Phraseology
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Age: 59
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phraseology
Hello! I am looking for a website with examples of phraseology in english.
Normal, non-normal and emergency situations.
Would you by any chance know??
Normal, non-normal and emergency situations.
Would you by any chance know??
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look for the UK ATC manual. It's about 100 pages and there is everything there (except, hmmm, that they still talk about milibars... 
). It's been linked here around somewhere.
Dani
). It's been linked here around somewhere.Dani
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 1,266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAP413 - UK RT Manual:
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP413.PDF
Bear in mind this details UK procedures, so are just examples of english phraseology. I don't have a link to US or Canadian standards.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP413.PDF
Bear in mind this details UK procedures, so are just examples of english phraseology. I don't have a link to US or Canadian standards.
Take me downwind
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: FCO
Age: 54
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plane English meets Standard R/T
Try these:
http://www.caa.govt.nz/fulltext/acs/..._and_172_1.pdf
Manual. of Radiotelephony (Doc 9432)
(This is to be "re-vamped" to accommodate the new Standards issued in Doc 9835.)
This is my expertise, let me know specifically what you are looking for and I can direct you to specialized material.
CAP 413 is really the best for standard R/T.
Regards,
PE
http://www.caa.govt.nz/fulltext/acs/..._and_172_1.pdf
Manual. of Radiotelephony (Doc 9432)
(This is to be "re-vamped" to accommodate the new Standards issued in Doc 9835.)
This is my expertise, let me know specifically what you are looking for and I can direct you to specialized material.
CAP 413 is really the best for standard R/T.
Regards,
PE
Just had a look at the link to the phraseology document, but noted an anomaly regarding Flight Levels. I was told many moons ago that following the successful trial of 'Flight Level One hundred', as opposed to FL one zero zero, the other hundreds had also changed. I always make a point of calling level at 'FL ??? hundred' whenever possible (even cruised comfortably at FL five hudred!!!). I often get fed-up with listening to Brits who should know better still calling 'FL three zero zero'. Have I got it wrong, should we still refer to them by their single digits? I await an interesting response.
H Peacock
H Peacock
Take me downwind
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: FCO
Age: 54
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to be relative to location...
Dear H Peacock,
It seems there are differences in the transmission of FL. CAP413 (edition 16 dated 1 September 2004) states on page 31,
1.4.2.a) When transmitting messages containing aircraft callsigns, altimeter settings, flight levels (with the exception of FL 100, 200, 300 etc. which are expressed as ‘Flight Level (number) HUN DRED’), headings, wind speeds/directions, pressure settings, transponder codes and frequencies, each digit shall be transmitted separately
Whereas ICAO in their The Manual of Radiotelephony (Third edition dated 2006) on page 21,2.4.2 reads,
All numbers, exept as specified 2.4.3, shall be transmitted by pronouncing each digit separately. (2.4.3. specifies for altitude, runway visual range, visibility, cloud height to be pronounced [number] hundred).
I teach my students the CAP 413 communications standards but prepare them for both by using listening exercises with real transmissions where both are used. I have one dandy specimen (isn't there someone crying on one of these threads that scanners are illegal?) of an approach ATC native speaker of English saying, "cleared to FL [number] hundred, FL [number]-zero-zero". This is interesting seeing that he used this method only with non-native speaking pilots. With both American and British pilots he only used "[number] hundred ".
I hope I have cleared the air for you on all levels.
A question for you H Peacock,
I am still trying to understand the NATO Alphabet for the letter "P". In Australia last week I heard PaPah but in most transmissions I have heard it is pronounced "Papa". Any help you can give me?
Thanks,
Regards,
Plane English
It seems there are differences in the transmission of FL. CAP413 (edition 16 dated 1 September 2004) states on page 31,
1.4.2.a) When transmitting messages containing aircraft callsigns, altimeter settings, flight levels (with the exception of FL 100, 200, 300 etc. which are expressed as ‘Flight Level (number) HUN DRED’), headings, wind speeds/directions, pressure settings, transponder codes and frequencies, each digit shall be transmitted separately
Whereas ICAO in their The Manual of Radiotelephony (Third edition dated 2006) on page 21,2.4.2 reads,
All numbers, exept as specified 2.4.3, shall be transmitted by pronouncing each digit separately. (2.4.3. specifies for altitude, runway visual range, visibility, cloud height to be pronounced [number] hundred).
