"Where's our traffic"
 

This is going to sound like another controller bitch and moan,but I want to highlight a phrase I have heard from pilots over teh past couple of weeks that does not sound professional at all.
On first contact pilot instructed to reduce speed/turn/etc. A minute or two later comes the dreaded:
"Where is our traffic?"
I realise keeping the pilot in the picture is part of our job but a comment like that doesn't achieve anything.I might have priority traffic departing from another runway. And I know it isn't every pilot that does it but its more than a few.

So what phraseology would you prefer when you put me on a heading without giving any explanation and I need to understand what you're planning?

Bookworm:

How about "Roger, turning left/right heading XYZ, insert callsign here!"

That'll work for me every time!

Regards,

IF2:ok:

bookworm
Try making that enquiry @ EWK or JFK & see how far you get !
:(

Bookworm:

While keeping the pilot in the picture planning wise is a nice touch, it is certainly not top on the priority list for an ATCO. With all due respect why do you need to know our plan? If we had to explain our thinking to a pilot every time we gave an instruction the system would just grind to a halt.

I personally find little comments like 'where is our traffic' and 'what number are we' not only annoying but potentially distracting. Just because the frequency is quiet it doen not mean the ATCO is sitting there doing the crossword. It probably means he is talking or co-ordinating on one of his many telephone lines or intercoms. Having somebody wittering in your ear with superfluous and non-standard phraseology is a pain in the butt.

:ok:

What bookworm is saying is that it is part of 'situational awareness' which is, in general, a GOOD thing to have - for pilots, anyway. Our TCAS has made a huge difference to our interpretation of the airspace around us but it IS limited in scope.

If the USA do not want pilots in their airspace to have 'SA', that is their choice. It will not stop us asking.

CRR - you do not tell us which particular part of the control scene you are, but is it really SO difficult to keep us in the loop? We do not wish to know the other pilot's sock size or auntie's name, but a clue as to why we are turning/slowing/levelling what-have-you does actually help. EG - 'number 5 in traffic' when we have been kept high-speed/straight-line to ctr/fix by the previous sector does affect the way we do things and does not take long to say?

Just seen TIAC's post and again - I would say that a clue as to what lies ahead from you guys and girls does help a lot. 'Track miles' are another very useful tool which LGW inbounds at least are very good at - and saves us asking for those, too - and messing up the crossword:D :D

BOAC

Quite agree that situational awareness is a good thing. But most situational awareness, I would suggest, is gained by listening in on the frequency and building a picture of what is going on. Although it would be nice, it really is impossible to explain every move you make to each aircraft.

I have found that when it is busy, the pilots with the best situational awareness are those who realise it is busy and don't add further to the problems by interrupting a controllers 'line of thought' with further questions. Of course every pilot has the right to query any ATC instruction but if it is busy dont be surprised to fine that the answer to the question "Where is number 1" is:

"Ahead of you!"

:ok:

Student controllers are taught what the MATS Pt 1 Section 3 Page 2 Para 9 which says:
9.1 The position of an aircraft is to be passed to the pilot at least once on each leg of the circuit.
9.2 Position information for an aircraft making a straight-in approach is to be passed at least once before it commences the final descent.

Note that the phrase "is to be" makes it mandatory.

That of course is the bare minimum required by "The Book". We also teach that, providing the spare capacity exists, number in traffic is useful, a/c type ahead if particularly slow or heavy can give a clue. We also teach that good practice is to give track-miles to touchdown when turning base leg, when turning onto the closing heading, and immediately before QSY to TWR. A good radar controller will be keeping an eye on the Mode C and adjusting the track miles accordingly.

It is to be hoped that on first contact the pilot is informed what sort of approach he will be making e.g. "Vectoring for an ILS approach RWY 26". However, one must accept that when the R/T loading is approaching 100%, the important stuff, like stopping planes banging into each other, takes precedence over the nicities of how far you have to go and what that boring aircraft is you are following. Believe it or not, we do teach that a well informed pilot is less likely to ask questions and is more likely to do what he is told without quibble, thereby making every-one's life easier.

In the interests of PC, any reference to the masculine gender should be taken to include the feminine gender also.

