As if the ATCO enjoys watching us plod along fix to fix when a direct routing is available.

GF

When a/c already established on the frequency:-

Bloggsworth Control StarTrek 1234 REQUEST

Startrek 1234 Pass Your Message

Ah Startrek 1234 we were wondering if Flight Level XXX might be available?

Yes Startrek 1234 Affirm do you wish to climb?

Startrek 1234 Affirm we're in moderate chop hear/in the tops (fill in the blanks)

Startrek 1234 Climb Flight Level XXX

Climb Flight Level XXX Startrek 1234

PLEASE why not just say "Startrek 1234 Request Flight Level XXX" - why all this REQUEST etc which takes up a load more air time?

Two pet annoyances for me...
1. The Lufthansa policy of reading back and STARTING with callsign. Why???
'Lufthansa 123 climb flight level 50'
'Lufthansa 123 climb flight level 50' echo echo echo echo....
2. And to agree with Kiltie, the Scottish button lingerer!!! I thought I was the only one to notice. Around 3 secs is what I timed last time I heard him, and several clipped tx's.

CRX.

And in France, on a not so quiet frenquency (I guess it works also with other accents) :


- Airr Huatteverr one too tree for, conntacter Bwest, one too niner decimowl fife, goohd by.
...
- Airr Huatteverr one too tree for, conntacter Bwest, one too niner decimowl fife, goohd by.
...
- Airr Huatteverr one too tree for, on ze frrequansea ?
...
- Airr Huatteverr one too tree for, iffer yooh reed mee, squohk hi-dennter !
...
- Are you calling me, Whatever 1234?
- Ahfirmer, Huatteverr one too tree four, conntacter Bwest, one too niner decimowl fife, goohd by.
- Contact Brest, 129.5, Whatever 1234, bye.

YES! Couldn't agree more, I always think they're questioning whatever I've just said whenever they read it back.

My pet hates:

A/C: London control Speedy123 FL230 to x
ATC: Speedy123 London Roger, squawk ident
A/C: presses ident button
ATC: Speedy123 Squawk Ident
A/C Squawk Ident Speedy123.

Why do we need to read back SQ ident? Surely you can see it on your radar screens? You have our callsign, a/c type and sq code displaying, along with a flash when we ident, you know where we're coming from, and where we're going.

Another.

A/C: xxx Radar Speedy123 descending FL70 to the centrefix RWYxx, Space Shuttle Charlie with information Xray, QNH 1019, request deconfliction service outside controlled airspace.
ATC: speedy123 roger, descend FL40
A/C: descend FL40 speedy123
ATC: Speedy123 latest information is Xray, QNH 1019, turn left hdg xxx, what service do you require?

A/C: :ugh::ugh::ugh:I just told you I had Xray 1019, I just asked for a deconfliction service.

ATC: speedy123 descend altitude 3,000ft, QNH 1019
A/C: descend Altitude 3,000ft, QNH 1019 Speedy123
ATC: speedy123 descend altitude 2,500ft, QNH 1019
A/C: descend altitude 2,500ft QNH 1019 Speedy123
A/C now on finals etc:
ATC: Speedy123 contact tower on 123.450
A/C: Contact Tower 123.450
A/C: xxx Tower Speedy123 ILS etc etc etc
ATC: Speedy123 roger, QNH 1019
A/C: QNH 1019 Speedy123
ATC: Speedy123 cleared to land rwy xxx, surface wind 360/40G80 etc etc.

Sorry, do you want to run the QNH by me one more time, I don't think I got it the last 8 times you gave it to me :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Stop Stop Stop wrote:

Agree with you on this EXCEPT - it is becoming increasingly common for pilots to say 'Was my readback correct?' if you don't do it :ugh:

DD

No but I am sure than many will agree when I say certain European countries have controllers that always leave you at the upper level in their sector until you call before passing you to the sector above for higher.

eg

ABC123 climb FL180 report your requested level

ABC123 reports requesting FL380 climbs to FL180 and levels.

After a while and no traffic in sight, ABC123 reports level at FL180

ABC123 contact xxxxx on 134575

New frequency - ABC123 climb FL260 report your requested level

ABC123 reports requesting FL380 climbs to FL260 and levels

After a while and no traffic in sight, ABC123 reports level at FL260

ABC123 contact xxxxx on 134575

So now we make the very anoying call of ABC123 passing FL150 for FL180 in the hope that sometimes the controller will wake up and transfer us to the sector above before we have to reduce our climb or level off where there is no traffic.

