Calling tower on approach

[spoilers yellow]

When told to contact the tower on approach, what do you guys want to hear?
I keep it down to the callsign on the assumption that you have all other info at your fingertips if you want it.
Is it really necessary for the callsign, runway, dme, speed etc or does it not really bother you?

Thanks in advance.

[Chilli Monster]

Callsign is fine, unless (obviously) you're told to contact with any other information (possibly range or speed for example). But that's it - nothing else required

[vintage ATCO]

Wot Chilli says

[GT3]

if the airport has 2 parallel runways its best to say left or right.....

[Turn It Off]

Just callsign Only would be great.

I work at a quieter airport and we dont get a mass of IFR runway movements but quite a lot of VFR. I try and bang the VFR's out as quickly as I can because there is some poor guy / gal sat there paying a fortune for their lesson.

When a pilot comes on with

"XXX Tower, this is the YYY123 Localiser established, just becoming fully established, range X DME, speed 160 knots errrr i mean speed 160 to 4. "

it is not only off putting and breaks the string of thought, the way the gaps were before I can now only clear two of the three that were on conditionals to lineup for takeoff which means I have to go through the issue of cancelling line up clearances as well. Doesn't happen as much as we start going into the winter traffic and the VFRs aren't out but maybe the winter would be a good time to practice

Just my thoughts on It.

TIO

[Eva San]

As said previously, callsign and runway is appreciated in case of multiple runways airport.

As for the rest working in a relatively busy IFR airport, I tend to maximize the use of time for IFRs...

When a pilot comes on with

"XXX tower, good morning this is XXXX , a PA 32, VFR with flight plan from XXXX to your field, presently at four thousand errr five hundred feet err sorry 3500 feet passing.... noise of somebody shuffling the maps... E point estimating your field in ....err [voice of the instructor in the background: 5 minutes !] err 5 minutes, three passengers on board, with information X, request full stop landing, ....errr over "

it is not only off putting and breaks the string of thought, ....

Just a matter of point of view !

[spoilers yellow]

thanks for the info,
Would you still require the L or R runway designator for say, LHR where almost always there is a different frequency and controller for each runway?
Cheers.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

At Heathrow they practice the "contact Tower with callsign only" procedure so just say your callsign. The Tower controllers should be fully aware of which runway you are approaching and they have SSR so for you to state the obvious is superfluous.

[NigelOnDraft]

At Heathrow they practice the "contact Tower with callsign only" procedure so just say your callsign

Errrr.... They did for a short time some while ago, but now the "Callsign" only seems to be quoted for the change to 120.4 ?

In fact, I always call with C/S only, but seem in a minority or 1! The Twr seem to know exactly who / what / where I am...

NoD

[av8boy]

You know, there are those days when it seems like it might be handy if everybody checked-in with callsign, nature of the proposed emergency, souls on board, and fuel remaining in minutes...



Perhaps I'm just in a mood today though...

[DFC]

"XXX tower, good morning this is XXXX , a PA 32, VFR with flight plan from XXXX to your field, presently at four thousand errr five hundred feet err sorry 3500 feet passing.... noise of somebody shuffling the maps... E point estimating your field in ....err [voice of the instructor in the background: 5 minutes !] err 5 minutes, three passengers on board, with information X, request full stop landing, ....errr over "

Not a good example since the student is obvously under training and believe me I have heard some nice one's from ATCO's under training.

The problem with VFR flights making long winded initial calls is that they are doing exactly what the UK Manual of RT requires them to do.

Nearly every PPL operator that I hear in the UK askes for a radio check with their initial departure call. For an age I wondered why bother since if the radio is working, the initial call will be replied to and if it is not then no reply will be made or perhaps a reply describing the comms as less than 5. However, I have just found out that the RT manual makes the requesting of a radio check in the initial departure call standard.

Thank god we don't hear "Heathrow Delivery XXX1234 request radio check one two one decimal nice seven zero boeing 747 information xray runway 27 left for departure runway 27 right for landing QNH 1024 QFE 1021 requesting clearance to ABC (we had corflakes for breakfast)".............but that is what many UK pilots elsewhere are doing as per the official manual (with their own splash of cornflakes )

If in the UK, when one is told to "contact" another ATS unit then your details have been passed and all that is required is the minimum details detailed in the AIP.

Less words makes it esier for us foreigners to understand

Regards,

DFC

[gravitysucks]

I generally check in with callsign and distance. Obviously tower know the DME range anyway but if there's other traffic lined up or on final ahead/behind it clues them in too.
Just my 20 cents worth.
GS

[Keygrip]

Well you got my bit in there, Gravity.

Remember going into Gatwick one morning in a Piper Arrow. Prat of a pilot that was flying it was at four DME travelling at a groundspeed of 60 knots.

Virgin 012 (747) came on and reported 12 DME.

I calculated the collision to occur just about at the threshold.

VS12 told to go around (I've never felt so ashamed). I was bugging the pilot to get on with it - but short of a fist fight on final, there was little I could do.

[rookie#1]

Keygrip,

I'm not quite so sure the prat in your aeroplane was the pilot.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<VS12 told to go around (I've never felt so ashamed). I was bugging the pilot to get on with it - but short of a fist fight on final, there was little I could do.>>

I can't understand why Gatwick Tower didn't break off the clockwork mouse and let the real aeroplane land..??

[Firestorm]

There are a few ATCOs that could do with a reminder of the definition of 'brevity': Inverness springs to mind....

[Keygrip]

rookie - the pilot was also the aircraft owner and determined in his thinking that as "he was ahead and below, he had the right of way".

I was merely a prostitute that had been hired to ride shotgun as a flying instructor who held an instrument rating.

I say agin - short of a fistfight, there was nothing that I could do (except write to Virgin and apologise [they didn't reply]).

H.D. I agree completely - but there's more, and even worse - the first encounter with the same 747 was when we were downwind and VS12 reported on frequency. Approach told him that he was going to be vectored to DVR because of a slower aircraft ahead.

Now that one just caused me raised eyebrows as I thought to myself "ATC has the bigger picture and can understand why he didn't move us first".

When he made his 12 mile call on final, I noted our DME said 4 minutes to run and alerted tower, as I let go the transmit button, approach broke in on frequency and commanded the go around.

I've never understood the ATC handling of the incident - nor forgotten it. I never flew as prostitute again. Nightmare.

[VectorLine]

the first encounter with the same 747 was when we were downwind and VS12 reported on frequency. Approach told him that he was going to be vectored to DVR because of a slower aircraft ahead.

Huh?

vectored from downwind at Gatwick to DVR because of slower traffic?

I think you've got your @rse and your elbow mixed up there.