TIAC - CRR's post said "On first contact pilot instructed to reduce speed/turn/etc.", so the 'listening in' option is not an option - and to suddenly find you are number 5 with no clue given before does change the way we do things. It might even be a turn which significantly shortens the APPARENT track miles - which can be a problem for us.

It would not take even the most stupid of us long to detect a busy sector, I can assure you, and I would hope we all keep Stumm, but the 'unexpected' is always better received when a LITTLE background is given. If there is a reason why I might need to level for a while, or even significantly reduce my ROD, say, at FL100 on descent to,?FL60? (maybe for a cabin pressure problem or whatever), or descend at 240kts all the way from FL330, I would aim to say a brief 'why' to you when I announce it, rather than your having to ask and interrupt my unfinished crossword.:D It will help YOU plan too.

"Where's our traffic?" is heard by ATC as "why aren't we number 1?" and thus assigned the label whinge.
You already know why you're being vectored because you'll have heard it on first contact with approach. "Vectoring for the ILS" or whatever the approach happens to be, or it'll be in the STAR to "expect vectors". A vector is not just a heading; think back to those vector diagrams you drew in nav training and at school. A vector is a heading at a specified speed. We are not required to tell you where traffic is from which you're separated (except in Canada where we do have to give traffic if your blips will merge at minimum vertical sep).

If you're hoping from a visual approach and you're number 2, by all means ask for the traffic so you can follow it. If you just want to whinge about slowing down or being widened out, try to act your age. :E

Bern Oulli,

Just out of interest I wonder why it is taught that way. I think most pilots would agree that by the time the base leg turn has been made the descent profile has prety much happend, and range checks are becoming less important, similarly i see little point in giving a range check once the pilot is established (although many of my colleagues do) as the pilot should now be receiving the DME and will know far more accurately (radar being history) how far he has to go than i can tell him.

Personally I will give a range check as soon as possible after first contact on approach and again about 20 nm from touchdown; i may give further checks if i think the a/c is flying an "inappropriate" descent profile.

But quite often the answer to "how many track miles" is " how many do you want"!!!

Some common sense is helpful here. If the frequency is going b@lls out, the reason you haven't been told why you're being put on the heading or given a change of level (i.e. a revision to a climb or descent clearance that stops off early) is because the controller probably has little enough time to think never mind tell everyone what the plan is. If it's quieter the controller will probably give you the information - if it's that quiet yopu'll probably go in a straight line wherever you're trying to get to anyway.

In the old days, before TCAS, I can understand that a pilot might have wanted more info but these days the close in situational awareness to avoid a collision is largely provided by TCAS - so I can only conclude that the requests made by pilots for traffic info are made for less significant reasons.

I've been in the ATC business for a good many years and if there's one thing I can promise you it's that controllers do not put aircraft on a heading or stop it off unless there's a good reason. And that reason will almost inevitably be another aircraft or some similar good reason. I can't speak for others but I won't do it because it increases my workload and I'm lazy. The upshot is that even if you ask where the traffic is, and I tell you, it's not going to change anything.

One final thought. If a pilot refuses a clearance that I issue but doesn't say why I'm not going to ask why - I'll assume there's a good reason and sort something else out.

I think Spitoon has it about right. Most aircrew recognise when a sector is busy and keep quiet. Similarly, controllers will usually explain if they are instructing something out of the ordinary.

Also - don't forget that traffic doesn't necessarily have to be airborne yet but could be still at the holding point in a very long queue!

Spacing via speed control and additonal vectors could also be to meet the towers spacing requirements - balancing the delays for all :ouch:

Bookworm,

In the London area, "thank you for putting me on this heading which will ensure I don't hold up all the much bigger and much faster traffic too much whilst also ensuring I safely reach my intended destination" (and if you're in the Mooney all free of charge as well) :)

Anyone is entitled to ask what their number in the sequence is inbound to Gatwick or Heathrow, it'll be....last. Only joking, only joking :p

BOAC, inbound Gatwick, unless extending the vectoring instead of going once round the hold, it's only required to give track miles on first descent from flight level to altitude (same at Heathrow).

Assuming time available, and there usually should be, would you like a check further back e.g. leave LARCK heading 270 degress, forty miles to go". Would only be a rough guide, more accurate at descent point mentioned above.

WF.

