Why does UK ATC not use ICAO phraseology
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the Tearooms of Mars
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Behind the landing . . . line up behind
Why are we finishing a sentence with a preposition? That's the stuff of Lufthansa!
Could we not line up in sequence?
Emphasis on the instruction.
Not everyone is a native English speaker.
Making sure that it is understood we wish you to enter the RWY after a specific A/C.
Not before it as this will involve raised blood pressure and some writing.
Not everyone is a native English speaker.
Making sure that it is understood we wish you to enter the RWY after a specific A/C.
Not before it as this will involve raised blood pressure and some writing.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Up North UK
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a few weeks ago I heard an American voice check in on a London frequency with something like "(call sign), one one four four one four zero". Short pause whilst ATC worked out what he meant. Actually it was - we assume - FL114 for FL140, but we couldn't hear the difference!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunny San Juan, Puerto Rico
Age: 78
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Enough is Enough
Why, in the name of __________ (enter your deity of choice) in this day and age, can the aviation community not agree on a standardized ATC phraseology? Unlike curling, aviation is an international pursuit. We all do it - so let's unite around a single document - ICAO 4444 - and get with the program!
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any Contracting State is free to deviate from SARPs.
This can sometimes lead to "interesting" problems when airspace is delegated to another state
This can sometimes lead to "interesting" problems when airspace is delegated to another state
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Worthing
Age: 32
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its a shame that we are being dragged down to ICAO level instead of pulling them up to standard. I like UK phraseology, you can always find history in the phrases which explain why we say things like we say them. Invariably it is to stop another "nasty" happening again. Why would we want to shy away from that....?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a popular misconception that just because "we" the Brits do something differently, then it must be better, or have some kind of enshrined safety benefit.
The simple facts of the matter are that to operators who are unfamiliar with the UK phraseology, it actually poses a risk as "we" are the deviation from the norm. Phraseology that works for all and to the greater good should be applauded not denigrated in a small minded, parochial way.
And the argument that "we changed it for a reason" bears absolutely no weight when there are 40+ runway incursions per year at airports that use the "After the departing..." type phraseology.
The simple facts of the matter are that to operators who are unfamiliar with the UK phraseology, it actually poses a risk as "we" are the deviation from the norm. Phraseology that works for all and to the greater good should be applauded not denigrated in a small minded, parochial way.
And the argument that "we changed it for a reason" bears absolutely no weight when there are 40+ runway incursions per year at airports that use the "After the departing..." type phraseology.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As unlikely as it is, I agree with P7. The other thing to bear in mind is that native English speakers often see nuance and subtlety in phraseology where there is none for non-English speakers.
Phraseology should not leave the door open to such nuance and subtlety as such things lead to misunderstandings.
Phraseology should not leave the door open to such nuance and subtlety as such things lead to misunderstandings.
Precisely and I never experienced a runway incursion so it seemed to work.
2 s
And I suppose that the good thing about the behind behind phraseology is that if your transmission is clipped by an aircraft (surely not!) then at least one behind will be heard. It did feel clumsy when I first started using it but you get used to it.
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a popular misconception that just because "we" the Brits do something differently, then it must be better, or have some kind of enshrined safety benefit.
FWIW, some of the biggest CFs I've ever seen were perpetrated by native English speakers.
Seem to be a few UKIP voters here.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"After the landing/departing………line up and hold/wait always worked for me,
I never had a runway incursion involving an aircraft.
As for "customers", I remember reading (on a break), a 'comment' on NATSnet from some office-bound buffoon along the lines of how can we incentivize our controllers to provide a better service?
The word incentivize was used 3 times in one paragraph. I returned to the sector with marginally elevated BP.
I never had a runway incursion involving an aircraft.
As for "customers", I remember reading (on a break), a 'comment' on NATSnet from some office-bound buffoon along the lines of how can we incentivize our controllers to provide a better service?
The word incentivize was used 3 times in one paragraph. I returned to the sector with marginally elevated BP.
