Readbacks

[Sky Conductor]

Can someone give me a full list of what is required to be read back..i know QNH, level,headings,speed and hold short instructions. But what else MUST be read back..like if im in the circuit and report downwind..ATC: "G-XX Report Final" must i say "Report Final, G-XX" Or can i just say "G-XX"?. i will, like most pilots say Report Final..but i have heard pilots just use their Reg for nearly every ATC instruction.

[2 sheds]

SC
Certainly could, but you will probably get a whole load of duff gen from many people, including their own opinions. The best thing to do is to go directly to source, i.e. the ICAO Radiotelephony Manual or, if there is one, your own State-issued equivalent as there might be national differences.

2 s

[RAAFASA]

I second the suggestion to check your local document (AIP, whatever) for accurate readback requirements for your area. In Oz, there would be no requirement to readback where to report, just to make the report at the appropriate time.
Personally, I hate it when pilots readback everything I say. Firstly, I worry that they have done so because they do not truly understand the instruction (maybe from lack of English skills, maybe a conceptual problem). Secondly, in a busy environment it contributes to unecessary frequency congestion which can be quite frustrating and potentially dangerous.

Certainly I want to hear callsign, levels, tracking instructions, clearance limits, requirements/restrictions (reach A050 by a certain point/distance or requirement to remain east/north of a visual fix/radial whatever), maintain own separation, follow another acft, land/take off/line up/hold short etc. Look the list is quite lengthy here, suspect yours is also.

However, if in doubt about any instruction - please ask in plain English (paraphrasing often helps to show comprehension or lack thereof). If your local airfield isn't too busy, most ATCs would probably be happy to help "refine" your RT (it makes their job easier in the end). Maybe you could even organise a famil visit to the Tower/APP unit? (It's still do-able in Oz).

Anyway good luck with it - and thanks for caring!

[good egg]

Pilots are required to read back IN FULL messages containing any of the following items:Taxi instructionsLevel instructionsHeading instructionsSpeed instructionsAirways or route clearancesApproach clearancesRunway-in-useClearance to enter, land on, take-off, backtrack, cross or hold short of any active runwaySSR operating instructionsAltimeter settingsVDF informationFrequency changesType of radar serviceTransition levelsItems which do not appear in above list may be acknowledged with an abbreviated read back.Hope that helps.

[bookworm]

must i say "Report Final, G-XX" Or can i just say "G-XX"?. i will, like most pilots say Report Final..but i have heard pilots just use their Reg for nearly every ATC instruction.

I believe it's not good practice to read back a reporting instruction. The readback may be mistaken for the report itself. That may not seem to matter much in the circuit where the controller will confirm your report visually; but if in a procedural situation you're descending and asked to "report passing 3000 ft", and your readback is weak or stomped on, the controller may hear "(unintelligible) passing 3000 ft, G-ABCD" and clear another aircraft to descend to 3000 ft while you're still well above it.

My advice appears to contradict CAP413 which offers an example of a pilot reading back such an instruction. It's not clear if that aspect of the example has been thought out. I think it's an accident waiting to happen.

[good egg]

In the above situation i think "Wilco, G-XXXX" would suffice

[2 sheds]

Or, more specifically, "(c/s) Wilco", in that order, as it is not a readback per se. Or, indeed, just (c/s), which is quite permissible for an acknowledgement of a routine report instruction.

Was hoping to avoid the UK CAP413 as there are numerous errors in it - beside which, the thread originator is not from the UK (I assume).

[anotherthing]

And one that really gets my goat.... when an A/C on departure calls me up and I tell it to 'squawk ident'.... I want a verbal acknowledgment (it is an SSR operating instruction) as well as implemention of the ident - that way I know for certain that 2 way comms have been established, and it's just plain politeness.

And on a similar vein, by the book, it's no use saying to me "London Control ABC123 climbing blah, passing blah, squawking ident"... The ident is supposed to be in response to my request, not your whim - and we ATCOs are fairly (very) simple... we're programmed to say 'quawk ident' on first contact - it's very hard to stop yourself from saying it, and you begin to query whehter the pilot said it or whether you are just imagining it.

And, yes, I should get out more.....

[dscartwright]

>And one that really gets my goat.... when an A/C on departure calls me up and >I tell it to 'squawk ident'.... I want a verbal acknowledgment (it is an SSR >operating instruction) as well as implemention of the ident

I was taught to report "squawking ident" at just the same time (dexterity permitting) as I actually did it. So if ATC hears me say I'm doing it but can't see that I am, he/she knows to inquire whether I've pressed the right button :-)

David C

[anotherthing]

dscartwright

you were taught correctly!! - As long as we get some kind of verbal response as well as doing it, we're happy!

[DX Wombat]

As long as we get some kind of verbal response as well as doing it, we're happy!

