How does one pronounce this callsign
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How does one pronounce this callsign
How does one pronounce, for example, "N100AB"
Is it:-
November one zero zero alpha brave
or
November one hundred alpha bravo??
Wouild be grateful for the opinions of the professionals.
Is it:-
November one zero zero alpha brave
or
November one hundred alpha bravo??
Wouild be grateful for the opinions of the professionals.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Somewhere in Britain
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your first answer is technically correct, however this is one of those greyish areas in A.T.C.
If the pilot gives his callsign as November One Hundred Alpha Bravo then I would use this.
You could abbrerviate it to November - Zero Alpha Bravo ( just like Golf - Alpha Bravo )
American pilots however tend to give their aircraft type and typically use something like -- Falcon One Hundred Alpha Bravo.
As always these things are clear as mud.
If the pilot gives his callsign as November One Hundred Alpha Bravo then I would use this.
You could abbrerviate it to November - Zero Alpha Bravo ( just like Golf - Alpha Bravo )
American pilots however tend to give their aircraft type and typically use something like -- Falcon One Hundred Alpha Bravo.
As always these things are clear as mud.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAP413 says 'Hundred' may be used for transmission of altitude, height, cloud height or RVR...otherwise, each digit should be pronounced separately so
N100AB is November One Zero Zero Alpha Bravo
N100AB is November One Zero Zero Alpha Bravo
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Kandahar Afghanistan
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hansard,
>How does one pronounce, for example, "N100AB"
>Is it:- November one zero zero alpha brave
>or November one hundred alpha bravo??
Both are wrong, to properly pronounce N100AB upon initial communication with the aircraft you use:
November one, zero, zero, alpha, bravo
or if you know the aircraft type:
ex: Skyhawk, one, zero, zero, alpha, bravo
Subsequent communications you may use:
Acft type, zero, alpha, bravo
or
November, zero, alpha, bravo
Mike R
FWA NATCA
>How does one pronounce, for example, "N100AB"
>Is it:- November one zero zero alpha brave
>or November one hundred alpha bravo??
Both are wrong, to properly pronounce N100AB upon initial communication with the aircraft you use:
November one, zero, zero, alpha, bravo
or if you know the aircraft type:
ex: Skyhawk, one, zero, zero, alpha, bravo
Subsequent communications you may use:
Acft type, zero, alpha, bravo
or
November, zero, alpha, bravo
Mike R
FWA NATCA
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.........unless you are in NATS airspace which is one where the A/C type then regestration isn't permitted for useage. In this case it would be November One Zero Zero Alpha Bravo on first contact, and subject to no other similar callsigns on frequency, could then be abbrieviated to November Zero Alpha Bravo for subsequent calls.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Belgium
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You guys make me unsure, but I was always told that I could use first and last 2 letters of the callsign.
So, N100AB would become November Alpha Bravo.... and I ( and most of my collegues ) use it that way. Never heard a complaint...
BTW, pilots have been giving me callsigns like that themselves... the Beluga transporters from Hamburg/Toulouse - wherever always call in with Beluga Tango Bravo ( having FGSTB as callsign )...
So, N100AB would become November Alpha Bravo.... and I ( and most of my collegues ) use it that way. Never heard a complaint...
BTW, pilots have been giving me callsigns like that themselves... the Beluga transporters from Hamburg/Toulouse - wherever always call in with Beluga Tango Bravo ( having FGSTB as callsign )...
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: 24 27 45.66N 54 22 42.28E
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My opinion on this is that since its an american pilot, it doesn't matter what you call him, he aint gonna listen out to hear it. Reminds me of the old joke:
What do you call a dog with no legs?
Whatever you like, he isn't going to come to you.
What do you call a dog with no legs?
Whatever you like, he isn't going to come to you.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May I stand corrected, the shiney new disk copy of the Part 1 and 2 does permit the useage of either manufacturer or a/c type to be used. 
