PPL'rs life stories?
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chilli
Thank you. And I guess that the reason that this information is often asked for at the end of the conversation is that it is needed for passing onto the next LARS unit in handover?
W
Thank you. And I guess that the reason that this information is often asked for at the end of the conversation is that it is needed for passing onto the next LARS unit in handover?
W
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Apa, apo ndi kulikonse!
Posts: 1,757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WC
It should be gleaned from you at the start ideally, but if there are other things to do it is fairly low priority.
In terms of the type we need to know for a variety of reasons. Not least the single/twin/fixed/rotary implications over Londonium! Also helps on giving traffic information. I heard a colleague once say......>" Traffic information, three miles north west, east bound, no height info, believed to be ....(pause).... an aircraft!!" no *****!!!!
Yes - the point of departure/destination help me guess your routing and who I should chuck you too next. If I know you are back to Biggin I can chuck you to them before you would go if left to your own devices probably
!!!!!! Of course, it helps in terms of overdue action as well.
It should be gleaned from you at the start ideally, but if there are other things to do it is fairly low priority.
In terms of the type we need to know for a variety of reasons. Not least the single/twin/fixed/rotary implications over Londonium! Also helps on giving traffic information. I heard a colleague once say......>" Traffic information, three miles north west, east bound, no height info, believed to be ....(pause).... an aircraft!!" no *****!!!!
Yes - the point of departure/destination help me guess your routing and who I should chuck you too next. If I know you are back to Biggin I can chuck you to them before you would go if left to your own devices probably
!!!!!! Of course, it helps in terms of overdue action as well.
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
" Traffic information, three miles north west, east bound, no height info, believed to be ....(pause).... an aircraft!!"
"Heathrow Special good morning G-xxxx just airborne Fairoaks requesting Ascot - Burnham"
"G-xxxx good morning Squawk nnnn route initially towards Ascot not above 1000' on 10xx. What type of helicopter are you?"
"I am an Aztec type of helicopter!"
If I know you are back to Biggin I can chuck you to them before you would go if left to your own devices probably!!!!!!
The fact that one of your colleagues (we know who I mean) then responds "that's another pint you owe me!" is his choice about how to use airtime!
W
Last edited by Timothy; 13th Jul 2003 at 19:50.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Concerning CAP 413 Chapter 3, Paragragh 5.1, there does seem to be good reason to modify that example insofar as in the initial call the aircraft asks for a "Lower Airspace Radar Service"
I noted from another thread that it was suggested that this is not particularly good phraseology since the services of offer are FIS, RIS, RAS.
Here is the thread
This sounds sensible, since after asking for a LARS the controller is none the wiser to the service you are requesting. If fact it could be that according to that example you could state Lower Airspace Radar Service in the initial call and then go on to ask for a FIS, itself a non-radar service; therefore perhaps contradictorily. A future modification for inclusion in the 14th Edition possibly.
P.S. Thanks for the direction to the part that mentions stating the service during the initial call. Did not know that and will use it in future calls.
I noted from another thread that it was suggested that this is not particularly good phraseology since the services of offer are FIS, RIS, RAS.
Here is the thread
This sounds sensible, since after asking for a LARS the controller is none the wiser to the service you are requesting. If fact it could be that according to that example you could state Lower Airspace Radar Service in the initial call and then go on to ask for a FIS, itself a non-radar service; therefore perhaps contradictorily. A future modification for inclusion in the 14th Edition possibly.
P.S. Thanks for the direction to the part that mentions stating the service during the initial call. Did not know that and will use it in future calls.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interestingly it isn't only those learning to fly who fall foul of what is written and expected to pass exams when using R/T.
As ATCOs we have similar problems, we are taught at the college to use R/T in the way that will mean we will pass exams , only to arrive at our respective units post college to be told forget all that , this is the real world.
We have to be especially careful with our "6" week students who are in the middle of there Cadetship not to lead them into what SRG and the CAA may regard as bad habits and let them carry on using college RT which is so very often out of place at an operational unit.
