Are you referring to advising the approach controller that you have the QNH on initial contact "Fastway 123 descending FL 80, B727 with A QNH 1021" ? That's no longer a requirement, just type (uk only please say the Europeans!) and atis.

Speaking of continental atises :}

babotika, are you sure that it's not an ICAO requirement?

CHIRP 108 - too much rubbish on ATIS
 

Del Prado, don't know if it ever was. There's no point as the controller will pass QNH when you are cleared to an altitude.

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP%204...21.1%20TSO.pdf

here is the new CAP413 including ICAO differences.


According to Chapter 6 for approach you just need to give Call sign, passing and clear level as per normal or just level and the information no QNH. In the UK

And QNH isn't passed by the controller until cleared to an Alt. So that looks like that one is taken care of in theory.

And to note most of the examples completely miss out ATSOCAS services :D we can only live in hope that its a precursor for it being scraped.

Bugga just remembered ATCO's don't work to CAP413 do they?

They work to MATZ part 1.

So its revert to normal ops of wait until someone else books in and if it works for them copy them or make it up as you go along and when something works stick to it. As its more than likely CAP413 doesn't match MATZ part 1

MATZ PT.1, is that a new type of airspace? :E

Sorry spell checker Mats Prt 1.

DB6...........if your only interested in getting an early update off the weather whilst on the way to Inverness/ Edinburgh or anywhere else for that matter please just give me a call on Scottish Info 119.875 and you will be given it with a smile :cool:

From latest CAP413

Automatic Terminal Information Service (ATIS) UK
4.184 To alleviate RTF loading at some busy airports, Automatic Terminal Information Service (ATIS) messages are broadcast to pass routine arrival/departure information on a discrete RTF frequency or on an appropriate VOR. Pilots inbound to these airports are normally required, on first contact with the aerodrome ATSU, to acknowledge receipt of current information by quoting the code letter of the broadcast. Pilots
of outbound aircraft are not normally required to acknowledge receipt of departure ATIS except when requested on the actual ATIS broadcast. If, however, pilots report receipt of a departure ATIS broadcast the QNH should be included, thereby allowing ATC to check that the quoted QNH is up-to-the-minute.
4.185 Aerodromes possessing ATIS, the hours of ATIS operation and the frequency employed are published in the UK AIP.
4.186 ATIS broadcasts (which should be no more than thirty seconds duration) will include all or part of the elements of the information shown in the Manual of Air Traffic Services Part 1, Section 3, Chapter 1, in the order listed

fis that's not the problem especially in INV.

The INV atis is off the VOR and depending on your direction of attack and level you can't actually get it until well inside its published DOC.

In this EASA world the paper work is king. You can blow a tyre out on the runway through no fault of the pilot and if the subsequent investigation finds out you haven't got all the wx boxes filled out that match what the ATIS is providing you will get your backside in a sling.

So sometimes you be at 30 miles doing 230 knts and still not got the atis out the way and recorded. If you are lucky you will just catch it as they start the met part and then you can dump it when you get the QNH and Code. If you catch it as they start grass cutting in progress, WIP at delta, WIP in approach lights, secondary radar/primary radar out of service, restricted area Fort George active the whole thing can go on for 60-90 seconds while your doing 3-4 Nm per min. At that point (25NM) you also usually get cleared down to an altitude anyway and the change to QNH triggers a altimeter cross checking procedure and approach checklists. So the whole thing becomes a bit of a flurry of activity with one crew member removing themselves from the team to collect the wx leaving the PF to single crew it during a busy phase of flight.

WOT MJ JUST SAID!
Perfectly describes it.
Fisbang, while that would be nice it almost always takes longer than an ATIS broadcast, which in your post mentions max 30 seconds. Not too long ago I listened to 34 seconds of guff on Edinburgh's ATIS BEFORE getting to the weather, all of which was either NOTAMed or irrelevant. Inverness is generally worse and most of it utterly irrelevant.
'Activity of a dangerous nature below 500 feet' - describes most of the Scottish Highlands, what's it doing on the ATIS? Like I said, probably done with the best of intentions, but actually very counterproductive. If you think of ATIS as another form of R/T, the same principles apply:
Brevity, Relevance, Clarity.
The CHIRP comment describes it as a growing problem. QED.

