Radar contact and Identified
 

Hello guys and girls,

what's the difference between those two,can you give examples of situations,whether to use one or another, doc.4444 definitions doesn't give much:cool:

Cheers,Ron.

Contact - I can see what ac you are talking about.

Identified - I have all the details and am ready to accept that ac.

so for example: G-XXXX departs, calls on frequency, I can see him, I reply: XXX Approach, radar contact.
But if the same acft,which I have details,departs,but let's imagine transponder was off, SSR only, I can't see him ,he calls, I reply: XXX approach, Identified.

Is that what you mean?:ooh::ooh:

Ron.

Really?
In Spain "radar contact" = "identified". There´s absolutely no difference between them.

In UK, MATS Pt 1:

Radar Contact - The situation which exists when the radar position of a particular aircraft is seen and identified on a situation display. (ICAO)

Identification - The situation which exists when the position indication of a particular aircraft is seen on a situation display and positively identified. (ICAO)

So if, I'm using radar than it is always be radar position and therefore =Radar contact?:ugh:
So how come I can see on situation display other than a radar position,only ADS comes to my mind:ugh:

it's the same thing...u can use both as much as u wish

Here up north..

RADAR CONTACT = SSR contact
IDENTIFIED = primary (PSR) contact only

:rolleyes:I go for the same.I can`t see the difference.radar contact=identified.:confused:NOW I HAVE DOUBTS:bored:

Surely it depends on the context in which it/they are being used.

Identified is usually only mentioned ATC to ATC during a radar handover or ATC to AC when the ac is positively identifed by the controller using the proscribed identification techniques/methods.

Contact would be used when an ac had undergone a radar handover and the ac would be told to "Contact xxx radar 111.11" or when one ATC to another is referring to an ac and points said ac out using radar. As soon as the listening controller is happy he he has identified the subject ac he replies "contact" so both parties know the which ac they are referring.

Just read that through so not convinced it's that clear but I've never professed to be any good at this lark!

UK phraseology "Identified" sounds a lot more positive than "radar contact" but the latter is ICAO so we're outnumbered.

Picking up on the use of contact in RT,, i.e "callsign contact xxx on xxx.xxx"

contact implies a radar handover has been completed.
continue with implies the next agency has been pre-noted but no radar handover has taken place
freecall - is just that, neither has taken place and any service the aircraft is under would be terminated at that point.

In the military arena, identified means the aircraft has been identified on radar using an approved method of identification. Identification must take place prior to a radar service being provided. The process of identification does not imply a service is being offered.

The First ATCU that gets an aircraft on radar
(eg. TWR upon departure) will identify the flight (eg 1NM from RWY, passing 2400 ft) So that controller will use
KLM123 identified (upon departure)...

The next controllers who will use the same radar system will usually say KLM123 radar contact...< instruction> ...

If the radar contact is lost...
KLM123 for radar identification, squawk ident...

KLM123 identified...

Thats the info we received in our ANSP...

Grtz
B

What's the difference between:

a) POSITEVELY IDENTIFIED and
b) IDENTIFIED?

:ugh:

Contact vs Identified
 

Wow, what a buffet of answers to a simple question, and I am sure this was covered about 5 months ago.

Radar Contact means a target / PPS / RPS whatever is observed on a radar screen. That is all, it is just an RPS or blip buzzing around.

Identifed means that thru the approved procedures of SSR / PSR identification, that target has now been correlated to a known A/C and is now "Identified".

There is no such thing as "Positively Identified", a target is either Identifed or not.

Once an A/c is "Identified" it shall automatically receive radar service until it is told "Radar services terminated", procedural control then ensues and the A/C will resume normal position reports etc.

Picking up on the use of contact in RT,, i.e "callsign contact xxx on xxx.xxx"

contact implies a radar handover has been completed.
continue with implies the next agency has been pre-noted but no radar handover has taken place
freecall - is just that, neither has taken place and any service the aircraft is under would be terminated at that point.

In the military arena, identified means the aircraft has been identified on radar using an approved method of identification. Identification must take place prior to a radar service being provided. The process of identification does not imply a service is being offered.

Couldn't disagree with you more on this one "glider insider", unless you do some special secret military stuff. "Contact" when used with a frequency change just means "Call" "Switch-to" "Talk to" etc, but has nothing to do with the state of A/C Identification or not.

Once an A/C is "Identified" it remains so forever, unless "Radar services terminated" is used. This also applies in automated RDPS's between sectors, the A/C is still identified when control is transfered from one controller to the next.

The second an A/C has been identified, that automatically and immediately implies a radar service is being provided until they are told otherwise.

Not sure that I agree with that. In the terminal/approach environment there are many occasions when I have an aircraft identified but I'm not providing it with a radar service. A VFR departure may be identified on departure but unless the pilot asks for a radar service he/she continues 'doing their own thing' - but I still have them identified.

PS - I say 'doing their own thing' because in reality I'm not sure what service they are then receiving, a situation that will not be helped in the UK from March when just about anything can be called a FIS!

According to ICAO Doc. 4444, both terms are acceptable: either "Radar Contact (position)" or "Identified (Position)" (see Doc. 4444, 12.4.1.1).

Further, it defines Radar Contact as "the situation which exists when the radar position of of a particular aircraft is seen and identified on a situation display".

It is also stated that that these phraseologies are to be used when surveillance is being used in the provision of Air Traffic Services, implying that that once an aircraft has been identified (and advised) it is then being provided with a radar service.

Tired now...

Imperator1300

The controlling I do is certainly not "secret military" stuff, but the meanings of the 3 phrases, "contact, continue with, freecall" are as taught to UK mil controllers and are certainly applicable in UK ATSOCAS as provided by a military controller (such as when controlling LARS).

I disagree that Identification implies a radar service is being applied. I can think of an example when you are controlling a FIS and you require coordination with that aircraft, you will identifiy that aircraft and seek agreement from the FIS pilot to a course of action. I have identified the aircraft so that I know I am coordinating the correct return on the screen, but I am still only providing that aircraft with a FIS. I cannot speak for controlling in CAS, but outside CAS a radar service is not applied until the controller / pilot agreement has been reached. That is the pilot requests the type of service and the controller confirms that service by stating it back, or the relevant next best service applicable (such as when the aircraft is beneath the RVC and cannot be provided with RAS, so a RIS is applied).

Interestingly the discussions we are having are one of the reasons that the new ATSOCAS is being introduced, so that a consistent level of service is being applied from unit to unit across both the military and civil arenas. Accordingly the military will be adopting many aspects of civil phraseology such as "immediately" when offering AA and "degrees" with headings ending with a zero.

The original poster is a SATCO according to profile so I would imagine that the question relates to ATC-ATC co-ordination and nothing to do with what is said to pilots over the RTF. Clarification would help but I think the 2nd post answers the question perfectly.

to clarify, I mean Controller-pilot RT:ok: