R/t Terminology
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R/t Terminology
I know it will be in CAP 413, but can someone tell me whether the pronunciation of wun hundred or two hundred applys to all 'round' flight levels now as opposed to just FL100?
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have asked this very question directly to the CAA and was told that it only applies to FL100 - as it was getting confused with FL110 and HEADING One Zero Zero (which is never to be called Heading Wun Hundred).
This level was suggested to be "thick with traffic" - climbing out of and descending into airfields.
The trafic at FL200 is normally more spread out and in an intermediate cruise, FL300 even less of a problem.
This level was suggested to be "thick with traffic" - climbing out of and descending into airfields.
The trafic at FL200 is normally more spread out and in an intermediate cruise, FL300 even less of a problem.
Guest
Posts: n/a
For what it's worth, it was originally introduced for FL100 to avoid confusion with FL110 and then extended to the other 'round' FLs later. More info. AFAIK this is still only done in the UK.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One Hundred
Two Hundred
Three Hundred
Four Hundred
but NOT Five Hundred (as it is not a separated level!)
An we are now supposed to append 'Degrees' on every heading instruction. So much for reduction in R/T loading.
Two Hundred
Three Hundred
Four Hundred
but NOT Five Hundred (as it is not a separated level!)
An we are now supposed to append 'Degrees' on every heading instruction. So much for reduction in R/T loading.
Worth mentioning that the above applies in the UK, not necessarily anywhere else, but for the good reason specified above.
It begs the question, why has the UK now adopted the ICAO procedure of pronouncing pressure information as separate digits, including the value of 1000 hpa/mb?
If anything is likely to be confused, it is 1010 and 1-0-0-0. I always thought that the UK method of using "one thousand" was a step in the right direction. Why has SRG seen fit to change it, surely this is a retrograde step?
It begs the question, why has the UK now adopted the ICAO procedure of pronouncing pressure information as separate digits, including the value of 1000 hpa/mb?
If anything is likely to be confused, it is 1010 and 1-0-0-0. I always thought that the UK method of using "one thousand" was a step in the right direction. Why has SRG seen fit to change it, surely this is a retrograde step?
eyeinthesky.
you can breath again re the need to say degrees after every heading instruction. Although the word is used after the example on appendix E page 4. If you look at the specific examples of R/t throughout appendix E the word degrees isn't included. I agree with you though that alot of these recent phraseology changes are complete b*****k's and do nothing to help aviation safety. My least favourite is the bizarre change so the runway designator comes before the 'cleared to land'. Did the old method ever cause an incident? Of cause not, but I suppose changing it made someone in an office feel important!
Spiney
you can breath again re the need to say degrees after every heading instruction. Although the word is used after the example on appendix E page 4. If you look at the specific examples of R/t throughout appendix E the word degrees isn't included. I agree with you though that alot of these recent phraseology changes are complete b*****k's and do nothing to help aviation safety. My least favourite is the bizarre change so the runway designator comes before the 'cleared to land'. Did the old method ever cause an incident? Of cause not, but I suppose changing it made someone in an office feel important!
Spiney
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Out on the bike in Northumberland
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
spiney-could not agree more about your comments on the phraseology changes!, many are I believe to bring UK closer to ICAO-thank heavens we managed to get the 'taxy to holding position' changed, whoever thought that up could'nt have ever been an operational ATCO
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and ofcourse technically you can't even say "squawk seven thousand" anymore-it has to be "squawk seven zero zero zero"!! because whoever writes the MATS 1 clearly hasn't spoken to an aeroplane since DC3's ruled the skies. I see the point of saying squawks as individual numbers, but I don't think anyone in their right mind would say "squawk one thousand three huindred and twenty seven" -I think an exception can be made for 7000 though! Correct me if I'km wrong but in the US they just say "squawk VFR" (meaning 1200)...why don't we say "squawk conspicuity" or something slightly less tongue twisting but quick, unambiguous and easy.
FYI I said "squawk seven thousand" all through my radar board a few months back and the CAA said nothing-and funnily enough no-one misunderstands it!!
FYI I said "squawk seven thousand" all through my radar board a few months back and the CAA said nothing-and funnily enough no-one misunderstands it!!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the new NATS ammendment associating to degrees is for the word to be used mandatory for headings ending in zero, and only advised for any others.
Why isn't FL500 a separated level??? Again in the UK, as there is soo little up there anyway it can be used so long as all other a/c are given the standard 2000ft separation, or 4000ft if supersonic. It wouldn't affect the military either as it'll have to be co-ordinated due to it being above FL450.
Why isn't FL500 a separated level??? Again in the UK, as there is soo little up there anyway it can be used so long as all other a/c are given the standard 2000ft separation, or 4000ft if supersonic. It wouldn't affect the military either as it'll have to be co-ordinated due to it being above FL450.
