Australia - report airborne - question
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australia - report airborne - question
Question for Australian controllers. Scenario - I'm a helicopter out of view from the tower. I've been given a T/O clearance with track, altitude and report airborne. I read back my clearance and then Take off. Q is - Is my airborne report - ABC Airborne or ABC tracking direct ......on climb ....... passing ...... I've always used ABC Airborne but questioned myself when the contoller required Alt the other day.
thanks . VH Mick
thanks . VH Mick
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: MEL
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as the tower is concerned "ABC airbone" is fine.
On first contact with depatures however, tracking instructions, level passing and level cleared to are needed. (Unless on a KOPTER route which has altitude levels contained in it).
On first contact with depatures however, tracking instructions, level passing and level cleared to are needed. (Unless on a KOPTER route which has altitude levels contained in it).
Mick,
The tower should make the distinction with the TO clearance: YMEN has a couple of pads out of sight of the tower, and they will (usually) be "report airborne" with the TO clearance. As UA says, departures will then treat you like any other aircraft, with all the usual reports on first check in.
Sometimes YMML traffic inbound for 34 will be on descent from PLE, and getting close to EN circuit traffic as they approach almost overhead EN threshold 35. I would surmise that would be the reason for the altitude call that you had, to protect the paraffin pidgeon passing overhead: I've been invited to reduce my rate of climb on more than one occasion, exceeding 4000fpm RoC in the BK117 with a 744 about to trip his TCAS somewhere over Preston
The tower should make the distinction with the TO clearance: YMEN has a couple of pads out of sight of the tower, and they will (usually) be "report airborne" with the TO clearance. As UA says, departures will then treat you like any other aircraft, with all the usual reports on first check in.
Sometimes YMML traffic inbound for 34 will be on descent from PLE, and getting close to EN circuit traffic as they approach almost overhead EN threshold 35. I would surmise that would be the reason for the altitude call that you had, to protect the paraffin pidgeon passing overhead: I've been invited to reduce my rate of climb on more than one occasion, exceeding 4000fpm RoC in the BK117 with a 744 about to trip his TCAS somewhere over Preston
I personally hate that phrase 
. I instead give a "Depart parrallel rwyxx, xx turn" or "depart into wind make xx turn".
The "report airborne" phrase requires just an "ABC airborne" call to the tower as far as i am concerned, a normal departure report is still required. Why i hate it is that I have given you a departure clearance, I usually cannot move anything until I have you sighted, therefore i'm looking out for you, thus I can see when your airborne.
The ONLY time i have used it is with an aircraft departing from within the CTR, (but not at the AD), no traffic, and really no need to speak with them apart from the fact they were in CTA..
It's really just increasing the R/T load as far as i am concerned.. but then a lot of that happens..
. I instead give a "Depart parrallel rwyxx, xx turn" or "depart into wind make xx turn". The "report airborne" phrase requires just an "ABC airborne" call to the tower as far as i am concerned, a normal departure report is still required. Why i hate it is that I have given you a departure clearance, I usually cannot move anything until I have you sighted, therefore i'm looking out for you, thus I can see when your airborne.
The ONLY time i have used it is with an aircraft departing from within the CTR, (but not at the AD), no traffic, and really no need to speak with them apart from the fact they were in CTA..
It's really just increasing the R/T load as far as i am concerned.. but then a lot of that happens..
