcome of said "radio procedures".

Time for you to join the real world. The Australian move to ICAO compliance in this area was in the mid 1990s, supported by AATA, Ansett and Qantas individually, BARA, AOPA etc, don't you think it is time you caught up.

Tootle pip!!

[Ollie Onion]

Seriously, I think you are overthinking this a little bit. Leaving or left!! Everyone will know what you mean. I remember getting repremanded by a checkie for saying 'gidday' to Sydney APP because that is 'not in the Jepps' and Sydney is too congested! Honestly if Heathrow and JFK can find time to say good morning and goodbye then Sydney can handle it. That was the day I realised aviation in Australia was to be taken in a 'different' light than the rest of the aviation world where most work to make your day out easier and more enjoyable, not full of people critisizing you for saying 'left 370'.

[Jack Ranga]

I think it's time for a national summit, kind of like when Kevin Rudd got Australia's finest minds together. We could nut out these problems as a group, ICAO sanctioned of course. We could teach the gen y kiddies how to read AIP, we could teach ATC's how to interpret re-calcitrant American pilot terminology, even if Australian's use it. We could also teach ATC's how to ensure aircraft remain OCTA because they've used incorrect Airspace Class in their transmission.

Summit time :ok:

[Ollie Onion]

Yes, I will come, can we hold it somewhere like Nadi, there are always strange government summits or conferences there. We might as well enjoy ourselves!!

[Capn Bloggs]

Download a copy of Annex X, Vol.11 for yourself and looks it up.
Your "If you don't show me, it ain't true" approach cuts no ice with me.

I have. It's not in my copy. So are you telling porkies?

[cockney steve]

As an Englishman, apart from sheer buggerousness (a wellknown Aussie trait :} ) Why the hell would you wantto use a word which is ambiguous or context-dependent, when you have a clear, definitive alternative?

Left= departed or changed direction.
To = intended destination, adittionally (too) 1+1 (two)
superflous if correct unambiguous phraseology is used.

Right = okay, relative direction, immediacy.

"left to 110 right "....OK,it wouldn't be transmitted by even the most gormless, but it's possible, so why make holes in the cheese when you don't need to?

departed or vacated =clear and unmistakeable...left is open to misintrepretation.

to/two has caused accidents, that's easy to see why.

RT procedures were established when valve-radio on AM (Amplitude Modulation) was the only horse in town. It's deficiencies were largely mitigated by procedures which attempted to overcome the------ or the SCCCCHHHHHHH....
Why not just think about what you're saying and wether it could be said in a clearly-defined ,unambiguous way which a "foreigner" could not misinterpret.

This truly IS a safety issue which CASA could devote it's energies to ,instead of hounding colour-defecient pilots.....
CVD pilots =no accidents 20+years

Military night vision (monochrome) gogle pilots=no accidents

Misinterpreted/ not heard/faulty radio accidents....LOTS

why compromise safety when you don't have to?

[ANCPER]

Ollie Onion, post 98. You got it one :ok:

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Bloggs,

Procedures change. There used to be a phrasing of "This is XYZ" to overcome any confusion wih crap radios. Not anymore. The reason for the phrasing of Leaving vs. Left has been explained and if you are too stubborn/ignorant/lazy to amend your procedures to fit in with what should be used then I don't know what to say. Does your vocabulary include such gems as "turns finals", "with you", "request code and traffic" and "out of"?

If you have actually operated in environments where ATC's english proficiency is about level two, then you will appreciate the value of proper communication.

It's not about cool, it's about standardisation to eliminate misinterpretation.

I've shown you where there is an example of "Leaving" (even if it isn't in the phrasing lists), yet you seem unable to reciprocate. Even your quoted Fastair example uses "Leaving".

Present something better or let it go. :hmm:

[le Pingouin]

If you have actually operated in environments where ATC's english proficiency is about level two, then you will appreciate the value of proper communication. Do you mean like the US? I thought we were meant to be blindly following everything they do.

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

The US?
Nah, I mean like Malaysia.

As a US example,
If you heard the instruction "taxi to position and hold" what would you do?

Guess why they now say, "Line up and wait"?:E

Even the FAA acknowledges that ICAO phraseology is to be continued by ATC if used by the pilot.