Had an "interesting" conversation with a visiting E145 FO the other day, who accused ATCOs at my unit of filling-in the empty gaps in the RTF with what he termed "un-necessary info" on aircraft which he deemed to be of no relevance to him.
For example:

1. helos hovering on the grass areas to one side of the RWY
2. aircraft postioning visually behind his a/c, from the downwind position in the visual cct
3. potential TCAS traffic which was 1000 feet separated from him but opposite direction

We routinely pass this info in order to:

a) pre-empt pilots asking what the traffic is and where it is
b) to cover our backsides if the circuit traffic or helos do something stupid
c) prevent silly TCAS reports and unwelcome AIRPROXES caused by pilots sighting the other traffic ands thinking it's closer than it really is (has happened at least three times now)
d) assisting the situational awareness of pilots
e) trying to cover as many unplannedl eventualities as poss (ATCOs v.good at this, pilots???) such as the late go-round, busy flight-deck tryin to sort-out a problem and then the aircraft flies off the centreline, to one side of the runway.

One question for the pilot brigade: when you know you're # 2 on the ILS and you have one ahead (which presemably you can see on TCAS), why do some of you delight in trying to close the gap and eroding the vortex wake/radar spacing)? Bloody-mindedness or do you expect us to impose speed control to 4 miles every time? Just a thought....

Evil J

to answer on Bern Oulli's behalf, the "why it's taught like that" is because the College (now known as DAT&S...and no I don't know what that means either) has a duty/responsibility to teach the 'book' before the practical short cuts.
With regard to distance from touchdown transmissions on base leg...it makes a difference if you're 8 miles south of the extended centreline, turning base, aiming at 16 mile final with potentially 24 miles to run which (may) be closed up by a tighter vector on base leg. TCAS won't tell you that...and incidentally, when the turn to intercept is given, students are told the ILS/DME will kick in and distance from touchdown information is superfluous.

Hope you realise Bern & his colleagues are trying to prepare the guys who (might) pay for your pension as best they can.

Tori

ATCO J30
Re lack of Brevity on your stations VHF
heres a bit of a transcript from the other day.

Us. 'ABC123 taxi'
BRS Twr 'ABC 123 taxi G2' ok so far

Us. 'ABC123 G2' ie may we proceed?
Twr. 'pass your msg'
Us 'ABC 123 just to let you know we are at G2'
Twr 'Roger hold at G2' Which is what we are doing!
Us ' Hold at G2' have to read back an instruction.

Twr 'ABC 123 taxi G1'
Us ' ABC 123 taxi to G1'. ok

Twr 'ABC 123 taxi to G1, hold short of the runway. after departure its standard noise then a left turn to WOTAN'
Us (read it back)

ATCO can you spot any superflous RT in this? I think this is the sort of waffle your fo was on about!

I sympatise with point b) in your post and I'm sure thats why you do a lot of it but......... brevity is important in rt. It's not a luxury. transmissions must be kept as short as possible!

In the horrible mid air twixt that DHL and the -154 it was not possible for the DHL crew to get out their vital 'TCAS descent' call due to the freq being busy. Had they been able to get the call out the accident may have been avoided.

Keep it brief. If it dont need saying.... Don't say it!

brain fade - "Keep it brief. If it don't need saying.... Don't say it!" mmm, indeed.

Us "ABC123 at G2" - A bit superfluous. We sit in a little room with 12 ft high glass windows and guess what, we can see you at G2!
The reason you are held there is so you don't interfere with the glide path signal. If it's possible to hold you at G1, then we'll instruct you to taxy to G1. So telling us you've reached G2 is, in itself, a waste of r/t time.:hmm: That whole paragraph of your post is about wasted r/t initiated by a pilot.

So, as I quoted at the beginning of my post, "If it don't need saying.... Don't say it!";)

brain, you seem to be on a one man crusade against BRS. You ask if there is any superflous R/T in you transcript - as it is written down by your good self there is and it's akin to "where's our traffic" referred to in the original post on this thread.

Why did you introduce an unnecessary call at G2. I would refer you to my earlier post in this thread - controllers don't do things for no reason. And G2 is not there for no reason. I would hazard a guess that its proximity to the 09 glidepath means that it is there to protect the GP signal in certain circumstances like, oh, I don't know, maybe an aircraft is using the ILS. Maybe I'm wrong - but there will be a good reason why you were held there. And when you were able to continue to G1 I'm sure the controller wasted no time in clearing you to continue.