The other bit of anoying R/T is being stepped up in 1000ft incriments (which of course we do at a rate of 1000ft per minute or less) and being told that if you can expedite the climb you can get a direct. Feel like saying well if you give me a climb that I can expedite (4 to 6000ft per minute possible) then you we will both get what we want. :D

CoffinCorner
From CAP493

Pilots/drivers are required to read-back in full messages containing any of the following items:
*SSR Operating instructions

Controllers are to prompt a pilot if a read-back is not immediately forthcoming.

FireflyB

I think its because that's how it is depicted in the CAP.....XYZ request..,

thus suggesting that it is an initial request to be followed up by the detail.

I agree with you that it it is much more concise to get the request done in one transmission.

How else would the controller know that it was you identing?

Avoiding Action.

Appreciate that's what CAP493 says, I am instigating that it is old fashioned and out of date, especially with the advent of Mode S and BDS6 compliant.

Wingo.

That may well be the case, but surely it takes the pilot about 2-3 seconds to hit the ident button, and the controller should be concentrating on the call in hand, i.e. if he asks for SQ ident then he'll already be looking at our radar tag. If someone else calls he can still have his eyes on our tag even if a new call is ½ way through it's check-in call etc.

Chesty

Because the controller's tag already shows our callsign, a/c type, squawk code, groundspeed, altitude etc etc. Just because we read it back it doesn't make the controller notice where we are. What makes the controller know where we are is the fact that he already has a mental picture of the traffic in his sector, he already knows we are there, and he can see the a/c tag flash when it idents. It doesn't need us to read back "SQ Ident Speedy123"

Acknowledging squawk ident is used to identify you.

Yes, I'm sure that in the future it will become obselete, but without you identing and acknowledging when asked, you technically are not identified. The fact that you are displaying a callsign doesn't mean anything, you might have got airborne using the wrong squawk (not uncommon) and thus be displaying the wrong callsign.

Ok...here's my grump. At the particular airfield(shall remain nameless!) I fly from we have one particular controller who preceeds every opening reply with "readibilty 5"(or whatever scale it may be). When departing,having told him i've got information(insert letter) he then replies to the effect that im correct and then proceeds to tell me the whole ATIS again! Having then got my IFR clearance and having told him im ready for departure, im then told to line up on the runway and wait. I then get literally told the whole of ATIS information for a 3rd time, followed by any local procedures/info(already included in the ATIS!!). I then get a great long winded message about the type of service i will receive. Having sat for goodness knows how long on the runway, i finally get clearance to take off. Included in the message "cleared take off" I then get literally everything again for a 4th time! Is this over control or someone who just likes the sound of their own voice?? I may be simpleton Pilot but I dont need to be told the same information 4 times in the space of 10 minutes!

Oh and another airfield I fly from we have an ineresting "leave the apronwith the marshallers instructions" reply to requests for taxi. If I dont reply with the taxi......"with the marshallers instructions" bit then ATC wont accept my reply. I have to repeat the instruction until I include the relevant marshallers bit. Is this normal procedure elsewhere?? Is this proper RT??

A/c: 'Approach, Airtwit 1234 with you, visual with the surface'
ATC: (Thinks): 'So what. Is he trying to drop a hint?'

Next day.
A/c: Approach, Airtwit 1234 with you, fully visual'
ATC: (Taking hint): Airtwit 1234 cleared for visual approach runway 18, QNH 1012'
A/c: Errr roger, it's still a bit hazy so we'd like to stay with radar till we're established on final'. :ugh:

ole.ole
 

"Tower, this is the Airtwit. fully established rwy24, fully in reciept of ATIS Charlie (I'm being polite), fully cleared to land...

Fully arsehole.

Wups! Sorry, "the" fully arsehole.

"Fully visual" is pointless trivia that should be ignored or acknowledged only by ATC. It is used by lazy pilots instead of a proper request for a visual approach but I am surprised ATC continue to issue a Visual Approach clearance based on this rubbish alone.

Why do many pilots still readback "Climb NOW FL190" as "Climb FL190" ?:ugh:

Why, when ATC give a conditional "After the landing Easyjet Airbus A319...." do folk readback "after the landing aircraft...."

I don't understand why people have difficulty in reading back exactly what they've just been told but choose to put their own twist on it. Maybe a more useful RT exam should be to reach an acceptable score on crappy 1980s electronic game "Simon" to prove you can repeat what you've just heard.

Wingo

Of course it isn't a stress, the title of this thread is a giveaway - Annoying RT, this is why I brought it up, I most certainly don't lose sleep over it. But when it's busy and you can't get a word in then what's the point?

Gonzo

1. So how would we have been able to reach an en-route controller with the wrong squawk in the first place? Surely this is picked up by the tower/approach controller?

2. Are you saying if we have the wrong squawk set then it automatically displays an arbitrary callsign?

3. How many a/c is an en-route (area) controller allowed to control at any one time? And what is the norm on a typical day? Anywhere near this limit?

4. If the answer to the question above is something like 13 or 14 then when you ask someone to SQ-I how many others are likely to SQ-I at the same time, in the same place to cause you confusion?

I just don't see why you have to read it back still, if we have checked in, you know our callsign already, we've told you where we are going, and what level we are, you surely have ATC handovers, from one sector to another, and flightstrips, so you know who we are,, if you've asked us to SQ-I and you then see the ident on your screen, so why do we need to read it back? I am still not getting the importance of it.

CC

Could it be that there is absolutley no requirement for pilots to have any idea of what an A319 looks like or even what an easyjet aircraft looks like.

Therefore when given a conditional they will line up after the first aircraft to land..........which is why you have to limit it to the first aircraft to land.

:)

-----------

The instruction to squawk ident is a mandatory readback item everywhere. The reason is as gonzo says and you should look up the official words used to describe the procedure which are along the lines of observing an ident from an aircraft which has acknowledged an instruction to ident.

CC,

Sorry, I was only talking about transfer from tower to departure sector.

In the UK it usually does, because we approach code saturation often, so chances are that any random code will be assigned to another flight, so you show their callsign.

I'll leave that to those who work en-route.

Again, it's not the fact that others might sq. ident at the same time, the identification of the aircraft is achieved when the callsign of that flight is observed identing after that flight has acknowledged the request.

Gonzo and others are right, which is why it's really annoying when you get "blah blah blah, passing x thousand feet for x thousand feet on a y departure with ident

Trouble is I'm only allowed to count you identified if I ask for the squawk ident, you acknowledge it, and then I see it on the radar at the aircraft I expect you to be. SO if you ident without asking, I haven't asked, and so I can't count it.

As for the number of planes we work at once - regularly 12 - 15 in the London TMA, occasionally more than that.

The chances of more than one identing are less likely if we ask for it, but it can happen, and remember that whilst squawk ident is most frequently asked for after departure from the major airfields, it can also be used for other traffic where we might not be as sure which is who.....

In the good old days getting you identing also used to set off the tracking system and ensure that your flight plan was activated. Is that still the case anyone?

Hope that helps.:)

Cheers,
Northerner

"Keep smiling, it makes people wonder what you're up to..."

Perhaps the most recent "Annoying R/T" trend is pilots from the same airline indulging in personal "chit-chat", oblivious to how distracting it is to others. Not just in quiet periods, but also during a busy radar sequence! :rolleyes:

Echoing sentiment above

"After the landing PA28" (Airbus, or anything except Concord)......

I am a heli pilot. All planks look the same. My readback will be "after the landing aircraft..." If there is something ahead of the P28 I would "go" in the wrong place.

Different (for me) if told "after the A109" or R22, or EC145, but how many plank drivers know the difference there?

John

To add to Northerner's post, we in the tower look out for the ident as an indication that the aircraft has two-way with London.....absence of ident prompts us to try again to see if the a/c is still on our frequency.

To John R81, in the scenario you describe, what would you expect the ATCO to do if there was an 'aircraft' (A320) just slowing down after landing and vacating, but clearly within your field of view, and another 'aircraft' (PA28) on short final?

If I was that ATCO and you read back 'aircraft' I'd expect the worst and assume that you meant after the one vacating. While my heart rate shoots up I'd be trying to get on the R/T and confirm.

