If there is an potential risk of some essential factor being omitted (as obviously there could be), surely this indicates that it should be done by written checklist, as for example, a runway change or emergency alerting action. I feel that this is particularly important when trying to hand over while actively controlling traffic. My objections to PRAWNS are that a) it sounds/looks silly and amateurish, b) it would be entirely unnecessary if a proper, logical and unit-specific checklist were used, c) has been forced on units by some Neddy in NATS, assuming that one size fits all, and d) is, IMHO, in an illogical order anyway, presumably just to force a damn' silly acronym/mnemonic out of it for the benefit of someone's career advancement.

Surely, the most obvious first item - at an aerodrome - should be runway-in-use, easterly or westerly operations?

2 s

These things aren't set in solid stone, do what's necessary to get something unit specific for your unit if you feel it necessary. Far more constructive that than just complaining about it here.

Please accept my apology for the apparent poor grammar. I shall, or is it will, try harder. Do feel free to let me know.

HD, level busts or runway incursions may not have been called that 40 years ago but I find it hard to believe they were unheard of. After all it's partly because of such incidents that cockpit developments like SOPs and CRM have come about (and on the ground, PRAWNS).