Initial R/T call to London control correct phraseology
 

Hello all,

A quick question, apologies if it has been already asked and answered elsewhere.

On initial contact with London control in a climb/descent is the correct phraseology

C/S passing level cleared level

or

C/S cleared level only

Many thanks

Only the 1st call to any radar unit after T/O should include passing level/alt, unless requested by ATC. All initial calls to any radar unit should include cleared level/alt.

D

Thanks D, will omit all passing level calls when handed over from one London control frequency to the next.

If you give us the level you are climbing/descending to, it gives us a clue where to look for you on the radar.

Broadening The Subject
 

I wanted to develop this thread because our (London) procedures cause some (understandable) confusion amongst some airlines.

I thought I could reduce the confusion by explaining the reasons for the procedures.

On transfer from London en-route to an approach frequency a pilot is requested to report cleared level, aircraft type and information received.

Cleared level becomes particularly significant when approaching areas of dense traffic and especially a hold where a level bust can very quickly become critical. In the LTMA many outbound routes pass under or near the holds thus increasing the number of potential conflicts in the event of a level bust.

Aircraft type is checked to ensure correct vortex turbulence separation in the intermediate approach and in particular on final approach. It is also checked on behalf of the tower who may be issuing conditional clearances to other aircraft or vehicles based on correct visual identifiction of an aircraft type. For this reason also variant changes are noted - e.g A319 v A320.

'Infomation received' enables us at a glance to check for any significant weather or pressure changes.

Several airlines omit some or all of this information on first contact with approach possibly because they are mindful of the "callsign only" request which does take place on transfer from Intermediate Director to Final.

The reason that happens legitimately at that stage is because the precision of the Final Approach task (particularly but not exclusively at LHR) requires exact timing of heading and level instructions. Whilst this is by no means always safety related an overlong initial call can impinge on our attempts to optimise spacing for the benefit of all inbound AND oubound aircraft.

So, DLH in particular please note, callsign, cleared level, aircraft type, information received on first contact (with for example LL Approach). Callsign only, ONLY on transfer to Final Director.

Thank you

KLM as well - They seem to be getting bad at just checking in on INT with just the callsign.

If I had to guess at reasons for that, the prime one would be that the ATIS says to give all this information "on first contact with Heathrow" rather than "on first contact with Heathrow DIRECTOR". I wonder if a simple change to the ATIS would solve the problem and also stop people giving the information (incorrectly) to the TMA controller.

In a similar way, I'd bet that if the departure ATIS told people to report the information to "Heathrow DELIVERY", more people would make the first call correctly. In other parts of the world, the ATIS letter is reported to "Ground" rather than "Clearance".

G W-H

Some examples I just created.

Outbound Example.

London Good Afternoon BAW913N, passing 3500 for 6000, DVR4G(Dover)

BAW913N, London, "Squawk Ident" Climb FL120 Route direct Dover.

Ident, Climb FL120 and Route direct Dover, BAW913N

BAW913N, London 1**.***

London 1**.***, BAW913N

Inbound Example.

London BAW913U, decending FL250 towards Logan.

BAW913, Hello London, Decend FL150 level by Saber.

Decend FL150, level Saber, BAW913U

BAW913U, London 1**.***

London 1**.***, BAW913U

London BAW913U, decending FL150 level by saber.

BAW913U, roger decend FL100 route direct LAM

Route direct LAM decending FL100, BAW913U

BAW913U, Contact Heathrow Director 119.725, bye.

Heathrow 119.725, BAW913U.

Director BAW913U, A319 with Information Zulu, Cleared FL100 level LAM.

BAW913U, Leave LAM heading 275, Decend FL80

Leave LAM heading 275 and decend FL80, BAW913U

BAW913U, decend to altitude 6000FT QNH1003

Decend to altitude 6000ft on 1003, BAW913U

BAW913U, Turn left heading 120, Contact Final Director 120.4 with callsign only.

Turn left 120* and contact director callsign only 120.4, BAW913U

BAW913U

BAW913U, 27 miles 27R, decend to altitude 4000ft QNH1003

Hope that helps :ok:

When you find yourself omitting the word "altitude", remember the Flying Tigers 747 that was instructed to "descend t(w)o four zero zero feet" and ended up hitting a 500 ft ridge on the way in to KL.

Quote:

---

Outbound Example.

---

Climbing the aircraft without identifying it or validating the SSR? Naughty

bookworm,

Edited as suggested.

anotherthing,

Having read the CAP 493 twice to help me with me towards my PPL, I should know that :ugh:.

Edited.

Thanks Guys

Another one..

"BAW913U, Turn left heading 120, Contact Final Director 120.4 with callsign only.

Turn left 120* and contact director callsign only 120.4, BAW913U"

An executive instruction followed with by a frequency change in the same transmission is not considered good practice either.

Thanks all,

One more quick question -

inbound, which is correct on handover from say Paris to London

C/S cleared level

or

C/S passing level cleared level

As this is the first contact with London control should passing level be included ?

The first reply (Dumbledor's post #2) answered that question Stinker!

Is this a 'bad habbit' of some crews or do ATCO's quite like the following format:

Glasgow good evening, EZY86AT, descending through FL100 for FL80, radar heading 305, A319 and we've been Tango'd, QNH 1018

There is a particular captain that I've heard say it in that format a few times. Seems to annoy a few others when it's rather busy.

What's naughty about that? There may be a radar screen in front of you, but it doesn't mean you have to use radar separation.:8

If only the UK adopted ICAO standards, then everyone would know what to do every time.

To handle the specific safety issues and the partisan solutions the UK has, the UK could then make the case and lobby ICAO for appropriate change to an internationally recognised set of procedures.

Result = everyone doing a standard thing and no excuses for not all doing it the same way.

PPRuNe Radar has hit the nail on the head there.

However there is no harm with differences to ICAO, providing they are obvious and documented for all pilots to see. If you want crews to call INT using a set format then get this format into the AIP and then it will find its way onto our approach charts. Until that happens, then the current campaign can be described as being nothing more than being based on 'word of mouth'!

Will including it on the charts make a difference? Perhaps it could, I'm not so sure though. The things we need on first contact are already mentioned on the ATIS, which everyone inbound listens to. Surely, as long as the ATIS is listened to, everyone should know what we need on first contact.

Good thread, I've found myself answering some questions by reading it.

I actually logged on this morning to post a related question concerning "callsign only". I don't fly in the big cities often (I'm more of a country boy), so "callsign only" isn't something I'm asked to do very much.

I know it's semantics, but is the correct phraseology for a "callsign only" contact:

"Stansted, CLB 123"
.... or just: "CLB 123"?