If you don't understand the clearance you've been given, you must say so. If you don't know the difference between an A320 and a PA28 then you must say so, and the ATCO will come back with clarifying remarks. By just reading back 'aircraft' you are already passing through the first slice of cheese.

Gonzo,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cap413

Conditional clearances are to relate to one movement only and, in

the case of landing traffic, this must be the first aircraft on approach.

---

Rolling out is not on approach.

While ATCOs (aerodrome at least) are provided with training in and assessed on aircraft recognition pilots are not and there is no requirement for a pilot to know what an A320 looks like.

You say "After the landing A320 line up and wait"

I say "After the landing A320 line up and wait"

and then wait and see what an A320 looks like. :)

Same airport, same traffic makes it easy.

Of course we do get "after the landing falcon line up and wait"

Is that the 20, 50, 900 900lx, 2000 2000lx or 7x..........quite different aircraft and as you say it is so important to get it right :)

Your "after the landing falcon" = a pilots "after the landing aircraft" :) :)

because if you tell me to line up after the landing falcon I could sit there waiting for one of these;

http://www.aerofalcon.com/images/3_F...at_Hovings.jpg

:D

DFC,

It's all very well quoting from MATS Part 1, but we both know the world is not so black and white.

I've seen many crew assume the conditional aircraft was the one that had already passed them on the runway, not the one still on final. I've also seen ATCOs make mistakes and misjudgements.

So what would you do if you were waiting to cross at the midpoint; one aircraft had just touched down but was yet to pass you, there was another 2.5nm out on approach, and I'd just given you an 'after the landing, cross......' clearance. Would you know I meant after the at 2.5nm, beacuse that's what MATS Part 1 says? Would I be safe to assume all pilots are as familiar with that document?

Not sure why you think this is all rather amusing, some of us take this sort of thing quite seriously.

Simple, last time i waited for the correct aircraft i got reprimanded by ATC. After all they told me to line up behind that landing Lufthansa A320 so i told them we would do so and waited for a Lufty A320. Next landing was of course a BMI A320 so we didn't line up.

By the way, the identing after departure seems to be a british peculiarity, is there really any technical reason anymore for that? Or just a local procedural oddity? After all in other parts of europe we do not even get individual squawks anymore, just 1000 for all on those routes, not to mention no ident and ATC has no problem working with us anyway.

Gonzo

I meant "Aircraft" in place of the type. Full readback would be, for example

"After the landing aircraft, line up 26 right"

I don't say back the aircraft type as this would give a false impression to you that I know what one of them is. I don't.

So no problem in your scenario. Only issue comes if you have given me the 2nd or 3rd landing aircraft but don't give me that vital (to me) piece of information. A320 v P38 I might just get that one, but 3x BA flights, same livery and similar size please help me by referencing only the 1st aircraft or make it clear.... eg "After the BA 747 number 3 on final, line up 26R".

I understand what you are trying to do. I posted as working all day with plank drivers (as many ATC do) who may know all the different fix-wing models I wanted to point out only that Rotorheads might be just as anal regarding Heli's but have a complete blank for make / model of fixed wing.

I will take on board one thing from your response; I could be a little clearer without wasting time. In future I will add "next" so above readback becomes "After the next landing aircraft, line up 26 right".

If unclear, then shout - absolutely. It does, as you say, work both ways.

Thanks for making me think a little

John

Denti
 

The "ident" can be for a number of different reasons.....besides the confirmation of aircraft identity and ensuring that the correct SSR code correlates to the correct flight. On my sectors the "ident" will trigger the code-callsign conversion [if not automatically done] and starts to track the aircraft.....depending on the particular bit of airspace it can change the "label" from a background grey colour to a foreground green colour.
Occassionally an aircraft might display a wrong code [misheard or selection error or redundant pairing or similar] and this may cause a wrong label to be displayed and/or activate the flight plan for the wrong flight.

Johnr81

Just reply unable if you are unfamiliar with the type. The ATC might miss your cryptic readback.

P.

I apologise for adding fuel to the fire, but its quite common at Aberdeen to be given the clearance "after the landing Jetstream line up and wait", and a Saab 2000 or Embraer flies over the threshold. "Eastflight" doesnt always mean a Jetstream.