This reminds me of an experience I had whilst flying through Shawbury's zone. A student and FI were flying to EGBO from Blackpool, made the usual call and received the standard response which included "QFE 1013". Student read back everything except the QFE.
Shawbury;- "G-XXX QFE 1013". G-XXXX "Roger". Shawbury;- "G-XXXX, QFE 1013." G-XXXX "Roger". Shawbury controller, who had the patience of a saint, repeats once again "G-XXXX, QFE 1013" G-XXXX "Roger", at this point the FI made his presence known and read back the QFE. I had to admire the calm, patient manner in which the controller treated the student. Same student followed me in to EGBO and, having heard my calls to both Shawbury and EGBO managed to announce "visual with HIM!" One was not amused.

[Standard Noise]

It is funny sometimes when pilots think they canreadback what they want, or not, as suits them. With PPL trainees, things may be forgotten in 'the heat of battle' (how many of us can say that we were perfect whilst learning to drive?), but after missing out one readback, I'd expect any instructor worth his or her salt to either tell the student to readback or do it themselves. If you (as an ATCO) are busy, then you haven't got time to waste in long winded cat and mouse games.

But then again, 'professional' pilots can be just the same at times. Best pilots for r/t standards are ex-ATCOs, IMHO.

Oh, and another thing, if an ATCO gives you a QNH different from the one you heard on the ATIS, it's the up to date QNH, so don't come out with 'the ATIS is giving xxxx!?'

[BlueSkye]

My personal pet hate that drives me to insanity is not reading back a frequency change. I call again, nothing. I call AGAIN, nothing. Then I have to go and look for you on the next sector. The next sector is busy and don't answer the phone. Where the hell has my aeroplane gone?

[DX Wombat]

Standard Noise,

but after missing out one readback, I'd expect any instructor worth his or her salt to either tell the student to readback or do it themselves

As a student I made plenty of mistakes, and probably still do, but my FI always corrected me instantly and made me read back correctly. I was astounded when I heard the FI reply as the student's other calls had also taken a couple of attempts at each. When I was doing my PPL before I made a call, my FI would always ask me what I was going to say, what I might expect to hear and how I was going to respond, only then was I allowed to make the call. I was very fortunate, I had a VERY good FI.

[camisa10]

ICAO PANS-ATM Doc.4444
4.5.7.5 READ-BACK OF CLEARANCES
4.5.7.5.1 The flight crew shall read back to the air traffic
controller safety-related parts of ATC clearances and instructions
which are transmitted by voice. The following items shall
always be read back:
a) ATC route clearances;
b) clearances and instructions to enter, land on, take off
from, hold short of, cross, taxi and backtrack on any
runway; and
c) runway-in-use, altimeter settings, SSR codes, level
instructions, heading and speed instructions and,
whether issued by the controller or contained in automatic
terminal information service (ATIS) broadcasts,
transition levels.
4.5.7.5.1.1 Other clearances or instructions, including
conditional clearances, shall be read back or acknowledged in
a manner to clearly indicate that they have been understood
and will be complied with.
4.5.7.5.2 The controller shall listen to the read-back to
ascertain that the clearance or instruction has been correctly
acknowledged by the flight crew and shall take immediate
action to correct any discrepancies revealed by the read-back.
4.5.7.5.2.1 Unless specified by the appropriate ATS
authority, voice read-back of controller-pilot data link communications
(CPDLC) messages shall not be required.

[NIMFLT]

what's your radar showing, that requires you to get aircraft to squawk ident. Are they departing from an airfield in class G without a specific code? Just interested. The only time I use ident is if I suspect a radio failure, although it is the quickest way to identify an aircraft if they aren't squawking an assigned code.

[Standard Noise]

DX - if only there were more FIs about who were that proactive!

It seems that once a student has done an R/T exam, it is assumed that they know how to speak/transmit properly on a frequency. As for ATCOs, we wouldn't get near a validation if our R/T wasn't of a high enough standard, despite having been considered to have passed an R/T exam as part of our college courses (or at least that was the way it worked when I did it).
It's something which can unfortunately permeate into the ranks of the flying professionals too, bad R/T discipline. ATCOs have (or should have) their R/T 'sampled' every six months to help in maintaining standards. These 'samples' are taken at a time decided by an 'in house' examiner and the ATCO only finds out when the recording is presented to them and a de-brief takes place.
If only all organisations did the same thing!?

[ILS 119.5]

"VDF Information"

Yep, never in years of flying had to read that back, and would not know that I had to, and having said that if I needed the information, which I wouldn't then my equipment is more accurate than theirs. Easy way out is to tell the controllers that you have the correct ATIS then according to MATS Pt1 you don't have to say you have the QNH, Runway etc. Also they don't have to tell me.

[jb5000]

VDF as in QDM/QDR/True Bearing etc. etc.?

[ILS 119.5]

Sorry forgot about the basic training and you are correct. but still cannot remember reading it back, and even now would not htink to. I think the CAA Mats Pt. 1 is out of date and I mean well out of date, maybe the people writing it are out of date or can't be arsed to give it a proper up to date meaning. Never mind typical apathy and they will leave it until someone takes their jobs.