[Capn Bloggs]

Does your vocabulary include such gems as "turns finals", "with you", "request code and traffic" and "out of"?
Absolutely! Plus Rolls, IFR Taxi (anybody seen an IFR taxi around here?), Enters and backtracks, pending clearance and the best one "on top"!! :ok::ok:

Said "Left" a few times today and it felt so....natural... :} I wasn't turning neither!!

The only thing I'm not letting go is Leadslead's claim that ICAO Annex Bla, Chapter Bla has the text that shows it's ICAO to say Leaving. Still waiting.

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Funny that, everyone else is still waiting for your example of "Left".

Maybe there ain't any such animal?:confused:

[Captain Nomad]

What's the problem with "on top" when stating in flight conditions on first contact with approach?

You could say "visual" (because you currently meet VMC criteria) but then you might be given an instruction which would require visual contact with something below the cloud layer. If you say "IMC" you are lying. What would you say?

[Capn Bloggs]

Make It Happen Captain, you're hanging on too tight. I have never said "Leaving" was wrong and "Left" was right (correct). Read my posts. As for the only example of "Leaving" voice RT in AIP (ENR 1.1 12.1.4), I've said it before and I'll say it again: it's nonsensical jibberish.

Still waiting for LS to show us all where ICAO Ann 10 Vol II shows "Leaving".

What's the problem with "on top" when stating in flight conditions on first contact with approach?
It doesn't make sense. You can either make a Visual approach, in which case you call Visual, or you can't, in which case you say nothing and ATC will continue to descend you via the STAR/Vectors/whatever until you either do call Visual or you do an instrument approach. What would you expect Sydney Approach to do differently if you called "on top" or didn't say anything?

You could say "visual" (because you currently meet VMC criteria) but then you might be given an instruction which would require visual contact with something below the cloud layer.
Better have a re-read of what "Visual" means in the context of an approach, Nomad, methinks... ;)

Of course, this was quite a lot simpler and better explained in AIP until ICAO RT came along...

[Wally Mk2]

"Blogsy" that comment "your hanging on too tight" about sums up this whole thread!:E
I mean Jesus there's so many variations heard of the R/T Daily that one becomes almost numb to it all! Good job there's no R/T cops up there or we would all be locked up for life especially the crap heard on 121.5, that's a certain Airlines private chit chat channel :E



Wmk2

[Capn Bloggs]

Pests, they are! :}

[FGD135]

... everyone else is still waiting for your example of "Left".
MakeItHappenCaptain,


Let's look at an example. Let's say you were maintaining FL290, but left that level, on descent, several minutes ago.


Let's say that, due to congestion on the frequency, you have been unable to make your "leaving" report.


You are now passing FL245. What would you now say?


Would you still say "leaving FL290"? Or would you say "left FL290"?

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<when valve-radio on AM (Amplitude Modulation) was the only horse in town.>>

So what mode are they now using for VHF R/T?

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

PASSING FL245, DESCENDING TO (level).:E

Would that not be more relevant?

I'll happily concede if anyone can show me a printed example of "Left" being used in your context in the books.

I have already supplied one that says "Leaving".

[Captain Nomad]

Better have a re-read of what "Visual" means in the context of an approach, Nomad, methinks...


I'm quite aware that those requirements are different.

What would you expect Sydney Approach to do differently if you called "on top" or didn't say anything?


The AIP requirement calls for stating 'in flight conditions' on first contact. There are other things that can be asked of a pilot such as "maintain own separation," "pass behind...," "report sighting" etc, all of which are fair game (especially for smaller craft and aircraft that may not even be 'approaching' - could be just transiting) and separate to a visual approach.

I guess it all hinges on the words in AIP ENR 1.1 subsection 12.1.6 (b.) "if appropriate." It could say (but does not) "if able to meet visual approach criteria." Your interpretation would suggest that you only consider it appropriate to report inflight conditions if you can conduct a visual approach - fair enough but possibly not the only interpretation! :E

[LeadSled]

FGD 135,
How about "passing FL 245" ---- due to radio congestion or whatever, "leaving FL290" is no longer relevant, and ATC will understand the message. In short, adapt to the situation.
"Left" is a direction, a concept that obviously causes some of you a problem. Jump the mental hurdle.

Bloggs,
The "Fastair" example is from the ICAO RH handbook, and reflects ICAO recommended phraseology. The UK RT CAP and the NZ AIP (last time I looked), use the same example(s).

