United Kingdom Military RT Phraseology
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
United Kingdom Military RT Phraseology
I flew into a large UK military airfield yesterday. Until now my only experience of Military RT has been VFR transits of MATZ and LARS services.
Having flown IFR only in the civil environment, I was rather bemused by the volume of RT provided to me as I flew the ILS, much of it duplication of my own cockpit checklist items. Most of the calls seemed to require only acknowledgement or confirmation (eg "check gear", "check DH", "approaching/passing DH", "you're over the threshold"). I particularly liked the phrase "you are expected to land off this approach" which I thought put remarkable faith in my ability not to stuff it up and have to go missed.
I was handled by the approach controller all the way. In fact it took a transmission from me along the lines of "G-XXXX..I've landed..." to get a handover to the Tower.
I post this not to complain, but just to get some clarification on what the controller might have expected to hear in response to his calls. Googling around (and searching on here) got me to the Manual of Military Air Traffic Management, but that didn't really go into detail on the RT (indeed it referred me back to the CAP 413 in which none of this is mentioned).
So- does anyone know if there's a civvy's guide to RT phraseology at Military ADs. If you are a military pilot, you're probably used to non-miltary pilots' RT. It would be nice to know what replies were expected; when in Rome etc.
Thanks
Having flown IFR only in the civil environment, I was rather bemused by the volume of RT provided to me as I flew the ILS, much of it duplication of my own cockpit checklist items. Most of the calls seemed to require only acknowledgement or confirmation (eg "check gear", "check DH", "approaching/passing DH", "you're over the threshold"). I particularly liked the phrase "you are expected to land off this approach" which I thought put remarkable faith in my ability not to stuff it up and have to go missed.
I was handled by the approach controller all the way. In fact it took a transmission from me along the lines of "G-XXXX..I've landed..." to get a handover to the Tower.
I post this not to complain, but just to get some clarification on what the controller might have expected to hear in response to his calls. Googling around (and searching on here) got me to the Manual of Military Air Traffic Management, but that didn't really go into detail on the RT (indeed it referred me back to the CAP 413 in which none of this is mentioned).
So- does anyone know if there's a civvy's guide to RT phraseology at Military ADs. If you are a military pilot, you're probably used to non-miltary pilots' RT. It would be nice to know what replies were expected; when in Rome etc.
Thanks
The phraseology should have been exactly in line with CAP413 although bear in mind there is a small military specific bit at the back. I can't access it easily at the moment but you should only receive a 'check gear', approaching and passing Decision Height/Altitude calls. Having said that, if you received the latter you were probably being monitored on the PAR. Don't think that you should get an 'over touchdown' call on an ILS though. The controller was almost certainly waiting for you to report ready to switch to tower so that they didn't interupt/distract you on the landing run. In terms of replies, when you're asked 'check gear acknowledge' a simple 'gear down' with your callsign. You don't need to acknowledge the DH calls, they're just advisory. Once you're on the ground and under control, just advise that you're switching to tower and APP will send you on your way.
Figure,
I think that you think that we have an answer.
We don't.
Frankly the drivel that comes out of military ATC amazes me, especially all the rubbish arse covering regarding reduced radar performance for the zzzz time and that I am responsible for that big hill they are pointing me at.
In my ideal universe we would have the RT brevity and discipline of the average civilian controller matched with the brevity and discipline of the average military aircrew chap. Imagine the extra capacity on any given frequency!
Don't get me started about the radar service I do not want, failure to provide the one I need referenced to an altimeter setting that I do not care for.
I think that you think that we have an answer.
We don't.
Frankly the drivel that comes out of military ATC amazes me, especially all the rubbish arse covering regarding reduced radar performance for the zzzz time and that I am responsible for that big hill they are pointing me at.
In my ideal universe we would have the RT brevity and discipline of the average civilian controller matched with the brevity and discipline of the average military aircrew chap. Imagine the extra capacity on any given frequency!
Don't get me started about the radar service I do not want, failure to provide the one I need referenced to an altimeter setting that I do not care for.
FOM,
Do recall one can teach a Monkey to fly.
Military ATC is just a backup in that system.
Do recall one can teach a Monkey to fly.
Military ATC is just a backup in that system.
Last edited by SASless; 8th Feb 2013 at 19:30.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just This Once, I totally agree with you. Once upon a time I was streamed ATC so spent a bit of time in towers as an asst. Notwithstanding the skills required to do the actual job, I was put off by all the superfluous mouth music that was seemingly part and parcel of it; much of it irrelevant to the crews and said for apparently little more than arse covering reasons. 
Then there were the JSP318A phraseology comedians who kept themselves in a job by changing otherwise perfectly good official phrases once in a while - my favourite was the diktat to use 'cleared to land' vs 'cleared land', which reverted back about a year later.
