I don't think we are under a requirement to do so just a suggestion from opps. That said if i add degrees to every heading i give i'll never get confused about wether it ends in zero or a five. :ok:

Capt Claret
sorry, missed your question til now.

yep, that's part of the area we look after. She is one of the global recruits, overseas she worked radar in 100 square miles of airspace with one frequency (mostly approach type) - So Airservices in their infinite wisdom have placed her in my airspace - mostly procedural, 1400 miles from top to bottom, with 13 frequencies to look after. :rolleyes:

So if you have both circuits active you don't mention left ? Doesn't sound like a very safe way to operate to me....

circuits
 

And when right-hand is the standard do you switch it around?

Secondly would you expect all the pilots around you to be of the same opinion as yourself in this issue?

Personally I don´t mind people reporting both left and right as long as they say the correct one :ugh:. Not taking much freq-time and always unambiguous.

(Note the fancy word in the end, guess you spell it like this)

Just my opinion

A minor gripe this one but at airports where there is no ATIS pilots call (on the ground) and request "the weather" - do they mean "take off data" or even "surface conditions"?

... or even "request departure information" (which is what CAP413 suggests) ...


JD
:)

Scrubby
 

Any American "checking in level FL 350 with a bumpy ride"

Scrubby: here we are encouraged to file Pireps for the benefit of others -sheesh sooo sensitive :ugh:

"Eh,Cape Town XXX101 requesting a visual ILS approach to 19"
Response was XXX101 report the ils in sight!!!!

London Control to American pilot....



"American XXX turn left 15 degrees and report the heading."

No response.

"American XXX turn left 15 degrees and report the heading."

No response.

"American XXX London control, turn left 15 degrees and report the new heading!!"

"Errrrrrr Just trying to get you a reallllllll accurate one here.... Errrrr heading 1....4....3"

"ATC- (Laugh) yea thanks!"



You just gotta love em!

@ A32Oriental
Quote: "2 circuits at the same time...... are you kidding me?? "

More to the point, are you kidding us ? :confused: As John McEnroe said, "you cannot be serious ?" I assume you are not an ATCO in the UK then ?

Helicopter circuits at EGBO are right hand, fixed wing left hand and both are often active together.

Quote:

---

Downwind or base is always left, only include 'right' when its a non standard right hand circuit!!

---

Quote:

---

The rule is straightforward. When the standard circuit is right hand you always add 'right'.
Yes, pilots should be aware of this. It's in the manuals, should be in yours too.
2 circuits at the same time...... are you kidding me??

---

What's the problem with using both circuit directions at a controlled aerodrome? Often has advantages.

It's not a "rule", it's an RTF procedure, as described in the ICAO Manual of Radiotelephony...

"When the traffic circuit is in a right-hand pattern this should be specified. A left-hand pattern need not be specified although it may be advisable to do so if there has been a recent change where the circuit direction is variable".

2 s

"ABC123 report YOUR heading to London...."
With a big emphasis on "your". I mean seriously, who else's heading is the pilot going to report?

"ABC123 turn left 10 degrees and report the new heading"
As opposed to the old heading?

"ABC123 stop climb initially FL90"
Usually said when the controller has made a mistake or the traffic scenario changes and needs to stop the aircraft off. I can see the logic of using "initially" when aircraft are in the region of cruise levels and get stopped off after being cleared to cruise but in a TMA environment? It sounds silly.

Or my pet hate...
"ABC123 can you just stop your climb FL90 please?"
Again, said when the controller has cocked up. As if they ask nicely it won't look so bad. Trainees have a habit of doing this. I've seen the point hammered home in reports where "[Trainees name], can you just do the job properly and use standard phraseology please?" has been written :E


And I witnessed a trainee perform the following exchange which made me cringe.
"Thai XXX, expect a couple of spins at XYZ, bring back the speed now"
"Say again"
"Thai XXX expect a couple of spins at XYZ bring back your speed"
"Thai XXX not understand, say again"
Trainee now getting a bit irate... "Thai XXX, bring back the speed, you're going to hold!!"

Long pause....

I take the RT.

"Thai XXX hold at XYZ, reduce to minimum clean speed"
"Hold at XYZ reduce minimum clean, Thai XXX"

I think it got the point across? The trouble is that the trainee had been using the same phraseology for well over 100 hours of training and nobody had picked him/her up on it! :ugh::ugh::ugh:

A simple "congratulations" response to pilots reporting "approaching" or "fully ready" normally resulted in a much older voice coming on the frequency with the correct phraseology, and I like to think, a cuff over the ear of the chap sitting in the right hand seat with an accompanying, "stupid boy".

On the beach :ok:

It may be apples to oranges, but in the US, where many airports have parallel runways, this isn't uncommon. Only today, we had 2 planes doing patterns on one runway, with 2 more on the parallel runway.

I understand that LHR normally uses one runway for arrivals and the other for departures. Is that the case at most other UK airports?

In some places in Asia if you are at the holding point for the runway and transmit " Tower XX123 ready" they will always come back with "XX123 report fully ready" ...does my head in.....fully.

"Can we have 10 mins slot extension?"

agree, stupid RT. Minimum clean, min approach or a specific speed is correct and understandable.

Metric Altitudes
 

Not a "pet hate", but what is the correct way to announce your level when flying a metric altitude in, say China.

C/S "ABC123 maintaining FL8100 meters" just doesn't sound quite right!

I just say I am maintaining 8100 meters (no FL prefix) but as I note all the operators out of Hong Kong talk of being at a metric Flight Level I assume they are correct, but are they?

Thanks in advance.