What a lot of you who have been brought up in Australian anal retentive aviation community just "don't get", is that the ICAO recommendations do not attempt to produce page after page of minor variations on a theme, and the "approved" exchange of words for each little variation.

The ICAO approach is for pilots to use their brains ( a radical concept in Australia, I know) and adapt to the circumstances, the recommended words and phrases are intended to cover the small number of areas where very clear intent or action is vital, and any possibility of misinterpretation is minimized.

So those of you who want to regard the ICAO RT Handbook, The UK CAP, or the NZ AIP ( or the Jepp "100" series pages of the WWT) as a load of rubbish ( or whatever the pejorative description was) reveal more about your own shortcomings, than anything else.

Some of you, instead of behaving like primary school English teachers, why don't you just accept ICAO recommendations --- that will at least minimize the risk.

Tootle pip!!

PS: Cockney Steve, you have it wrong on "left" as well.

[glekichi]

The ICAO approach is for pilots to use their brains ( a radical concept in Australia, I know) and adapt to the circumstances,

Yet at the same time you're telling us that even when a level was left some minutes ago we must still say 'leaving', even if the circumstance is one in which the word 'left' would never, ever be mistaken for a direction of a turn?

Do you not see the irony of your stance?

[blackteal]

Seriously this thread has to end!!!

What a f...ing joke this has become I am amazed that so many people have continued to contribute to this nonsense !!!

[LeadSled]

Do you not see the irony of your stance?

glekichi,
Nothing ironic at all.

I don't have a "stance",I am simply quoting ICAO ( and most of the aviation world except Australia) recommended usage, as a professional pilot of quite a few years standing, and with a thorough knowledge of not just the detail of the relevant ICAO Annex, but the context and intent.

Whether you want to accept it or not ( you obviously don't) "left" is a direction.

In the example quoted, the "leaving" report has become redundant, so a pilot (as opposed to an Australian anal retentive English usage pedant with a pilot's license) should just report passing the actual FL below FL290.

Aviation communications should be about common sense, not the "gotcha" approach that characterizes so much in the Australian aviation scene --- and with the increasing lack of experience and competence of many newer CASA FOIs, it is getting worse.

Tootle pip!!

[Capn Bloggs]

PASSING FL245, DESCENDING TO (level).

Would that not be more relevant?
If you can't say "Leaving" as soon as you leave and you won't say "left", then there's no point in saying anything at all. Or maybe you could say..."descending to FL 200"... Or was it "On Descent to..." :}

It could say (but does not) "if able to meet visual approach criteria."
ENR 1.1 12.8.7.

with a thorough knowledge of not just the detail of the relevant ICAO Annex, but the context and intent.
The reality is that the annex you quote contains nothing about what we're talking here (Yoda-speak).

I notice the POMs are still saying Flight Level Two Hundred, when ICAO says Two Zero Zero. Tut tut. I'll have to go over there and sort the motherland out...

[glekichi]

Whether you want to accept it or not ( you obviously don't) "left" is a direction.

Whether you want to accept it or not ( you obviously don't) "left" also has other meanings in plain language, and plain language is allowed by the AIP.

Whilst I would hardy, if ever, use 'left', I don't see how you can crucify those that do, as long as when they do so they are mindful that it could, in some circumstances, possibly be (mis)interpreted as a direction.

[FGD135]

Here's another example. Let's say a controller has cleared an aircraft to descend, and that descent has begun.


But, let's say the pilot has momentarily forgotten to report "leaving" or "left" his altitude.


ATC suspects the aircraft has started to descend and now wants confirmation. Let's say the aircraft is now passing FL200.


Does the controller say "ABC, confirm left FL290?"


Or should he somehow make that query using the word "leaving"? E.g:


"ABC, confirm leaving FL290?"
"ABC, confirm that you were leaving FL290?"
"ABC, confirm that you have done leaving FL290?"
"ABC, confirm that you have carried out the leaving of FL290?"


The latter four possibilities are ridiculous, and would very likely create confusion in the mind of the pilot.


What this example shows, is that the word "leaving" is very much present tense, and "left" very much past tense, and to use one of these words in the wrong tense would virtually guarantee confusion, requiring extra RT exchanges to clarify.

