Simple question re. readbacks

[XiRho]

Hi, just a simple question which should have a very straightforward answer. I have tried searching for it myself but want it clarified by the people in the know.

Is it appropriate to use 'Wilco' as a response to a request to make a position report?

ie.

"Cleared to enter controlled airspace not above 2000' VFR report overhead xxxx"
- "Cleared to enter controlled airspace not above 2000' VFR Wilco"

Or should it be read back "will report overhead xxxx"

Similarly, in what may be a more controlled situation.

"Cleared VOR DME approach r/w 35 report 5 DME"
-"Cleared VOR DME approach r/w 35 wilco"

or

"Climb FL210 report passing FL140"
-"Climbing FL210 wilco"

I' sure you get the drift!

Thanks very much for replies.

[Glamdring]

Yes. "Wilco" can be used for any requests not requiring a readback.

[sevenstrokeroll]

WILCO

WILCO of course means: I understand and WILL COMPLY with your instructions/clearance etc.

WILCO has fallen on hard times in the USA as some think its corny (corny means old fashioned at least for this purpose).

HOWEVER I USE WILCO whenever I can. It is almost a perfect word and it can save valuble time on the radio, PROVIDED there is no confusion about altitudes headings or clearance limits.

REading back for the purpose of protecting yourself on someone's tape recorder is a good idea, HOWEVER if the controller doesn't HEARBACK ( basis of word is readback) what you say and only HEARS what he wants to hear, someone can still get into trouble.

and just for those who use the radio (RT for the british)

saying your call sign as a response really means nothing

saying your call sign with the word roger means you have heard what the other person has said.

saying your call sign with the word WILCO means you have heard/understand and will comply with what has been said.

and saying roger or wilco without your call sign just leads to potential problems.

[XiRho]

Thanks very much and it is as I thought.

Seeds of doubt were planted today upon hearing a conversion in which 2 experienced pilots were telling a less experienced pilot that 'Wilco' is unacceptable once inside controlled airspace and can't be used to reply to an instruction. (Which I thought was weird since Wilco = Will Comply and I don't know how you can comply with something you aren't told to do, but thought I perhaps misunderstood)

[Blockla]

Giving a full readback and then stating WILCO is redundant (you just told me you got it (& you need to comply unless you tell me something different) by reading the pertinent instructions back).

"Wilco" can be used for any requests not requiring a readback.

and trying to think of an example: maybe reporting passing a lvl or geographic location which technically has no bearing on your clearance etc. but will facilitate the clearance of another.

[FantomZorbin]

Do not cofuse WILCO with ROGER.

As 'sevenstrokeroll' says, WILCO = Will Comply

However, ROGER simply means I HEAR WHAT YOU SAY* - a totally different concept!!!

* technically 'I have received your transmission satisfactorily'

[172_driver]

Do not cofuse WILCO with ROGER.

As 'sevenstrokeroll' says, WILCO = Will Comply

However, ROGER simply means I HEAR WHAT YOU SAY* - a totally different concept!!!

* technically 'I have received your transmission satisfactorily'

Who would respond WILCO to something they did not understand?

I think if you look in ICAO Doc 9432 you'll find that WILCO means "I have understood the message and will comply" (or words to that effect)

[de facto]

Wilco sounds sooo g

[Jwscud]

However, ROGER simply means I HEAR WHAT YOU SAY* - a totally different concept!!!

It's amazing how many different sentiments controllers and pilots seem to be able to inflect into the simple word "Roger". London Control are particularly good at it!

[Durban]

I've probably used WILCO twice in my entire career. As sevenstrokeroll already said, it sounds corny. If I was gonna make one of those extra long British readbacks, I'd probably go for the one without WILCO. Just a personal preference.

[Capt Kremmen]

Always give a full readback and DON'T USE BL###Y ROGER it might be technically correct but sounds so naff. If its not a readback, use "That's understood".

[Renmure]

Can I tag on a supplemental question please?

Flying a flexwing microlight mean I won't often land at a controlled airport, but Dundee is a probability.

After reporting Final and given clearance to land, is my reply to readback "G-XX Cleared to land" or "G-XX Landing"?

[blissbak]

Not by the book but that' would be a fair reply and acknowledge

[Renmure]

Sorry, perhaps I wasn't clear there. (spot the bad pun)
Dundee IS a controlled airport. I am just preparing so I get it right when I go there.

Bah.. you edited

[blissbak]

Yea I had to read it one more time, a typical readback should be "clear to land", but I don't see nothing wrong by saying "I'm landing"

[sevenstrokeroll]

things aren't DAFT...either you can be a real pro or a rank amateur.

if its in the ''book'' ( like the USA Aeronautical Information Manual, pilot controller glossary) then use it as it is called for.

and I don't think saying: "landing" is a very good response...either: 2xx clear to land runway 12 or 2xx roger, clear to land 12

[Glamdring]

After reporting Final and given clearance to land, is my reply to readback "G-XX Cleared to land" or "G-XX Landing"?

Your reply should be "Cleared to land, G-XX"

Callsign comes at the end.

[shaun ryder]

Wilco is not a daft thing to say ok!

As for those cretins who insist on saying "BLOCKED" after a crossed transmission.. well that is daft.

[sevenstrokeroll]

callsign should NOT come at the end

checking the AIM gives countless examples like:

American 623Heavy, fly heading 260.

not

fly heading 260, American 623 heavy.

ATC has to wait for the call sign all the way to the end...nope

the AIM for the USA is available as a PDF on the internet for free...I'm sure it is very close to the ICAO standards, with the only difference being: we say POINT instead of DECIMAL...and a few others

[bookworm]

Seeds of doubt were planted today upon hearing a conversion in which 2 experienced pilots were telling a less experienced pilot that 'Wilco' is unacceptable once inside controlled airspace and can't be used to reply to an instruction. (Which I thought was weird since Wilco = Will Comply and I don't know how you can comply with something you aren't told to do, but thought I perhaps misunderstood)

Certain instructions and clearances must be read back. Reporting instructions are not instructions that must be read back, and in fact, doing so can be hazardous because the readback can be confused with the report itself.

"Birdseed 123 report passing FL190"
"[unintelligible] Passing FL190, Birdseed 123"
"Birdseed 123 thank you break Duckling 456 climb FL180"

oops... the missing word was "report" and Birdseed 123 is still passing 150 in the climb, now in conflict with Duckling 456.

In CAP413, the UK's RT manual it's inconsistent. Examples:

Ch 3 1.15.5 (which deals explictly with readbacks)
G-ABCD, cleared to cross A1 at Wicken, maintain FL70 whilst in controlled airspace. Report entering the airway
Cleared to cross A1 at Wicken, maintain FL70 in controlled airspace, Wilco, G-ABCD

but Ch 3 1.18.6
BIGJET 347 , when ready descend FL170, Report leaving FL210
When ready descend FL170. Report leaving FL210, BIGJET 347

The majority are "wilco" but there are clearly examples of "report ..." as a readback.

In fact, looking at Chapter 4 1.5:

Edition 15 had:
G-CD taxi to the flying club, via A1 cross runway 24 report vacated
Taxi to the flying club cross runway 24 via A1 will report vacated G-CD

Edition 20 now has:
G-CD, taxi to the flying club, via A1 cross runway 24 report vacated
Taxi to the flying club, via A1 cross runway 24, Wilco, G-CD