You want to know why you were told to hold short. It's because you were being given a departure clearance but you were not yet cleared to line-up. Maybe you understood this. Maybe you've never lined up on a runway without a clearance - but trust me, if you did, you wouldn't be the first.

Why don't you give BRS a break and try to understand why they do the things they do. Better still, though it pains me to say it, why don't you get on with flying your aeroplane and let the controllers do the stuff that they know about.

[Edited simply to say that Standard got there first - and hey, I was right about G2!]

I always find if humorous that I never get asked a question when track shortening a pilot but as soon as you slow them some way they want to know everything....

I put in the bit about 'G2' for because the EZY we were waiting for (to land) looked to be so far out that perhaps we could have been allowed to go. Believe me, at CDG, we would have been away!

I realise that G2 protects the ILS.

I notice that neither Spitoon or Standard commented on the " taxi to golf one, hold short of the runway. after departure its a standard noise, then a left turn for WOTAN" call from ATC. Why not boys?

Every single element of that call was either repetion of a clearance or (in the case of noise) SOP:{

I also note that although you point out (correctly) that our call 'holding at G2' was plainly a prompt, and therefore unrequired (except to remind ATC that we we were willing and able to go), you make no mention of my wider point about brevity.

There are real implications here about the use of VHF comms which are certainly not lost at 'busy' airports, or on the airways where a check in frequently elicits the reply 'ABC123 Roger'. Ever heard that at BRS?

'Brevity' at BRS is definately one of your 'growth areas'. If you disagree with that you need to get out more!

I may as well say that we all put in words that we (me too) could miss out, but at BRS it's particularly bad.

It's not a crusade, and I like going into Bristol.

Really tho, I know it was really quiet for ages, but it's got a lot busier in the last few years, and I think it's about time you raised your game.

ATCOJ30 what is all this crap about 'threshold elevation' anyway? I've not heard it on VHF or ATIS at any UK airport (OK I've not been to them all) ,but really, on EVERY approach?

I think you are a nice bunch. You would do better if you simply copied ATC practice at other airports and ditched your special 'Brizzol' stuff, both on the ATIS & the VHF:ok:

Remember it's a simplex net. Any one tx denies the net to all users

Quote from brainfade (who is anti-EDI as well as anti-BRS)...
"I put in the bit about 'G2' for because the EZY we were waiting for (to land) looked to be so far out that perhaps we could have been allowed to go. Believe me, at CDG, we would have been away!"

Tower controllers judge gaps every single working day, in many cases several hundred times every working day. Guess what? Most of them are pretty good at it. Often, a gap that looks usable to a pilot isn't, sometimes gue to simple visual perspective and sometimes because there's a reason that can't be seen from the cockpit. That could be slower departed traffic ahead, overflights crossing the departure path, too much traffic on the sector to which departures will be handed over, the list goes on.
Most tower controllers derive great satifaction from firing off departures as quickly as safely possible, and in the smallest usable gaps between arrivals (I certainly did!) so calling when you're at the hold, and can be seen perfectly well by TWR who has a vested interest in getting you airborne and off his frequency ASAP, is utterly superfluous.

What's the problem with it? It is safe. UK ATCOs are taught that if one amends or passes a departure clearance, and the a/c is approaching a runway, then 'hold position, after departure.........' or 'hold short of runway xx/at holding point, after departure....' should be added, to avoid the departure instructions being misinterpreted as a take off clearance.

I see LnL has added some reasons why you might not get away when you think you ought to. Also, bear in mind that every departure from BRS requires a release (though I stand to be corrected!) from approach (and/or maybe Cardiff as well).

