line up clearances!!!
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 8,266
Likes: 1
From: Berkshire, UK
It stems from some incidents which occured long ago. In one such incident a pilot was told "behind the departing..." so he turned his small aeroplane on to the runway immediately behind a much larger aircraft and nearly got blown away.
I don't know why people come on here and question UK procedures - we have an enviable safety record and many of our "quirky" procedures are designed to enhance safety.
I don't know why people come on here and question UK procedures - we have an enviable safety record and many of our "quirky" procedures are designed to enhance safety.
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 8,266
Likes: 1
From: Berkshire, UK
Interesting point Chev.. I can't find anywhere the recommended phraseology for lining up #2 to a departure. MATC Pt 1 mentions "after" a landing for lining up and for crossing. CAP 413 does mention the fact that "after" rather than "behind" is used in the UK to line up following a lander but it makes no mention of following a departure! Guess it's all down to local training. I said "behind" when I first arrived at Heathrow and Bill McColl gave my ear a bashing so I never said it again.
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 5
From: South of England
"I don't know why people come on here and question UK procedures - we have an enviable safety record and many of our "quirky" procedures are designed to enhance safety".
I am still trying to decide if the tongue was firmly in the cheek here! Many of the UK procedures might well, in theory, enhance safety but equally create anomalies which must frequently act against the interests of safety - hence, this thread.
I am still trying to decide if the tongue was firmly in the cheek here! Many of the UK procedures might well, in theory, enhance safety but equally create anomalies which must frequently act against the interests of safety - hence, this thread.
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 119
Likes: 2
From: Somewhere
Personally I think the ICAO phrase is the silliest one they have - saying the word "behind" twice!
UK Phraseology does have its own stupidities but the "after" phrase is much better than the ICAO one, in my opinion.
I have worked in both UK and ICAO phraseology airfields so have used both.
I have also found that a lot of UK specific phrases do make it into the ICAO world!
In answer to the original question - one is correct for the UK and the other is correct for ICAO phraseology airfields - neither is most correct!!
UK Phraseology does have its own stupidities but the "after" phrase is much better than the ICAO one, in my opinion.
I have worked in both UK and ICAO phraseology airfields so have used both.
I have also found that a lot of UK specific phrases do make it into the ICAO world!
In answer to the original question - one is correct for the UK and the other is correct for ICAO phraseology airfields - neither is most correct!!
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
From: Here and Now
Behind x 2
My understanding, and this is how my instructors explained it is that the extra "behind" is to reiterate to the sometimes too eager pilot that his is not to line up immediately. IE: the "behind" is the first and last thing that the pilot hears.
To me this makes sense. It is a conditional clearance, but in a busy port it means that you can give an aircraft instruction and move onto the next item. Pilots should be aware of jetblast etc and ensure that there is a safe distance between them and the departing aircraft. How many times have you had pilots call ready halfway down the taxiway? You know full well that he ain't going to make number one to the bus on final or that there is someone on the ground ahead, but it gives them a warm fuzzy that they can get onto the runway and stops them bugging you for more (most airports don't have a punishment bay for pesky pilots
) and it means that it is one more thing that you don't have to think about.
I don't think it is a particularly unsafe practice, providing you get the readback "behind".
Admittedly I haven't had the pleasure of working with a large number of international pilots - yes we do modify and slow things down for the ones that do come through. But the local - and I don't mean local to the airport, are perfectly conversant with what "Behind" means and are probably grateful that they don't get a hold short. I guess it means they can adjust their taxi speed rather than stop their taxi.
To me this makes sense. It is a conditional clearance, but in a busy port it means that you can give an aircraft instruction and move onto the next item. Pilots should be aware of jetblast etc and ensure that there is a safe distance between them and the departing aircraft. How many times have you had pilots call ready halfway down the taxiway? You know full well that he ain't going to make number one to the bus on final or that there is someone on the ground ahead, but it gives them a warm fuzzy that they can get onto the runway and stops them bugging you for more (most airports don't have a punishment bay for pesky pilots
) and it means that it is one more thing that you don't have to think about.I don't think it is a particularly unsafe practice, providing you get the readback "behind".
Admittedly I haven't had the pleasure of working with a large number of international pilots - yes we do modify and slow things down for the ones that do come through. But the local - and I don't mean local to the airport, are perfectly conversant with what "Behind" means and are probably grateful that they don't get a hold short. I guess it means they can adjust their taxi speed rather than stop their taxi.
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 5
From: South of England
My objection to the UK's "After the..." is that...
a) it is non-ICAO and therefore creates a difference, internationally, in a safety-critical situation
b) it was introduced solely as a knee-jerk reaction because one pilot failed to exercise sensible precautions in respect of the conduct of his flight when the ATC instruction was sound
and c) it makes no sense in English ("after the landing 737..." - after it has done what, pray?)