I teach my students the CAP 413 communications standards but prepare them for both by using listening exercises with real transmissions where both are used. I have one dandy specimen (isn't there someone crying on one of these threads that scanners are illegal?) of an approach ATC native speaker of English saying, "cleared to FL [number] hundred, FL [number]-zero-zero". This is interesting seeing that he used this method only with non-native speaking pilots. With both American and British pilots he only used "[number] hundred ".
I hope I have cleared the air for you on all levels.
A question for you H Peacock,
I am still trying to understand the NATO Alphabet for the letter "P". In Australia last week I heard PaPah but in most transmissions I have heard it is pronounced "Papa". Any help you can give me?
Thanks,
Regards,
Plane English
Last edited by planeenglish; 3rd Jun 2006 at 21:02.
Plane English
Thanks for the swift reply, I'll await to see what anyone else uses.
As regards 'P' - I've only ever seen it as Papa. I quess the 'PapaH' version would help you to emphasize the second syllable of the word.
Cheers
H Peacock
Thanks for the swift reply, I'll await to see what anyone else uses.
As regards 'P' - I've only ever seen it as Papa. I quess the 'PapaH' version would help you to emphasize the second syllable of the word.
Cheers
H Peacock
Last edited by H Peacock; 4th Jun 2006 at 05:26.
According to every pronounciation guide I've seen, "Papa" should be pronounced "paPAH". But, because the real word "papa" is pronounced with equal stress on both syllables in some countries, some people pronounce it "papa".
Take me downwind
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: FCO
Age: 54
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
P's all around
Yes, indeed CAP 413 and ICAO Doc 9432 do show it to be pronounced as PAH PAH. Whereas, the FAA/AIM chapter four shows appropriate pronunciation PAH-PAH. Oddly, in the FAA issue for ATC the ICAO/NATO pronunciation is published. So which is it?
However, if we look at the more recently published manuals of the NATO alphabet and pronunciation the ICAO version is given as the "official" version and then the "unofficial-IPA" version (equal stress on both syllables) is stated.
The letter "P" seems to have been tried by both the Americans and the British before NATO agreed. It has been "Paris", "Peter" and "Pip" even once in the Royal Navy as "Pudding"!
Best to all,
Papa Echo
However, if we look at the more recently published manuals of the NATO alphabet and pronunciation the ICAO version is given as the "official" version and then the "unofficial-IPA" version (equal stress on both syllables) is stated.
The letter "P" seems to have been tried by both the Americans and the British before NATO agreed. It has been "Paris", "Peter" and "Pip" even once in the Royal Navy as "Pudding"!
Best to all,
Papa Echo
Last edited by planeenglish; 5th Jun 2006 at 05:16.
Take me downwind
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: FCO
Age: 54
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear New on NG, I have just sent a private message to you. It is some contact information on a specialist, also a freind, in San Paolo who can help you with specific study on this matter. 
An example of what not to say, and proof of the necessity to study these things, in/for an emergency: A320 Captain, pilot flying, lost hydrauic power immediately after take-off. He, a non-native speaker (albeit operationally proficient speaker), said to a EFL ATC (with a very low level in English langauge proficiency), "I've lost hydraulic power in engine number one". The ATC understood only these words "LOST ENGINE ONE". The mayhem that ensued is unbelievable. The tower continued calling the flight deck to clarify, asking if they needed emergency equipment, etc. It interrupted the pilot and distracted him from his concentration of trying to resolve the problem on board.
Happily, everything went well and the pilot was able to land safely. Reflecting upon this situation the Captain realized he should have just said, "Lost hydraulic power, request priority landing".
All the best,
Plane English
An example of what not to say, and proof of the necessity to study these things, in/for an emergency: A320 Captain, pilot flying, lost hydrauic power immediately after take-off. He, a non-native speaker (albeit operationally proficient speaker), said to a EFL ATC (with a very low level in English langauge proficiency), "I've lost hydraulic power in engine number one". The ATC understood only these words "LOST ENGINE ONE". The mayhem that ensued is unbelievable. The tower continued calling the flight deck to clarify, asking if they needed emergency equipment, etc. It interrupted the pilot and distracted him from his concentration of trying to resolve the problem on board.
Happily, everything went well and the pilot was able to land safely. Reflecting upon this situation the Captain realized he should have just said, "Lost hydraulic power, request priority landing".
All the best,
Plane English
Last edited by planeenglish; 5th Jun 2006 at 05:37.