My pet hates on the RT are "Ident you have" and the words "thats copied and understood"
Just repeat back "ident callsign" and say "roger"

From a turboprop pilots point of view asking a jet to "maintain highspeed" and asking the the turboprop to "reduce speed 180 or less" with forty track miles to go for sequencing when the jet will be wanting to slow down anyway and the turboprop would quite happily of maintained 250kts to final and the jet would not have known it was there. Just because its a jet doesnt mean its faster in the zone or that its lower so itll get there first.

I would look out my window and see that you had provided an unsafe clearance.

You could have no traffic on the runway and say "after the landing A320 cross 27L" and as said A320 vacates at the exit prior to me wonder what you were talking about.

Perhaps you need to have a think about conditional clearances issued to traffic waiting to cross at the midpoint etc.

PaulW, so true!! but isn't that why we make our initial call to approach with type, atis code and qnh?

PaulW, roger does not mean understood!

PaulW wrote:

I hope its not common at all! Aberdeen Unit policy is not to use Conditional Clearances for runway movements. When they are used the aircraft type is taken from what the (electronic) 'strip' says and that is directly from the flight plan ..... garbage in, garbage out.

Hear, hear. Most airport controllers are well aware of that BUT are usually at mercy of the preceding en-route sectors who are not so aware and have made the decision to 'get the jet ahead'.


John R81,

Read the CAP413 extract posted by DFC above - conditionals are only allowed to refer to the FIRST aircraft.

DD

In the days of when PD did use conditionals (few years ago now), some types were often generalised and a member of the A320 family would often be referred to as 'an Airbus' and a E145 or a E190 was often simply referred to as 'an Embraer'. Whilst that in itself would have little safety impact, it is perhaps somewhat different to the conditional phraseology used at larger NATS units. Funnily enough, I never heard a member of the Boeing family being referred to as simply being 'a Boeing'.

CAA ATS seem reluctant to stipulate the use of the aircraft operator in addition to the aircraft type since it can get rather complicated with wet lease ops. However at larger airfields it is often second nature for the aircraft operator to be mentioned in a conditional clearance.

With a number of ATC units now not using conditional clearances, is there anything that could have done by the regulator to make the use of such clearances less potentially unambiguous? After all, if there was no risk of ambiguity, then I suspect that no units would have opted to not use conditionals? Could there be a safety case for the regulator to do away with conditionals all together, based on where we are at present? Perhaps the CAA ATS boys and girls have not done enough in making conditionals more robust?

I would be interested to hear what you controllers think.

Regarding the incorrect aircraft types passing over the threshold with conditional clearances, that was in no way a dig at the controllers, I am aware that the flight plans and aircraft type often get changed by the company and type may sometimes be incorrect through error in operations, Im just pointing out that the aircraft type is not always correct, for whatever reason. Repeatedly questioning did you mean this aircraft type will add to the controller work load. In the same way I couldnt tell the difference between a puma and a tiger or super puma? Do they look any different from the outside or is just different engines, avionics and gearbox? Its a bond, chc, or bristows helicopter to me.

Roger means message received edit apologies to ChestyMorgan Ive just read CAP 413 and indeed it does not say understood, but there is no confirmation for understood except reading it back. Apparently unless its important enough to readback a message only needs to be received.

So Ill go back and say I dont like the word copied..
CAP 413

Acknowledgements of information should be signified by the use of the receiving
stations’ callsign or Roger callsign, and not by messages such as: 'callsign-copy the
weather' or 'callsign-copy the traffic'.

Nope it just means received. Although most people use it to mean understood...incorrectly.

Eurocontrol thingy

Thanks ChestyMorgan nice link to a useful page.
I just search through CAP413 but your link is good.

What happens when the number 1 is a B737 and so is the number 2,3,4 and 5.

"After the Landing B737 line up and wait" :)

I think that in the ICAO docs Roger means "received and understood".

To me that simply means that;

1. The message has been received in full

2. The message makes sense

The actions or not subsequent to receiving the message may not be the responsibility of the person receiving the message and it may take some time for the person receiving the message to inform the responsible person of the message. I am not just talking about radio operator passing message to pilot it could be PNF receiving the message and interupting the PIC's dinner to pass on the message.

CAP 493 states that:- "no ambiguity must exist as to the identity of the aircraft concerned"

So a conditional line-up clearance in the above example may not comply. Suggest it depends on the spacing between the successive B737s ?