[cockney steve]

vacated!...clear, cannot be misinterpreted and also implies
"FL290 is now free and vacant for other traffic"

@ Heathrow director....brain fart....meant unsophisticated MW and LW transmissions. I am not well-up on Aircraft Comms but guess that VHF is not frequency, but sideband modulated?
whatever....the point I was trying to make, is that a Non-native English-speaking pilot is much safer in proximity to other traffic which broadcasts a message which has , as far as possible, words with only one meaning.
There is currently a thread outpointing the Spanish standardising English RT, whilst the French, apparently, are resisting , therefore creating SA problems fornon-francophiles (or should that be "Francophones?)

[Captain Nomad]

ENR 1.1 12.8.7.


With all due respect, that reference is not specifically in reference to 'first contact - in flight conditions.'

Like I said, I see where you are coming from but there are other ways to interpret that requirement (who would have thought!). :}

[harrowing]

cockney steve
Surely that level will not be available for other traffic until you are one thousand feet below.
I also believe that you have not left a level until you are at least out of IFR/VFR tolerance for maintaining. It always made me smirk when people would call left FL... as soon as they were given a clearance, whereas the leaving call IMHO was more correct. That was a few years ago anyway.
Step climbs and descents were often misunderstood with either too many or not enough calls made.
Cheers

[Lambswool]

Practically, I can not see why a "leaving", "left" or other call should be needed when identified. Same concept as not needing to when maintaining an assigned level or last vacated level when changing frequencies if you are identified.

Reference?

I thought ENR 1.1 General Procedures 12.1.2 covered this?

"Pilots are not required to nominate a descent point if identified".

[cockney steve]

@ Harrowing, - Of course, you're quite correct, but, all things being equal, ATC , in a massively crowded environment, having a desperate need for that airway, would , one supposes, asign it to other traffic than a supersonic rocket or a lead balloon...:8
That is to say, short of a massive updraught/downdraught/catastrophic failure, the vacating aircraft would continue to change level , as would the aircraft being reassigned to the vacated level.
They would maintain their relative positions to each other, wouldn't they?

Either way, other traffic is not going to get a rude awakening when they realise that "Left " meant "left" and not "vacated," Right? :}
This thread is really a load of anally retentive pedantry......but if it saves even one "OH 5h1t" moment,it's been worthwhile.

[Derfred]

I don't believe that's how it is done here... maybe we are "different"

[LeadSled]

PASSING FL245, DESCENDING TO (level).

Would that not be more relevant?

Bloggs,
I'll go along with that --- it is the "communication" that counts, not a "procedure".
Tootle pip!!

PS: Perhaps by know, you have figured out that the important bit in Annex X, Vol.11 is that the underlying principles of communication are set out.

[Compylot]

Once again Gentlemen congratulations to all on your fascinating, robust and important contributions to such an important topic regarding left or leaving.


I have enjoyed sipping a red or two while absorbing all six plus pages of said topic. I particularly enjoy the numerous AIP quotes to back up the arguments.


Happybandit, thankyou for your kind PM, I do not know you Sir so relax your secret is safe. Perhaps one day, in a far flung part of the world, in a bar frequented by flight crew, we may unknowingly cross paths and during the ensuring conversation as the topic drifts to such matters we may both have an epiphany and realise who the other is. Until that moment I raise my glass of red and look forward to more discussion.


Back to topic, carry on gentlemen


Doodle doo!!

[Jack Ranga]

I block some doods, but you're such a d!ckhead compylot :ok: I can't block ya brutha, keep up the good work :ok:

[Wally Mk2]

..................hey 'JR' i thought you might have 'left' or was contemplating 'leaving' this thread 'cause like me am totally lost as I see little sense 'left' here or it's 'leaving' me fast but either way I'm 'out of' here:E
Every time I say 'out of FL370' I have a smile on my dial:-)


Wmk2

[Hempy]

'through three five oh for two one oh'

lovin it

[Jack Ranga]

Wal, just having a laugh! Do a straw poll, take note of how many times you get chipped for saying 'out of.' None is my guess :E

[Wally Mk2]

'JR' I say it at random times, sometimes I say 'left' other times 'leaving' & of course may fav 'out of', never get chipped for any version as I am sure the ATC guys can think laterally unlike most pilots:-):ok:
I've said over the years as well 'with you' when changing to a new ATC'er, 'checking in' anything that comes to mind & suits the mood:) 34 yrs of driving planes & am constantly dreamin' up new ways of saying hello to the guys/gals on the other end of the microphone:ok:


Wmk2