Should we perhaps as both operational ATCOs and Pilots be approaching the CAA to look at an overhaul of the RT manual. There wouldn't be major changes but perhaps the small amendments that could be made would make both Flyers and Controllers lives a little bit easier on the radio.
As ATCOs we have similar problems, we are taught at the college to use R/T in the way that will mean we will pass exams , only to arrive at our respective units post college to be told forget all that , this is the real world.
We have to be especially careful with our "6" week students who are in the middle of there Cadetship not to lead them into what SRG and the CAA may regard as bad habits and let them carry on using college RT which is so very often out of place at an operational unit.
Should we perhaps as both operational ATCOs and Pilots be approaching the CAA to look at an overhaul of the RT manual. There wouldn't be major changes but perhaps the small amendments that could be made would make both Flyers and Controllers lives a little bit easier on the radio.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There appears to be a process for consultation during document revision. Here is the link
Consultation
I am going to register my interest for CAP 413. Maybe information from this forum can be fed into Edition 14.
Consultation
I am going to register my interest for CAP 413. Maybe information from this forum can be fed into Edition 14.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Flower
I'd be up for this. Anything that introduces improvements based on operational experience has got to be good.
Like Andrew S, I'm going to register my interest too.
F3G
Should we perhaps as both operational ATCOs and Pilots be approaching the CAA to look at an overhaul of the RT manual. There wouldn't be major changes but perhaps the small amendments that could be made would make both Flyers and Controllers lives a little bit easier on the radio.
Like Andrew S, I'm going to register my interest too.
F3G
aceatco, retired
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: one airshow or another
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
(Except that I must remember to 'foget it' for my next 1 hour JAR currency training flight where I would undoubtedly be criticised by the examiner for using non standard calls.)
A final input from me before away for a week and a bit at RIAT. . .
F3G
I would be extremely diappointed if you were criticised for using a bit of commonsense on the RT. Standard RT is fine and I uphold it's virtue, but a bit of crisp, precise, to the point, words are worth their weight. Who could/would criticise that?
All the best
VA
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Wales
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok - from a different perspective. As a CL/IR student (even though I'm going to use a PPL as a "half way there license") I think that using R/T correctly is very important!
We had an aircraft at my local aerodrome last week, who didn't seem to have been told that R/T transmission is not a telephone - he basically called giving his registration (good beginnings) and position/ altitude then radio silence for 5 minuits then he casually asks for permission to land - half a mile downwind of the runway.
(by casually I mean 'XX, can I land?)
Correct use of R/T is not something to be ashamed - too much information never killed anyone.
WelshFlyer
We had an aircraft at my local aerodrome last week, who didn't seem to have been told that R/T transmission is not a telephone - he basically called giving his registration (good beginnings) and position/ altitude then radio silence for 5 minuits then he casually asks for permission to land - half a mile downwind of the runway.
(by casually I mean 'XX, can I land?)
Correct use of R/T is not something to be ashamed - too much information never killed anyone.
WelshFlyer
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Welsh Flyer ,
correct RT is essential . I think the point many are trying to get across is that there are differances between what the manual is telling people to use and what is really necessary.
If we can get some sort of parity between Pilots and ATCOS and do it officially then that is good news for us all.
RT sadly is often placed at a lower level of priority in Flying training than it should be.
To much info could cause problems however , as it blocks the frquency and could do so at a critical time.
Im glad to see that 2 people so far have registered with the CAA to offer their assistance.
correct RT is essential . I think the point many are trying to get across is that there are differances between what the manual is telling people to use and what is really necessary.
If we can get some sort of parity between Pilots and ATCOS and do it officially then that is good news for us all.
RT sadly is often placed at a lower level of priority in Flying training than it should be.
To much info could cause problems however , as it blocks the frquency and could do so at a critical time.
Im glad to see that 2 people so far have registered with the CAA to offer their assistance.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Wales
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couldn't agree more - mind you, my QFI even though his R/T is excelent, whenever we go into Caernarfon if any of the Caernarfon-based FIs are around he'll greet them by name - eg, "Good morning captain Claire" (and there are points in this if you can guess who my QFI is)
But when you are flying, hopefully accurately and especially in controlled airspace it is even more essential.
