Why do weekend Pilots persist in making a million radio calls
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R/T training is a shocker IMO. I remember being out on a cross country with a good mate of mine and we did a touch and go at some farm strip. He made no calls and said to me that he did not as sometimes the farmers monitor the 'appropriate' frequency when they see/hear an aircraft in the area so that they can send the owner a bill. This was a technique shown to him by his instructors to keep the costs for the flying school down. Disgraceful. Oh and we nearly got cleaned up by a Westwind an hour or so later that was cruising at a non standard VFR level and broadcast at the last moment upon reaching. Last time I got into one of those little death machines.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Had to listen to a bloke at Birdsville a few months ago make 14 seperate calls on the CTAF, after his initial 10 mile call, before he landed.
Only one other aircraft well behind him inbound.
A little too many
Only one other aircraft well behind him inbound.
A little too many
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry,
I should have said why do some PILOTS (i was stereotyping with the term weekend)
It really annoy's me that some people on this website get of on reminding people of there spelling and grammer mistakes or choice of wording.
Get out more!
This aint no F&@kin english lesson
I should have said why do some PILOTS (i was stereotyping with the term weekend)
It really annoy's me that some people on this website get of on reminding people of there spelling and grammer mistakes or choice of wording.
Get out more!
This aint no F&@kin english lesson
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is like saying the reason YOU are dumb is because YOU had bad teachers when you were at school...give us a break...
My quote does not infer that YOU are dumb because of bad teachers, it infers that there maybe a deficiency in the training process, or that the experience of the pilots does not lend itself to good airmanship.
From the Macquarie Dictionary - Dumb: stupid; dull witted.
It appears you might be the dumb one.
DP
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DP, pot calling the kettle? Your post cannot infer. It may imply... quite different. Look it up.
JSM - I recall flying some early morning solo practice bumps and circuits in an outer suburban MBZ airfield when another pilot announced he was taxiing for the upwind end of the only available runway in order to takeoff downwind and in a direction contrary to the existing pattern being flown by the only other aircraft in circuit.
How many short, precise, clear calls do you reckon I made announcing my intentions downwind, base, turning final, and short final to land before Captain Cloth-Ears got the message, looked at the windsock and in the sky to see what might be going on and decided a takeoff into the wind might be in order?
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate.
In that order will do nicely. Thanks.
VH-CHUP
JSM - I recall flying some early morning solo practice bumps and circuits in an outer suburban MBZ airfield when another pilot announced he was taxiing for the upwind end of the only available runway in order to takeoff downwind and in a direction contrary to the existing pattern being flown by the only other aircraft in circuit.
How many short, precise, clear calls do you reckon I made announcing my intentions downwind, base, turning final, and short final to land before Captain Cloth-Ears got the message, looked at the windsock and in the sky to see what might be going on and decided a takeoff into the wind might be in order?
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate.
In that order will do nicely. Thanks.
VH-CHUP
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VH-CHUP,
Maaate! Just looked it up.
From the Macquarie Dictionary -
Infer: 2) Colloquial to indicate or involve as a conclusion; imply
3) Colloquial to imply or hint
Imply: 3) to indicate or suggest, as something naturally to be inferred, without express statement.
I try to use the correct words with the correct meanings. Thats why I've got the dictionary. Sometimes I might be speaking (posting) colloquially.
And VH-CHUP, heres another colloquialism for you -
Get a big black dog up ya!
DP
Maaate! Just looked it up.
From the Macquarie Dictionary -
Infer: 2) Colloquial to indicate or involve as a conclusion; imply
3) Colloquial to imply or hint
Imply: 3) to indicate or suggest, as something naturally to be inferred, without express statement.
I try to use the correct words with the correct meanings. Thats why I've got the dictionary. Sometimes I might be speaking (posting) colloquially.
And VH-CHUP, heres another colloquialism for you -
Get a big black dog up ya!
DP
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DirtyPierre,
You seemed to have missed my point altogether- I wasn't calling anyone dumb... I was showing a parallel - let me spell it out...
Blaming training (and instructors) as the main problem for idiots who make too many (bad, stupid) radio calls, is like blaming a persons lack of ability to think on bad teaching...
