Ground terminology
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Behind the wire.
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ground terminology
Hi, there is an on going discussion point at a military base regarding correct terminology. I appears “our” ATC guys are understanding the CAP in a different way to all of my aircrew brethren.
When requesting taxi we often get told.
“…99 cleared taxi to the 13 hold, holding short of 19”
My understanding is that if runway 19 comes before the 13 hold (which it does) and you don’t want me to cross it don’t issue a clearance to the 13 hold. Surely something along the line of “Taxi for Rwy 13 holding short of 19” would be a less ambiguous call – isn’t that ultimately what all communication from ATC should be – unambiguous.
Also if told
“taxi for the 13 hold” with no mention of holding short of any runway (the taxi routes here are set and we tell ATC where we are when we start) surely that automatically clears me to cross runway 19. - You’ve given a clearance all the way to the 13 hold so I’m off.
I welcome thoughts from anyone who has ingested the CAP or any ATC standards people?
Regards,
High_Expect
When requesting taxi we often get told.
“…99 cleared taxi to the 13 hold, holding short of 19”
My understanding is that if runway 19 comes before the 13 hold (which it does) and you don’t want me to cross it don’t issue a clearance to the 13 hold. Surely something along the line of “Taxi for Rwy 13 holding short of 19” would be a less ambiguous call – isn’t that ultimately what all communication from ATC should be – unambiguous.
Also if told
“taxi for the 13 hold” with no mention of holding short of any runway (the taxi routes here are set and we tell ATC where we are when we start) surely that automatically clears me to cross runway 19. - You’ve given a clearance all the way to the 13 hold so I’m off.
I welcome thoughts from anyone who has ingested the CAP or any ATC standards people?
Regards,
High_Expect
Are your holding points not desgnated with letters or letter/number combinations? This would make it easier, but I agree, you should be given a clearance limit of the first holding point ie for runway 19, and told departure will be from runway 13. Giving it the way you describe, the pilot might hear 'taxy to 13 hold' then miss the bit about holding short of 19 for some reason eg someone else transmitting. Course he should read back the entire clearance, but this doesn't mitigate the fact that a runway incursion might occur the way the clearance was given.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Behind the wire.
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No unfortunatly there aren't any intersection letters - that is something they are trying to change but in the mean time why don't they just use some clear comm?!?
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: York, UK
Age: 34
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my experience as a radio operator (non Aviation industry) I would agree that clear comms are vital to success. As soon as any level of ambiguity creeps in, one can find all sorts of things going awry, usually in a dangerous manner!
So, whilst I don't have training in ATC ground comms procedures, I'd say: "Yes, you do have a good point.
" Presumably these things are fairly standardised are they not though?
Phil
So, whilst I don't have training in ATC ground comms procedures, I'd say: "Yes, you do have a good point.
" Presumably these things are fairly standardised are they not though?Phil
Last edited by PhiltheReaper; 28th Nov 2010 at 10:15. Reason: typo
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
High_Expect.... Have you visited ATC and spoken with the SATCO because I think that would do more good than discussing it on here? Long time since I worked in a tower but in the last place I was at we were pedantic in the extreme about anything involving runways.