However it also clearly states that if using an american callsign, the abbreviation is the first 'November' and then the last 3 digits if that many are available, therefore N100AB will become N0AB, and not the commonly used NAB.
However it also clearly states that if using an american callsign, the abbreviation is the first 'November' and then the last 3 digits if that many are available, therefore N100AB will become N0AB, and not the commonly used NAB.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RT callsign
I take a flexible view which seems to work; I use whatever the pilot uses. He is more likely to respond to a familiar if not absolutely by-the-book callsign than one which he may not readily recognise..........within reason of course!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the U.S. registration numbers 1 through 99 are reserved for FAA aircraft (N-1 is a G-V, N-99 is a BAE 125-800 flight inspection aircraft) so the number of digits problem will only happen if the Administrator flies to Europe on her own horse or with the flight inspection aircraft based at Frankfurt.
N100 is a J-3 Cub in Oklahoma....doubt if G controllers will work him, but you never know.
N100 is a J-3 Cub in Oklahoma....doubt if G controllers will work him, but you never know.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the CIR
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you continously want to work by the book, then you will run out of airspace before you run out of time. If I want to save time and not have to repeat myself, I would just call this aircraft
"November one hundred Alpha Bravo". The pilot should hear it easier(first time round I hope).
"November one hundred Alpha Bravo". The pilot should hear it easier(first time round I hope).
I'm Just A Lawnmower
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Over the hills and faraway
Age: 62
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hansard
I bet you wished you had never asked, now
As a rule of thumb, you can call an American pilot anything you want at first as he either won't be listening or if he is, he won't understand anything you say. As they say, two nations divided by a common language.
For what it is worth, I would call him 'November one zero zero alpha bravo' and wouldn't bother abbreviating it. If I was absolutely satisfied that the pilot had a full understanding of English with a slight Yorkshire accent, I might consider abbreviating it to 'November alpha bravo' which, according to 5milesbaby's MATS Part 1 (CD edition) is wrong but I'm too stubborn to change...
I bet you wished you had never asked, now
As a rule of thumb, you can call an American pilot anything you want at first as he either won't be listening or if he is, he won't understand anything you say. As they say, two nations divided by a common language.
For what it is worth, I would call him 'November one zero zero alpha bravo' and wouldn't bother abbreviating it. If I was absolutely satisfied that the pilot had a full understanding of English with a slight Yorkshire accent, I might consider abbreviating it to 'November alpha bravo' which, according to 5milesbaby's MATS Part 1 (CD edition) is wrong but I'm too stubborn to change...
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Kandahar Afghanistan
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BALIX,
American pilots are ingrained to key on their aircraft type and the tail number. So, when a C310 pilot hears, Twin Cessna Zero Alpha Bravo, his ears should perk up at the sound of twin cessna.
As for pilots not listening, trust me it isn't unique to American Pilots, I can't count how many times that I'd love to have a button that I can push that would ZAP the pilot so he would listen.
Mike
NATCA FWA
American pilots are ingrained to key on their aircraft type and the tail number. So, when a C310 pilot hears, Twin Cessna Zero Alpha Bravo, his ears should perk up at the sound of twin cessna.
As for pilots not listening, trust me it isn't unique to American Pilots, I can't count how many times that I'd love to have a button that I can push that would ZAP the pilot so he would listen.
Mike
NATCA FWA
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: behind the lens
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going off the subject a bit but I love to hear LTE pilots with their c/s.
Why were they given a "J" in their c/s - Hispanic speakers can't say jjjjjjjjjjjj!
So FUN HYET it is
Why were they given a "J" in their c/s - Hispanic speakers can't say jjjjjjjjjjjj!
So FUN HYET it is
I'm Just A Lawnmower
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Over the hills and faraway
Age: 62
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWA
For whatever reason, we have more RT problems with American aircrew than those from many countries where English is not their first language. It makes me wonder if European aircrew have similar problems on your side of the Atlantic. It's as if European ATC speak and American ATC speak are different languages. I also have a theory that long haul US aircrew get across to Europe less often than long haul European aircrew fly in the opposite direction. As a result, the US aircrew are less used to hearing European style ATC.