Regardless of how bad somebody has been instructed, a person who gets into an aeroplane with a private or commercial licence to fly him/her self around still has the opportunity to actually THINK for themselves about their radio calls.
...And I was trying to say that instructors seem to often get the blame for some dumbwit who makes 14 calls from 10 miles...like Desert Duck has explained...
...and the point that the majority of instructors teach their students well ...
You seemed to have missed my point altogether- I wasn't calling anyone dumb... I was showing a parallel - let me spell it out...
Blaming training (and instructors) as the main problem for idiots who make too many (bad, stupid) radio calls, is like blaming a persons lack of ability to think on bad teaching...
Regardless of how bad somebody has been instructed, a person who gets into an aeroplane with a private or commercial licence to fly him/her self around still has the opportunity to actually THINK for themselves about their radio calls.
...And I was trying to say that instructors seem to often get the blame for some dumbwit who makes 14 calls from 10 miles...like Desert Duck has explained...
...and the point that the majority of instructors teach their students well ...
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Locust Hunter,
Reread my original post on this thread. I implied that the training may be at fault, not the instructors.
The instructors may be well skilled, but if the training course is inadequate, then it doesn't matter how good your instructors are, the training received is still inadequate.
Nes't ces pas?
If the pilots are not doing the right thing with R/T, then how were they taught to do the R/T? Are they doing what they were taught, or is their R/T training deficient is some way?
Tell me, if the training was adequate, then how come JSM has a significant complaint?
DP
Reread my original post on this thread. I implied that the training may be at fault, not the instructors.
The instructors may be well skilled, but if the training course is inadequate, then it doesn't matter how good your instructors are, the training received is still inadequate.
Nes't ces pas?
If the pilots are not doing the right thing with R/T, then how were they taught to do the R/T? Are they doing what they were taught, or is their R/T training deficient is some way?
Tell me, if the training was adequate, then how come JSM has a significant complaint?
DP
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: A one horse town...
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is it that when a group of private aircraft fly around, they generally fly within a mile or so of each other? Just this week we had a group of 6 or 8 private aeroplanes all heading down to the bungles from Kununurra. After deciding to depart at 9am (along with 12+ local aeroplanes departing on their scheduled 9am flights 
), they all take off one after the other in quick succession. Sure enough with a mix of around 20 (I stopped counting at 15) local/visiting planes in the MBZ all heading in the same direction at different speeds, it all turns messy.
This group then spends a huge portion of their time talking to each other over the radio and looking out for each other while all the amazing scenery is passing away underneath them. Why not just space everyone out by 5 or 10 minutes so you can relax a bit more, take in all the landscape around you and give your PTT a holiday?
This happens every time a group passes through here. They all take off together and then clog the radio frequency because they are worried about being so close to each other. I just don’t understand the rational behind it. Maybe someone that participates in these group fly away activities can explain?
victor two,
Yes some of the locals can spew out a lot of dribble on the radio around the bungles such as pointless passing calls etc etc. I’m not condoning that at all. However, if you don’t want to listen to chatter on other people’s company frequencies then don’t tune into them…..
), they all take off one after the other in quick succession. Sure enough with a mix of around 20 (I stopped counting at 15) local/visiting planes in the MBZ all heading in the same direction at different speeds, it all turns messy. This group then spends a huge portion of their time talking to each other over the radio and looking out for each other while all the amazing scenery is passing away underneath them. Why not just space everyone out by 5 or 10 minutes so you can relax a bit more, take in all the landscape around you and give your PTT a holiday?
This happens every time a group passes through here. They all take off together and then clog the radio frequency because they are worried about being so close to each other. I just don’t understand the rational behind it. Maybe someone that participates in these group fly away activities can explain?
victor two,
Yes some of the locals can spew out a lot of dribble on the radio around the bungles such as pointless passing calls etc etc. I’m not condoning that at all. However, if you don’t want to listen to chatter on other people’s company frequencies then don’t tune into them…..
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bush
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well get ready Dave, those nuisance yanks are on their way up to "Kannanarra" again! Saw the cowboys at Tindal today. Are they still performing the formation take offs at KU and getting caught in each others wake?? 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Oz
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dave, how dare anybody else go flying when the KU locals want to. How impertinent of the visitors. What poor scheduling by the locals, all going at 0900, who do they think they are, an airline?
ding
ding
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DirtyPierre,
Understood- re: the training & instructors.