(by the way flower, it's nice to see a fellow Welsh person on the boards, where do you fly from?)
WelshFlyer
But when you are flying, hopefully accurately and especially in controlled airspace it is even more essential.
(by the way flower, it's nice to see a fellow Welsh person on the boards, where do you fly from?)
WelshFlyer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: europe
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When giving aircraft type is it preferable to give PA xx, or Warrior/Twin Commanche/Tomahawk.
As it is PAxx on the flight plan form, I give that as type, but will happily change to the model name if that is preferred.
As it is PAxx on the flight plan form, I give that as type, but will happily change to the model name if that is preferred.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blueskis
it doesn't make much difference how you identify aircraft type, just say what you feel more comfortable with. If we are unceratin to the type we may ask for clarification.
Welsh Flyer, Im an ATCO although I have a number of people trying to persuade me to learn to fly. And I work out of Cardiff.
it doesn't make much difference how you identify aircraft type, just say what you feel more comfortable with. If we are unceratin to the type we may ask for clarification.
Welsh Flyer, Im an ATCO although I have a number of people trying to persuade me to learn to fly. And I work out of Cardiff.
aceatco, retired
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: one airshow or another
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
When giving aircraft type is it preferable to give PA xx, or Warrior/Twin Commanche/Tomahawk.
"GABCD, traffic right 2 o'clock is a PA28 at 2000ft'
"XXXXXX, Gxxxx, we're a PA28RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!"
"Oh, right"
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: location, location
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Working at one of the busiest LARS units in the country (499 movements last Friday), I believe the standard of r/t from general aviation pilots is by and large pretty good. This is especially so given the fact that a lot of the time they are students, and I would always encourage instructors to get their students to do the r/t as much as possible.
With a radar, all I need to know are reg./ aircraft type/ altitude/ from and to. If you don't say otherwise you'll get a FIS. If you say your routeing I'll probably make a note of it, and likewise with POB (just in case...). If I need to know anything else I'll ask.
The most unnecessary call I often get is identified squawkers reporting overhead the field when they haven't been asked to - I know, I can see you!
With a radar, all I need to know are reg./ aircraft type/ altitude/ from and to. If you don't say otherwise you'll get a FIS. If you say your routeing I'll probably make a note of it, and likewise with POB (just in case...). If I need to know anything else I'll ask.
The most unnecessary call I often get is identified squawkers reporting overhead the field when they haven't been asked to - I know, I can see you!
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you don't say otherwise you'll get a FIS.
Should we take a hint from this that the former is on the busy side while the latter is happy to provide an RIS, or is it just a matter of taste, style and local standards?
W
Guest
Posts: n/a
VA
You'd be surprised 
I would be extremely diappointed if you were criticised for using a bit of commonsense on the RT. Standard RT is fine and I uphold it's virtue, but a bit of crisp, precise, to the point, words are worth their weight. Who could/would criticise that?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: location, location
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you ask for a RIS then I'll give one unless it's absolutely crazy. If it's just medium busy (or there's a lot of weather clutter) then this may be a Limited RIS with late warning of traffic. Also, the more people that want one, the more limited the service will be as it does mean you're looking out for someone more than when they're just under a FIS. Ultimately it depends on the personal ability of the controller and we're all different.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Traffic information, three miles north west, east bound, no height info, believed to be ....(pause).... an aircraft!!"
I was inbound to my home airfield in my Europa. Also working the frequency was another Europa, inbound to the same field. The other aircraft requested a frequency change to the A/G frequency:
Other pilot: "G-AB, request frequency change to Somewhere, 123.45"
Controller: "G-AB, frequency change approved, be aware you're following another Europa helicoptor that's about 5 miles ahead of you into the same field"
Other pilot: "Roger, G-AB"
Me: "G-IK, request frequency change to Somewhere, 123.45 - and for your information, I'm fixed-wing"
Controller: "Oh... <pause> G-IK, say your type"
Me: "Europa, which is a fixed-wing aircraft."
Controller: "Oops, didn't know that. Frequency change approved."
Gave me a good laugh anyway!
FFF
--------------