Still, we always get the message across in the end. Well, almost always. Occasionally, after the fifth time of offering someone a MIMKU direct to LEGNI routing, you give up and send them direct to Newcastle instead...
For whatever reason, we have more RT problems with American aircrew than those from many countries where English is not their first language. It makes me wonder if European aircrew have similar problems on your side of the Atlantic. It's as if European ATC speak and American ATC speak are different languages. I also have a theory that long haul US aircrew get across to Europe less often than long haul European aircrew fly in the opposite direction. As a result, the US aircrew are less used to hearing European style ATC.
Still, we always get the message across in the end. Well, almost always. Occasionally, after the fifth time of offering someone a MIMKU direct to LEGNI routing, you give up and send them direct to Newcastle instead...
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BALIX;
I expect that most US crews are at somewhat of a disadvantage from thier experience with ATC phraseology. Most have learned and have grown into flying in the US. Here unfortunately we do all pretty much speak some form of english <G>. Because of that, the RT is a bit sloppy due to being able to use chit chat phrases and everyone more or less understanding them. In Europe, you have grown up with going into many countries every day where hardly anyone is a native english speaker. This forces both controllers AND pilots to use a more standardized aviation phraseology. Something that most controllers in the US would LOVE to here from the flight crews.
I think that it is getting WORSE over here too. I don't know why it is, but we seem to be fighting a losing battle with pilots using any sort of standard phraseology. Maybe another reason too is that in many European countries, prior to getting your instrument ticket, you must show that you can pass an aviation phraseology test, both knowing it and understanding it. We don't have anything like that here, and it shows...
Shoot, sometimes we are lucky to get them to respond with a call sign. It's like they think we have voice recognition software <G>. We as controllers are at fault too due to not holding the pilots more accountable for thier phraseology. But then again, other than having them repeat stuff constantly which we don't have the time for when we are busy, there is also NO regulation that REQUIRES the flight crews to use standardized phraseology...
Hope this may shed some light....
By the way, a shameless plug now.... <G> We will be talking about some of these issues in Denver, at Communicating for Safety 2003. An aviation safety seminar sponsored by NATCA for controllers and pilots...
regards
Scott H. Voigt
NATCA Southwest Region
Safety and Technology Chairman
I expect that most US crews are at somewhat of a disadvantage from thier experience with ATC phraseology. Most have learned and have grown into flying in the US. Here unfortunately we do all pretty much speak some form of english <G>. Because of that, the RT is a bit sloppy due to being able to use chit chat phrases and everyone more or less understanding them. In Europe, you have grown up with going into many countries every day where hardly anyone is a native english speaker. This forces both controllers AND pilots to use a more standardized aviation phraseology. Something that most controllers in the US would LOVE to here from the flight crews.
I think that it is getting WORSE over here too. I don't know why it is, but we seem to be fighting a losing battle with pilots using any sort of standard phraseology. Maybe another reason too is that in many European countries, prior to getting your instrument ticket, you must show that you can pass an aviation phraseology test, both knowing it and understanding it. We don't have anything like that here, and it shows...
Shoot, sometimes we are lucky to get them to respond with a call sign. It's like they think we have voice recognition software <G>. We as controllers are at fault too due to not holding the pilots more accountable for thier phraseology. But then again, other than having them repeat stuff constantly which we don't have the time for when we are busy, there is also NO regulation that REQUIRES the flight crews to use standardized phraseology...
Hope this may shed some light....
By the way, a shameless plug now.... <G> We will be talking about some of these issues in Denver, at Communicating for Safety 2003. An aviation safety seminar sponsored by NATCA for controllers and pilots...
regards
Scott H. Voigt
NATCA Southwest Region
Safety and Technology Chairman