Gatwick ATIS
 

Greetings, Ladies and Gents of ATC. Two questions about ATIS:

At Gatwick one often hears: "Clearance delivery.....on wun too wun deysimal niner fife zero....is closed. For clearance, call Gatwick Ground on wun two wun deysimal eight." (The voice is quite slow and heavily emphasises the phonetics)

Would there be any chance - for the sake of brevity - of just saying "Delivery is on 121.8”? Why take all that time to read out the frequency that is NOT in use?

Secondly, the runway in use is given and then the phrase "ILS approach to be expected". I think that 99.9999% of pilots approaching a major London airport WILL expect an ILS approach, (unless it was NOTAMED as being U/S). Therefore for, again for brevity, would it be possible to delete this comment, and only say anything if the approach WASN'T going to be an ILS?

These may seem small OCD points, but if one is trying to quickly update the ATIS before calling for clearance, or during a busy approach, these two phrases make the process longer than it really needs to be.

Talk about picky!!!!

Au contraire. Seems like a perfectly reasonable observation; really annoying to have to listen to.


2 s

Why don't they simply pair delivery and ground when workload allows like most other places? No need to tell pilots about it, they will still call on the appropriate frequency...

Expected approach is obvious but necessary, but why not just say "expect ILS 08R"? Less words, same meaning...

Equally useless is the phrase "ILS Approach to be expected".

What is the point?

Surely that's the default setting, I'd only want notice that it would be LOC/SRA/Rnav/Visual when the ILS is otherwise out of service.

It is superfluous verbiage which is typical of the direction this industry is going, viz "to hell on a handcart"!!!:

Uplinker, are we the only ones to notice and protest this creeping malaise? I'm looking forwards to some cogent articulate reasons from the ATC community as to
why they/their bosses think this sort of verbal squits is necessary. ugh:

The reason "ILS approach to be expected" is on the ATIS is because the rules state that all IFR aircraft will be told what sort of approach they will get on initial contact with the relevant approach unit. By putting it on the ATIS, it avoids the controller having to tell every inbound individually. Saves time and effort.

It's a stupid rule anyway, but this is a simple way around it.

Hope this helps.

Hi TS, Thank you for that explanation - which I understand. Since it is mandatory, could we at least reduce the length of the information? Instead of "Runway in use zero eight right. ILS approach to be expected" how about "Runway zero eight right. ILS"

9 syllables instead of 18.

I realise that Heathrow Director and others might be spluttering over their coffee now that I am talking about syllables !!

However, what used to take a moment, now takes longer. More syllables mean that the ATIS message takes longer to repeat, so if you just missed the QNH or whatever, and you need to listen through twice to get all the information, this extra delay is doubled. This becomes a problem because ideally we want to brief before we start descent. Approaching the UK, we get the ATIS as early as we can but the ATIS only has a limited range. Descent into the London TMA is a very busy time but one pilot has to go off the active frequency to listen to the ATIS and write it down, while the other pilot is flying the plane, and doing the radio. Sod's law says that even when you judge it to be a quiet moment to get the ATIS, ATC suddenly issues instructions, so only one guy is handling all this, including new descent clearances while the other is getting the ATIS. Later in the approach we would want to check the ATIS for updates, but with a long winded ATIS, this can take one pilot out of the loop for too long.

Therefore, ideally the ATIS needs to be as succinct as possible, without uneccessary verbiage.

The clearance information on the ATIS takes even longer and is useless to inbounds, and therefore really does need to be as short as it possibly can be. Taking 20 syllables to transmit completely useless information "Clearance delivery, on one two one decimal niner fife zero, is closed" is a total waste of everyone's time. Please can we ditch it.

Suspect this might be an automated system from which a pick and mix is done so may not be as flexible as you would like- would you like to go back to a guy or girl recording it every half hour?

