latest cap413
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
latest cap413
Just downloaded and looking through the latest cap413,
see the example for AFIS operated aerodrome example of pilot call for departure is "G-AB ready for takeoff"
Assuming its a typo error, how could something so important be left uncorrected.
Although i see the reply is "G-AB roger, taking off"
Why bother with the roger, surely "G-AB taking off" is sufficient.
see the example for AFIS operated aerodrome example of pilot call for departure is "G-AB ready for takeoff"
Assuming its a typo error, how could something so important be left uncorrected.
Although i see the reply is "G-AB roger, taking off"
Why bother with the roger, surely "G-AB taking off" is sufficient.
"G-CD, C2 Ready for take-off"
A call which should never be made. EVER! Tenerife taught us that....
I shall bring it to the attention of the CCA Chief RTF Examiner.
A call which should never be made. EVER! Tenerife taught us that....
I shall bring it to the attention of the CCA Chief RTF Examiner.
How can they make such a basic mistake!?
As Beagle says Tenerife was years ago!
Cant understand why you have to say "taking off" in this case?
Whilst on the subject some airfields have started saying Runway XX Left Hand - I always thought left hand was the default circuit direction anyway? Apparently the CAP which is published for A/G. INFO etc now infers that the circuit direction should always be given.
I wrote to the appropriate SRG group at CAA quite a while ago about this and they wrote back saying it was optional and that they only put this caveat in so that the circuit direction would be included where there was doubt or ambiguity - ie rotary on right hand, fixed on left for example.
I feel this is a case of "dumbing down" where the circuit direction is always stated when it is left hand and I religously do NOT read back the circuit direction unless right hand is stated - I suggest we all do this!
By the way, when I looked in the latest LASORS there is also an error in the call to a MATZ zone (cant remember what but it stuck out like a sore thumb) - who proof reads this stuff?
Rant over - pith helmet donned.
As Beagle says Tenerife was years ago!
Cant understand why you have to say "taking off" in this case?
Whilst on the subject some airfields have started saying Runway XX Left Hand - I always thought left hand was the default circuit direction anyway? Apparently the CAP which is published for A/G. INFO etc now infers that the circuit direction should always be given.
I wrote to the appropriate SRG group at CAA quite a while ago about this and they wrote back saying it was optional and that they only put this caveat in so that the circuit direction would be included where there was doubt or ambiguity - ie rotary on right hand, fixed on left for example.
I feel this is a case of "dumbing down" where the circuit direction is always stated when it is left hand and I religously do NOT read back the circuit direction unless right hand is stated - I suggest we all do this!
By the way, when I looked in the latest LASORS there is also an error in the call to a MATZ zone (cant remember what but it stuck out like a sore thumb) - who proof reads this stuff?
Rant over - pith helmet donned.
While you're at it, BEagle, could we try and get rid of:
"G-CD Seaton runway 23 left hand, QFE 1021."?
We seem to be the only country that throws arbitrary left hands and right hands into phraseology to indicate circuit direction like like. There's a potential confusion, particularly for foreign pilots with "runway 23 left".
I've witnessed a foreign pilot at Cambridge line up on 23 grass (obviously "23 left", even though local convention is to call it "23 grass") after being instructed that departure would be "runway 23, left hand".
I can just about live with "runway 23, left hand circuits", but I'd much prefer something like "runway 23, circuit direction left".
"G-CD Seaton runway 23 left hand, QFE 1021."?
We seem to be the only country that throws arbitrary left hands and right hands into phraseology to indicate circuit direction like like. There's a potential confusion, particularly for foreign pilots with "runway 23 left".
I've witnessed a foreign pilot at Cambridge line up on 23 grass (obviously "23 left", even though local convention is to call it "23 grass") after being instructed that departure would be "runway 23, left hand".
I can just about live with "runway 23, left hand circuits", but I'd much prefer something like "runway 23, circuit direction left".
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Bookworm - "left hand circuits" makes far more sense.