If it's a big problem then crew need to start filing ASRs so that CAA change the requirements.

Can someone please tell Easyjet at Gatwick?

Just sprayed my cup of tea.

Is that those paragliders, fannying about about on the point?

MJ - best post I've seen on Pprune lately!

That's before we mention the frequency "planning" which means EMA ATIS freq is same as CDG so approaching from the south in a Big Jet you can't copy ema ATIS till half way down descent through busy airspace with clearances coming thick and fast with PNF off ATC recording all the important stuff like "Birds in the vicinity etc. x"

I mentioned the frequency issue to a friendly ATCO years ago and the reply was "Ah well the DOC is only 60 miles"......

They may have changed the CDG ATIS freq now but it was like this for years!

If its just the weather part you're interested in there isn't even any need to get an ATIS, simply print out the current METAR and you're all set. That is available even if no D-ATIS is available.

fireflybob - its the same at EDI coming from the South. You wil be getting the Schipol ATIS right up to ToD, worse if it's a high pressure day and propagation is good.

Scottish helpfully gives you the runway on first contact, which is nice given the local propensity for the odd intriguing runway change.

Also, anyone know why EDI are determined to tell me the vis is 35k instead of just 10k+, or are they just boasting about the spiffing view from the tower?

BHX Atis is a complete shambles at the moment. Half a dozen different voices repeating same old stuff week in month out. Runway and weather will do nicely - we are obliged to read notams before we fly after all.

As an aside, I am not remotely interested in cloud above ten thousand feet nor on variations in light winds !

beamer,

Yes, but I'd be very rich if I was given £1 every time something that is subject to a NOTAM seems to take a crew by surprise.

Hence why ATIS is a common mititgation in hazard analysis. If it's in AIP/NOTAM and on the ATIS, then maybe more crews will pick up on it.

Not saying that's right, it's just how it is.

Again, if it's a real problem then crews need to submit official reports to the CAA; 'mentioning issues to friendly ATCOs' doesn't achieve what you want, because us 'friendly ATCOs' can't decide ATIS policy. We can ask questions about it, and pass on our own opinion, but when asked where the safety issue is, if there are no reports there, then we can't change anything.

Gonzo, quite agree! I did file a CHIRP report - apparently when MAN had the same issue many moons ago with ATIS being blocked by another station many crews filed CHIRPS report and eventually one of the freqs was changed.

No chance if a crew isn't reading the NOTAMS they will be the ones that won't listen to the full ATIS and just ignore the Guff as its going through until the MET comes up.

If pilots don't know about something try and find out why.

is it because the NOTAM is more than 2 weeks and its being filtered by the planning software.

Is it the fact that the airport has double figures of NOTAMS most of which never change.

A lot of European airports put temp changes through the plate providers and we get temp different coloured sheets through with the details on. They stand out and in general are read.

The doubling and tripling of the same information through different sources is never going to work its just treated as nagging. Then when something is important it gets missed mixed in amongst the Guff.

Its quite easy to tune out what's being said on box two until you hear the trigger word wind. If your the skipper you have to anyway because you will have box one going as well in case something comes up on it which needs your input or you want to make sure the FO gets it right so you don't have a Alt bust to deal with.

You can stick as much crap as you like on the VOLMET if you want. Just give the bare essentials on the ATIS.

I would suggest who ever does your hazard mitigation gets there backside out of there office and goes and flys the line on the jumpseat for 2 weeks 6 days on one off then 5 days with an airline that does 4-6 sector days. Then they might have a clue what mitigates a hazard and what creates one.

I don't actually know what we are meant to do different with half the guff anyway.

Grass cutting h'mm land on the runway and not on the grass?

Birds in the vicinity: Put safety specs on?

WIP in the undershoot: lets not fly 4 reds as usual then.

Dangerous activity below 500ft: tell the FO they are not allowed to fly the downwind at 300ft today.