Then there were the JSP318A phraseology comedians who kept themselves in a job by changing otherwise perfectly good official phrases once in a while - my favourite was the diktat to use 'cleared to land' vs 'cleared land', which reverted back about a year later.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The South
Age: 58
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll give you a little insight into mil ATC. It is manned by very inexperienced ATCOs who are managed by very inexperienced managers/supervisors. Unfortunately, this results in a massive lack of flexibility and ability to be able to apply any common sense to a given situation all because they are adhering to the rules; only black and white. This results in a poor service. On top of this, the geniuses in MOD thought it would be a good idea to apply CAP413 to mil ops. Bad idea. This is in no way a dig at the individuals, just the system. All this is a result of cuts in manning. By the way, I am an ATCO and have my current job has allowed me to experience this 'service' from the other end.
Last edited by Standby!; 8th Feb 2013 at 20:08.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Do not acknowledge further calls unless requested.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: An Ivory Tower
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that brevity is a great thing but the odd 'dirty talkdown' certainly restored the faith
. "You are manoeuvring into my dark area" might not be in the manual but made me smile at the time!
. "You are manoeuvring into my dark area" might not be in the manual but made me smile at the time!
Figure Of Merit
CAP413 Chapter 10 (with a quick reference to areas of difference at Appendix 2). What you describe sounds pretty standard.
As to all the other chat associated with mil radar services, mil ATC still labours under the weight of the Ben Macdui tragedy, even though it was largely attributable to the pilots' misunderstanding of the extant rules.
CAP413 Chapter 10 (with a quick reference to areas of difference at Appendix 2). What you describe sounds pretty standard.
As to all the other chat associated with mil radar services, mil ATC still labours under the weight of the Ben Macdui tragedy, even though it was largely attributable to the pilots' misunderstanding of the extant rules.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
My favourite bit was back in 2004 when I flew a civil 737 into Akrotiri. Now, back in the dark ages I had flown on the RAF C130 fleet. The nice WRAF controller asked me if I was familiar with Akrotiri. My reply of "not since 1975" must have thrown her a bit, since the next control voice was male. Chances are my last visit to Akrotiri was before she was born! 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Age: 33
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Do not acknowledge further instructions unless requested"
Therefore, "check gear, acknowledge" is the only one they want a reply for.
Once safely on the deck "G-XXXX to tower."
Therefore, "check gear, acknowledge" is the only one they want a reply for.
Once safely on the deck "G-XXXX to tower."
Last edited by TurningFinals; 8th Feb 2013 at 21:58.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 68
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fly from a mil airfield (civvy, civvy a/c) and the ILS approaches tend to be fairly verbal free at my place. Ask for vectors to ILS, get them, then a call for cockpit checks complete, established on localiser. That's about it really. PAR of course is what it is, talkdown, so one would expect some verbiage to be going on.
Edit: I haven't done an instrument approach at another mil airfield apart from an NDB/DME approach into Cranwell once but TBH I haven't noticed any difference between an approach into my airfield or say Donny or Humberside other than it seems to be less of a drama at a civ airfield. You ought to try talking to Lakenheath/Mildenhall for rapid fire delivery....
I've taken some of our ATC guys and gals up on PAR/ILS's to show them what it's like from the other end, hand flying a Warrior while getting bounced around like a ball in a spin drier. They seem to appreciate the problems a little more when they ask for 'correct two degrees left'. Oh yeah?
Edit: I haven't done an instrument approach at another mil airfield apart from an NDB/DME approach into Cranwell once but TBH I haven't noticed any difference between an approach into my airfield or say Donny or Humberside other than it seems to be less of a drama at a civ airfield. You ought to try talking to Lakenheath/Mildenhall for rapid fire delivery....
I've taken some of our ATC guys and gals up on PAR/ILS's to show them what it's like from the other end, hand flying a Warrior while getting bounced around like a ball in a spin drier. They seem to appreciate the problems a little more when they ask for 'correct two degrees left'. Oh yeah?
Last edited by thing; 8th Feb 2013 at 22:28.
A lot of it is developed for the single seater fighter and "check gear" is a required procedure which repaced a second crew member. Now, I fly airliners around Asia and operate into several combined military/civil airfields in Taiwan, Korea and Japan. They all ask for a gear check, regardless of type. It's common.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
A fairly recent jaunt into the secret Somersetshire base in my pal's EC120 involved four, yes four ATC frequencies. There was one other aircraft (also RW) in the circuit.
One guy with a handheld in a L@ndRover would have been under-worked.
One guy with a handheld in a L@ndRover would have been under-worked.
Last edited by airborne_artist; 9th Feb 2013 at 05:27.