Not really. Partly it's due to the required wording, and believe me it took a lot to get it reduced to what it is!. I will get something to our tech committee (if they haven't already seen this) to see if we can use a shorter wording for the delivery closed message. Please bear in mind though that the ATIS has to use standard RT phraseology just like any other ATC frequency and anything non-standard is not going to happen. I suspect we'd have just as many crews complain that the wording was ambiguous or didn't give enough info if we changed it. I don't like having to say "Behind the landing xxx, line up 08R via Juliet behind" (and if I tried to get a correct readback from every crew who gave their own version I wouldn't have time to move much aluminium!) but rules are just that.....

At Stansted they seem to manage with "Delivery is closed, Ground is open" without any mention of the frequency. (Pilots do carry charts to look up the frequency, believe it or not!)

It'll probably be more worthwhile contacting Gatwick ATC directly rather than ask for it to be changed via a forum.

You make good points but no-one is going to go into work and say 'Hey, I saw this on pprune and think we should change it'

Greetings!

I object.

First, read back of the frequency you are dialed in is necessary, as many are not aware of which frequency they are - so point one, I appreciate the additional safety.

Second, a runway in use is one thing, but same as SVFR clearance (often not given ...) I believe this one is even mandatory by safetey regulations and insurance settings. It also reminds pilots of others around them (what they sometimes forget).

I think it is worth the additional safety to add these phrases.

It's not picky. It's paying attention to detail.

I agree with Uplinker.

Occams Razor . I think your comment is personal and out of order. We are all allowed to have an opinion, even you!
Heathrow Director was a very good controller indeed and great fun to work with.
I hope you either apologise or delete your post.:=

Tongue in cheek O&O, I do respect that HD has spent many years plugged in working the traffic.

And I reckon HD will have recognised that....heaven forbid we should not be allowed a little ribbing of one another.That would be like working for the company that HD has sadly left.One less 'character' in the job which is slowly being overwhelmed by corporate robots.

REMEMBER TENERIFE?
 

Bearing in mind the worlds worst aircraft accident had R/T factors and the pilot community are constantly (deservedly!) and regularly criticised for their comms quality it is not unreasonable to politely ask the other end of the freq to tidy up their act.

The OP has a perfectly valid observation, and to say "that's the rule" and acknowledge it is a stupid rule as well, indicates something which requires attention and rectification.

Since non-pilots have made it more difficult, post 9/11, for ATC personnel to ride on the jumpseat and observe at first hand the controlled chaos which can be an arrival into a TMA, then how do the aircrew get this one across to the rulemakers?

One option (UK) is to get yourself down to Swanwick and observe a TRUCE session, great value for both parties and I can thoroughly recommend it. It also provides the opportunity to bend the ears of those wonderful humans who keep us apart in the sky, and get off your chest/bosom such issues as this which are bugging you.

Who knows, someone important might even get to hear of it and take action?

Alternatively there's CHIRP in the UK, enough grumps to that databank might just get to the right ears.

Airing it on this network only gives us followers that warm wet feeling that we are not the only ones but may achieve little else........

And if you are really determined to get therapy, with a little organisation it only requires your airline ID and company airfield transport to actually go to the LGW tower and see how the other half live? And the view is spectacular........:)

From a pilots point of view operating into a major airfield what do I always need to hear:

Runway & approach in use - wind - temperature - QNH -

What do i sometimes need to hear:

Cloud less than 1000ft - viz less than 3km - any special info.

I personally think we could really simplify our weather reports but guess there is a large amount of arse covering from the authorities.

I find the ATIS at SEN a bit of a joke in some respects.

The runway is almost always DAMP DAMP DAMP or WET WET WET and the ATCO in the tower invariably parrots this, even when arriving/departing crew in rain can clearly see for themselves.

"We could really simplify our weather reports......."

The RAF (can l say that without stirring up the old antagonism?) had and may still have the colour system for airfield weather. KISS or what?!

Why does an international airport tell me XYZ cloud cover at 20,000ft?

At that height I was approximately 60 nautical miles away........

Yes, if I was para dropping I'd be interested, and though strongly tempted to jettison some SLF in 10 years on the 73NG, I never found the appropriate system listed in Part B Technical.

Mind you, I never liked e-manuals and always learned more from PAPER manuals, but that's the inspiration for another thread? :)