I disagree about not saying "left hand circuits", thoguh - it depends on the circumstances. For example, at the airport I fly from, the circuit on all the westerly runways are generally right-hand. But there are sometimes very good reasons (the police helicoptor operating in the vicinity being a common one) why this needs to be changed to left-hand, and on these occassions it's important that "left hand circuits" be stated by ATC and read back by the pilot? Just one example of many - there are so many cases that CAP413 can't possibly deal with them all, but must give examples which are generic enough that a bit of common sense will fill in the gaps.
FFF
-----------
(PS - for anyone who reads the first post and doesn't know what the fuss is all about - I doubt there are any instructors in that category but this forum is read by people other than instructors - the phrase "take off" is only ever used on R/T when you are cleared for take-off, so there can be no confusion about whether a call is a clearance or not)
I disagree about not saying "left hand circuits", thoguh - it depends on the circumstances. For example, at the airport I fly from, the circuit on all the westerly runways are generally right-hand. But there are sometimes very good reasons (the police helicoptor operating in the vicinity being a common one) why this needs to be changed to left-hand, and on these occassions it's important that "left hand circuits" be stated by ATC and read back by the pilot? Just one example of many - there are so many cases that CAP413 can't possibly deal with them all, but must give examples which are generic enough that a bit of common sense will fill in the gaps.
FFF
-----------
(PS - for anyone who reads the first post and doesn't know what the fuss is all about - I doubt there are any instructors in that category but this forum is read by people other than instructors - the phrase "take off" is only ever used on R/T when you are cleared for take-off, so there can be no confusion about whether a call is a clearance or not)
I really don't see the problem with '26 left hand' to mean left hand circuits and '26 Left' to mean a runway if there's also a '26 Right'. How many of those are there in the UK? Sure, '26 Grass' or '26 Hard' seems sensible - but "Runway 26, Left Hand Circuits" is too verbose.
Frequently I have to join "Runway 26 left, join right base". Scope for confusion indeed - but that's miltary ATC, I'm afraid....
Frequently I have to join "Runway 26 left, join right base". Scope for confusion indeed - but that's miltary ATC, I'm afraid....
Gizajob
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: uk
Age: 49
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly nothing surprises me with the CAA. Sure that some depts think we still fly open cockpit Spitfires and all talk into throat mikes through our handlebar moustaches...
For what it's worth, as a FISO and pilot who works at an airfield with variable circuits and circuits operating in opposite directions at once (one for fixed, one for rotary), our standard phraseology would be ' runway in use 33 with a right hand circuit etc'. If the aircraft is a regular, we may abreviate to 'taxi to the hold, runway 33 righthand etc' - either way, we think about the possibility of confusion.
In my little experience, though we try to keep to 413, we end up being somewhere between that and practical, though I appreciate that for those trying to learn or teach, this sort of crap from the CAA doesn't help.
[edited to say that if I used 'roger' as many times as in the 413 example, the ATCO who trained me would slap me A LOT! What a waste of airtime...]
For what it's worth, as a FISO and pilot who works at an airfield with variable circuits and circuits operating in opposite directions at once (one for fixed, one for rotary), our standard phraseology would be ' runway in use 33 with a right hand circuit etc'. If the aircraft is a regular, we may abreviate to 'taxi to the hold, runway 33 righthand etc' - either way, we think about the possibility of confusion.
In my little experience, though we try to keep to 413, we end up being somewhere between that and practical, though I appreciate that for those trying to learn or teach, this sort of crap from the CAA doesn't help.
[edited to say that if I used 'roger' as many times as in the 413 example, the ATCO who trained me would slap me A LOT! What a waste of airtime...]
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: 26000 to 28,000 lightyears from the galatic centre
Age: 77
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While your at it Beags, can you ask why we now need 177 sides of A4 print for CAP 413 when the old CAP 46 published in 1973 did the job just as well with 30 pages of A5 print. I still have a copy (sic).
Orion
Orion
It all started going wrong when we let them have a radio in the Watch Office sometime during WW2.......
Have pointed this thread out to the chap concerned - but it might be more productive if people (as some have) indicated their legitimate concern rather than just taking the opportunity to throw yet more mud at the Belgrano!
Have pointed this thread out to the chap concerned - but it might be more productive if people (as some have) indicated their legitimate concern rather than just taking the opportunity to throw yet more mud at the Belgrano!