Gonzo yep, you're half right, every IFR dep requires a release from radar, and the problem is, we have to obtain that before we taxy an a/c from G2 to G1.
Only if we have the release, can we be sure of getting the a/c away. No point in taxiing someone past G2 and not being able to get the release and then causing a go around because the one on the ILS isn't happy at getting G/P fluctuations at a critical phase of landing.
BTW, brain fade, that explains why we sometimes ask the inbound if they are visual, and if they say yes, then we taxy you forward to G1 and explain to the inbound that they may get G/P fluctuations due to your prescence at G1. Oh, sorry, would that be a lack of brevity on the r/t?:rolleyes: Ah well, all in the name of using the 5 mile gap.
Right now brain fade, if we're on the subject of looking at each others' working practices, then I'm going to say something that may annoy you. Some of the pilots here at Bristol and in particular the E145 jockeys really do need to raise their game a bit. I used to work at Belfast City, where on 22, we had a backtrack for every dep. Quite often, we would have the Embraers backtracking 500 metres or so, turning and rolling, all in a tiny 6 mile gap. It worked! When I came here to Bristol, I was told that I'd be lucky to get any Embraer to accept a dep when there was a 5 mile gap. I was shocked to say the least, considering there is no backtrack on 27 and only a 250 metre taxy from G2 to the 09 threshold. So if we're looking for improvements, tell me why pilots on all the types based at or operating into BHD can use 6 mile gaps with a backtrack of 500m but at Bristol, they can't with no backtrack or only a 250m taxy???????
See, I knew you wouldn't like that one.
Oh, and another thing, when you are ready for departure, it's customary to inform the tower by saying "ABC123 ready for departure", not "ABC123 holding at G2."
There's not one of us ATCO's here at Bristol that isn't committed to using every gap we can for departures. Pity we can't say the same for the pilots who use this airport.:mad:
As for "taxy to G1, hold short of the runway. After departure standard noise, then a left turn to WOT", Gonzo is correct, there's nothing wrong with that. We get hammered by our own management and the Campaign Against Aviation when there is a runway incursion, even if it's not our fault, so we tend to use this phrase, or say "hold position....." then give the release. Point is, some pilots think that once they've been told "after departure......" they think it's some hidden instruction to line up, or even worse, they say "after dep std noise ABC123 cleared take off." And yes, I've had that read back to me more than once here at Bristol. Maybe it's an English thing!?:confused:

Finally, and only cos I'm off home soon, " you would do better if you simply copied ATC practice at other airports and ditched you special Brizzol stuff....."
Hey, the CAA gives us some books (MATS pt 1/ UK AIP/ CAP670 etc etc) and we have to work within the framework of said publications. We do. End of.

Clear as mud?:suspect:

Oh yeah, just one final thought.......
If you don\'t think we\'re much kop here at Bristol, get yerself of down the nearest friendly ATC college and get a licence. Then we\'ll see what your made of! Failing that why not ask for a transfer?:confused: :rolleyes:

From BrainFrom SpittyFrom the Manual of Air Traffic Services Part 1And yes, the day I get my ATPL I might try to tell a pilot how he should fly his aircraft. When Brain gets a controllers' licence I might have some time to debate the niceties of how to control more than one aeroplane. In the meantime....

Spitoon - nah, don't wait til you get an ATPL, just tell 'em what they should be doing, works for me!
If bf thinks he could do any better than you or I, then let him try, if he's got the balls...........................oh, and his own 'yellow peril' of course.

Standard Noise:

I agree with almost everything you say, apart from:

"BTW, brain fade, that explains why we sometimes ask the inbound if they are visual, and if they say yes, then we taxy you forward to G1 and explain to the inbound that they may get G/P fluctuations due to your prescence at G1. "

As someone who operates on both sides of the gulf that seems to have opened up on this subject, I would argue that once I am visual with the runway and/or the PAPIs, then glidepath fluctuations are irrelevant, as I am using the eyeball and not the ILS to judge my flightpath. Thus I would suggest that your explanation to the inbound might be superfluous, but no more so than a call to report at a holding point which is visible to the Tower!

1-1 then...?!

hmmm.....
Just to be clear. Not saying BRS unsafe or 'unprofessional'.
just saying a lot of clearances are repeated. Any denials?
I also acknowledge what you say re some pilots taking to long to go after saying 'ready'. thats poor.

If you guys at BRS don't agree with me that there is a lot of verbal diarrhoea (is that how you spell it?) on the freq then frankly you've got your heads in the sand, my luvvers! Every pilot I know at BRS would be too polite to tell you, but not me as you can see!

There has to be a limit tho' to my moaning, so it's about time I shut the !!!! up :{

I've no wish to be an air trafficker, sooner be a drug trafficker, the whole ATC plot gives me the willies, but in a previous life I was a B1 signaller in HM forces and I fuggin hate pish poor sloppy voice procedure on the VHF.