2 s
a) it is non-ICAO and therefore creates a difference, internationally, in a safety-critical situation
b) it was introduced solely as a knee-jerk reaction because one pilot failed to exercise sensible precautions in respect of the conduct of his flight when the ATC instruction was sound
and c) it makes no sense in English ("after the landing 737..." - after it has done what, pray?)
2 s
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
From: Somewhere in Aus (4 now)
In 3 years in Aus using ICAO double behind method, never scene (or heard of) a RWY incursion due to confusion of that phrase. It is worded that way specifically to avoid RWY incursions. Definitely the better method - most correct too you could say
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,694
Likes: 15
From: Wellington,NZ
Or how about (wait, do something else for a few seconds, and then as the landing crosses the threshold)
"Fastair345 line up."
(Or if there's a possibility of confusion)
"Fastair345 line up runway##"
(Or if a takeoff clearance will not be issued pdq)
"Fastair 345 line up (runway##) and wait (reason)"
Or you could just go the full monty and use 3+ transmissions and dozens of words instead.
That certainly has a place, if you need to manage the timing of your r/t, for sure. But just because conditional clearances are available, doesn't mean you have to use them.
(Know a guy who used the first method on a check, one time, just after they'd been brought in. He couldn't remember the correct phraseology. Passed the check.)
"Fastair345 line up."
(Or if there's a possibility of confusion)
"Fastair345 line up runway##"
(Or if a takeoff clearance will not be issued pdq)
"Fastair 345 line up (runway##) and wait (reason)"
Or you could just go the full monty and use 3+ transmissions and dozens of words instead.
That certainly has a place, if you need to manage the timing of your r/t, for sure. But just because conditional clearances are available, doesn't mean you have to use them.
(Know a guy who used the first method on a check, one time, just after they'd been brought in. He couldn't remember the correct phraseology. Passed the check.)
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: South of Beirut, North of Aden
Hi all,
Food for thought...
Several years at London Gatwick using "After the Landing......": 0 runway incursions (personally).
1 Year in the sandpit using "Behind the landing.....": 7/month average runway incursions at the unit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Granted, Dxb an exceptional airport with MAJOR changes in airfield layout weekly so perhaps not a like for like comparison but still.... The figures say something. Interestingly also, we use stopbars 24/7 which pilots seem to ignore in many of these incidents. These are not in use during daylight hours in the UK.
Can any pilot try to explain why they would cross a red lit stopbar under any circumstance without being instructed to do so?... As a PPL I would not even consider it unless specifically instructed to do so and would then clarify it and only do so with extreme caution! This is not an antagonistic question but I would genuinely like to come up with some answers!
Not to mention the insistence of the use of only ICAO phraseology at the unit, some of which makes my hair stand on end and clearly confuses pilots of every nationality.
Some of you may not like the way the Brits do it but it works!
Cheers all
CR!
Food for thought...
Several years at London Gatwick using "After the Landing......": 0 runway incursions (personally).
1 Year in the sandpit using "Behind the landing.....": 7/month average runway incursions at the unit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Granted, Dxb an exceptional airport with MAJOR changes in airfield layout weekly so perhaps not a like for like comparison but still.... The figures say something. Interestingly also, we use stopbars 24/7 which pilots seem to ignore in many of these incidents. These are not in use during daylight hours in the UK.
Can any pilot try to explain why they would cross a red lit stopbar under any circumstance without being instructed to do so?... As a PPL I would not even consider it unless specifically instructed to do so and would then clarify it and only do so with extreme caution! This is not an antagonistic question but I would genuinely like to come up with some answers!
Not to mention the insistence of the use of only ICAO phraseology at the unit, some of which makes my hair stand on end and clearly confuses pilots of every nationality.
Some of you may not like the way the Brits do it but it works!
Cheers all
CR!
aceatco, retired
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 1
From: one airshow or another
HD - I was always taught 'behind the landing...' and 'after the departing'.
Don't like the groundswell against conditional clearances, would seriously hamper our movement rate. Still, with only eight shifts to go before I retire I DON'T CARE!!!
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,122
Likes: 0
From: uk
Thats why Nats is trying to reduce the use of conditional clearances as part of reducing runway incursions.Having worked abroad,often non native english speaking pilots can have problems with ''After'' or ''Behind'' and readbacks are wrong.Or they miss out the conditional part of the clearances.
We have tried not using conditionals,and that is at a unit with a lot of co-ordination per movement and muti runway useage,and it seems to work well.
We have tried not using conditionals,and that is at a unit with a lot of co-ordination per movement and muti runway useage,and it seems to work well.
