heading-degrees
 

I was working in a very busy sector in the airspace of Seville this morning, and i would like to share something with you. I know it is recommended by icao but i have to admit that i don´t find useful the use of the word "degrees" after the heading. I use "turn left XX degrees" or "turn left heading XXX". Well, this morning four or five EZY and MON started saying at the same time degrees after the heading, i know it is absolutely correct, but it was very confusing. I said "turn left heading 010", and the readback was "left heading 010 degrees" which is very similar to "turn left 10 degrees". There were three of four "confirm?" and "affirm", not very helpful in a busy environment. What do you think about this phraseology? Do you normally use it?

I use degrees after every heading (Best practice on my watch) and have never had any problems.

If I want them on the heading, I use:

"Turn left/right heading XXX degrees"

If I want them to make a turn by so many degrees,

"Turn left/right XX degrees"

Stipulating the word "heading" in the first example ensures and implies that the aircraft should turn onto a heading of xxx degrees

DF

I say "turn left heading 010" and "turn left by TEN/twenty/ninety degrees". Very international airspace, and never seem to have a problem. I dont believe a pilot (from anywhere) would turn ontoa heading of "TEN". Headings are three digits.

and if you dont say degrees after the heading implies to turn XXX degrees?

No - In the UK, officially, you only have so say degrees with the heading if it ends in a 0.

The most imortant word here is the word "heading" in the transmission, not degrees.

As Feris says, another way to get round it is "Turn left/right ten/twenty/fourty degrees".

belk78

As a MON pilot, but not in your sector this morining, I understand your observation. The UK has decided to use degrees as has already been explained, but this is a UK thing. Can I ask whether Spain has adopted this protocol? If not I will try to make sure my First Officers refrain from incorrect RT whilst in Spanish airspace.


As an aside I notice that many UK controllers have decided to use the degrees phaseology for headings ending in 5. This is rather annoying to us pilots!

MANAGP

Why is it annoying? it's only one word. The protocol is that we must say it after headings ending in 0 and we can either say it or not in headings ending in 5.

Why the addition or otherwise of the word should be annoying to a professional pilot beats me

Managp,
i appreciate your comments. We don´t say (as far as i know) degrees after a heading, only after the DegreeS we want you to turn. I think it is easier to make a mistake using it in both expressions (think of a poor RT in a busy environment), but then again, it´s only my opinion.

If the word "heading" is used, the use of "degrees" is redundant.

Some years ago on arrival into KPHX, I was flying an airplane with the number 210XX. On the same frequency was a 120XX, and a 210YY. We were alternately each being given altitudes and headings, such as "N210XX, turn left heading 120, descend and maintain FL210." "120XX, climb and maintain FL210 heading 210," and "210YY, descend and maintain one two thousand heading one two zero."

Very soon all the numbers began to blend, and predictably, someone in the mix mistook directions for one aircraft with those for another, and with hearing the same numbers over and over, it was very easy to hear an altitude and mistake it for a heading or visa versa, even for the wrong airplane. The use of "feet" and "flight level" and "degrees" in that case were useful supplements to "climb and maintain," "descend and maintain," and "turn left/right heading..."

SNS3Guppy - if only it were that simple.

The introduction of the use of the word degrees was brought about because aircrew often climbed to the heading i.e. FL100 instead of heading 100. That is the only reason why we have to do it.

That is why it is not mandatory to use it on headings ending in '5' -because we use the semi circular rule.

Anotherthing

It's annoying because it's not correct phraseology and therefore subject to misunderstanding. CAP 413 makes it quite clear that 'Degrees' should only be used for headings ending in zero.

Belk78

In exchange for my co-operation could I ask you and other Spanish controllers to refrain from talking to Spanish a/c in Spanish. ICAO mandate English as the language to be used. Everytime a non English transmission is made Situational Awareness reduces.

MANAGP

Actually, it has historically been the case that the word 'degrees' was optional after any heading instruction.

This (relatively) new ruling states it must be used for headings ending in 0, the optional part still exists for other headings.

It is still correct phraseology to use it for headings ending in 5, but not mandatory.

I applaud your crusade for correct phraseology, however your issue over the use of the word degrees is really a non issue. Even if it was not allowable, it's use does nothing to detract from safety, and it does not increase workload one iota.

Anotherthing

Is that the reason? I would have never thought it! i say heading 100 and a pilot climb to FL100? No comments.

Managp

Believe me, everytime an english speaking traffic is involved we use the english. The problem is that some VFR or ambulance flights don´t speak english, so we still have to use spanish. Nevertheless, you can take for granted that I will pass your remarks on in my unit, because the loss of situational awareness is totally understandable.

In my short time lurking around PPrune I've noticed that this seems to come up a lot. Personally, I use "degrees" after every turn instruction regardless of what it ends in. So far without problem...

I think if this thread has done anything though, it's shown the importance of trying to maintain an international standard of Phraseology. If we all know it and stick to it, there should be fewer things misinterpreted...
My two cents

The Aussie AIP GEN phraseologies state;
TURN LEFT (number) DEGREES, or
TURN LEFT HEADING (three digits).

We specifically teach NOT to say DEGREES after a HEADING.

which, in the UK, led to several pilots climbing to their heading, or more frequently just reading back the figures, eg.

Me "Turn left heading 120 degrees"
Pilot "120"

I fell foul of this many years ago on EGLL Final Director when instructing a Panam 727 (showing my age!) to reduce speed to 180kts - his response - "180". Guess what he did - turned on to 180 degrees.

That's why we say degrees after a heading instruction (best practice is after all headings) and knots after a speed instruction. It's worked for me!

belk78 -thank you, although Iberia, Spanair etc are very much as guilty. I have yet to hear a controller reply in English when a Spanair has checked in speaking Spanish.

surfingatco,

In the example you give, I don't believe the phraseology used is at fault. Rather, it's the poor readback from the pilot and the controller's failure to catch it. Reading back only the three digits without any hint as to what he might do with them IS the dangerous bit.

Cheers,

SAO

One does get the impression that the Brits are rather pompous and precious. They keep wanting to improve R/T unilaterally, and all this does is cause arguments and some confusion: eg. whether to say "degrees" after 5 or not!

There will always be some pilots who mishear things and the key is to make the calls unambiguous and for the ATCO to check the readback - not to change CAP 413 and add the odd word here or there in an instruction, like some sort of code, when most of us are flying outside UK airspace anyway, and things are done differently there.

If Scotland produced its own CAP 413 and included some words that did not appear in the English CAP 413, wouldn't we deem it all a bit silly and insist on just one way of stating something? If so, why should the British think they can impose their own ideas unilaterally and forget about everyone else?

There shouldn't be arguments about how instructions should be worded, but they are frequent in PPRuNe. That is because there have been too many changes, and it is clear that many controllers and pilots get a bit irritated by them.

Message to the CAA: Stop tinkering with R/T procedures.

Riverboat