As someone said to me once, "bad service is only a problem if you accept it".

The VP at BRS, is particularly 'wordy' and frankly if you were as busy as you may well be in a few years, you'd brush it up.

I'm not going on about this forever, so ignore my comments if you want.:rolleyes:

Brevity is important in comms. Are you really saying you could miss out nothing?

Brain Fade



From MATS Part 1....

7.3.5 If it is known that a particular company uses, or a pilot has clearly indicated that he will use, QNH during the final approach the controller may omit QFE and substitute QNH and aerodrome elevation or if appropriate, the threshold elevation in RTF messages.

Up here at the Ice Station the Threshold Elevation of the runway in use is included in the ATIS - when Pontius was a pilot and 90% of our customers used QFE we used to pass the appropriate figure to the 10% that landed using QNH - now the world has changed and nearly everbody uses QNH the figure goes on the ATIS to save constant repetition.


Re: Standard Noise's comments on E145's...

Embraer Regional Jets were the prompt for my signature :)

DD

"I cleared you for take off, I didn't give you squatters rights!"

Data
Ta. How come it's not on the ATIS or passed by voice at most airports then?

Right, let's have another go then................
eyeinthesky- unfortunately, everything we do is regulated by the Campaign Against Aviation, and these nice chaps just love to jump on the poor overworked ATCO when something goes wrong (whether it's the ATCO's fault or not). Therfore, we indulge in a favourite hobby of ours, it's called 'back-covering'. Thus the reason why we say "........you may experience some glide path fluctuations......." Just cos a pilot claims he's visual, doesn't mean he's not got one eye on the G/P indications. We just have to legislate for the lowest common denominator (you know the sort, pilots who moan about traffic in the circuit being too close, despite being in class D and being passed the appropriate tfc info).
brain fade - "just saying that a lot of clearances are repeated. Any denials?"
No, I'm not denying it, but as I said above, we have to legislate for the lowest common denominator, which, quite often, can be the 'professional' smartie tube drivers rather than the ppl students.

DD - which airport is it that has the threshold elevation on their Pamos? Am I right in saying it's Edinburgh?

Standard
This 'back covering' of which you speak, is at the bottom of a lot of this. It's no excuse tho.
Many airports (and the en route folk) don't have the time to do such a thorough job on the back covering as you guys at quieter airports like BRS. therefore they rely simply on good practice.

Try it.;)

S'not my good practice I'm relying on, it's yours!:ok:

And until the Campaign Against Atco's leave us be to get on with it, it will remain our favourite hobby.

Standard.
I like you. You're a feckin master at missing the point tho.:{

I have no idea! Possibly yet another piece of inconsistant "rule making" by our Regulators......

DD

Look, in the last two shifts of this cycle (quiet nightshifts), I've had a heading of 275 read back as 270 and an altitude of 2500' read back as 2000'. Both times by 'professional' smartie tube drivers. When you guys start to get it 100% right, then we'll be able to relax with the repetitive back covering clearances. Another favourite which has happened more than once in my last 6 duties, has been "ABC123 taxy to holding point G2."
"ABC123 taxying to G1" Mon Dieu!!!!!!

Is English not your first language? I know I grew up in NI, but my accent isn't that strong !:hmm:

As long as people issue and read back instructions, there going to be mistakes. Doesn't mean you have to say everything twice!

You're missing the point again my babber!:rolleyes:

Any chance of resolving this squabble over a coffee somewhere?

Where i work (regional airport similar size to BRS) we neither pass the elevation (except for an SRA) by RT or on the atis, and I have never been asked for it.

Personally I think passsing it to a commercial aircraft is tantamount to telling em the final approach track or ILS frequency??? Correct me if I'm wrong here pilots, but arent most of you landing ref the rad alt these days anyway, and pressumeably its a requirement to have the appropraite plate in front of you anyway which has all that info on it. And even the aircraft that dont have rad alts have still never asked me for the elevation.

I'm not having a pop at anyone who does it(and certainly dont want this to degenerate into another Bristol slagging exercise), as lots of places ive flown to do pass the elev, my point is that if we dont pass it, and no one has every complained or said we should...is it really necessary???