The implication seemed to be that instructors or pilots' initial training was the problem - I am not so sure.
It is just easy to blame training or instructors...or lack of CASA literature on radio calls...or whatever...
At the end of the day, it is a few individuals who don't think about the fact that others may be trying to use the 'radio space' and that they are cluttering up the airways.
But anyway, I am starting to agree with currawong...
"Thread had potential, turning into a winstun."
Understood- re: the training & instructors.
The implication seemed to be that instructors or pilots' initial training was the problem - I am not so sure.
It is just easy to blame training or instructors...or lack of CASA literature on radio calls...or whatever...
At the end of the day, it is a few individuals who don't think about the fact that others may be trying to use the 'radio space' and that they are cluttering up the airways.
But anyway, I am starting to agree with currawong...
"Thread had potential, turning into a winstun."
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: A one horse town...
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAPTAINOZ,
Yeah, the formation takeoffs are still the flavor of the month. They did the bungles in form not that long ago. I’m sure they got a great view of the bloke flying lead while the bungles were passing by underneath them. Whatever tickles your fancy I guess…
Dingo,
I didn’t suggest that nobody else could go flying when the locals do. I did however suggest that it is not the most intelligent thing to do. The ERSA even states that visiting pilots are welcome to contact the local operators for a briefing. Why? So we can show people the route, the MBZ/CTAF/radio procedures and the most appropriate times to go. Many people take us up on this and are very appreciative. Almost all of these people then elect to depart at a time that does not coincide with the local departure times. Why? So they can minimise their workload during the flight (not having to worry about 15 other aeroplanes around them) thereby allowing them to enjoy their flight more than they might have otherwise. It’s simply common sense.
The particular group I was referring to in my previous post hadn’t even taken the time to thoroughly brief the required procedures at Kununurra before the flight. I know this because the first bloke to taxi briefed those in his group behind him by reading out the ERSA procedures over the MBZ frequency not once, but twice. Meanwhile in the small gaps between the on-air briefing, people are struggling to get in the mandatory circuit joining and taxi calls. As I mentioned, this is all happening while there are around 20 aircraft in the MBZ.
As for operating on a schedule, it is a very common practice for large tour operators, both flying and non-flying. Believe it or not, coordinating 4WD/heli/lunch transfers, first/last light constraints, aircraft/pilot utilisation etc. etc. is best done with a schedule. Just ask any geriatric that has been on an AAT Kings bus.
Having the local aircraft all depart at the same time isn’t generally a problem. The pilots have all been trained on the route and generally fly it on a regular basis. As a result, the tracking and radio calls are very standardised, making it easy to visually spot aircraft as you know precisely where to look for them. This means you can easily get by with just the minimum required MBZ/CTAF/bungles calls. Which brings us back to the topic of this thread….
Yeah, the formation takeoffs are still the flavor of the month. They did the bungles in form not that long ago. I’m sure they got a great view of the bloke flying lead while the bungles were passing by underneath them. Whatever tickles your fancy I guess…
Dingo,
...how dare anybody else go flying when the KU locals want to.
The particular group I was referring to in my previous post hadn’t even taken the time to thoroughly brief the required procedures at Kununurra before the flight. I know this because the first bloke to taxi briefed those in his group behind him by reading out the ERSA procedures over the MBZ frequency not once, but twice. Meanwhile in the small gaps between the on-air briefing, people are struggling to get in the mandatory circuit joining and taxi calls. As I mentioned, this is all happening while there are around 20 aircraft in the MBZ.
What poor scheduling by the locals, all going at 0900, who do they think they are, an airline?
Having the local aircraft all depart at the same time isn’t generally a problem. The pilots have all been trained on the route and generally fly it on a regular basis. As a result, the tracking and radio calls are very standardised, making it easy to visually spot aircraft as you know precisely where to look for them. This means you can easily get by with just the minimum required MBZ/CTAF/bungles calls. Which brings us back to the topic of this thread….
Now back on to the topic!
It is not only "weekend pilots" that make too many calls, but charter and regional airline pilots are "offenders" but perhaps for different reasons.
Certainly the lack of any STANDARDISED training in R/T is a very significant reason for so much verbal garbage these days. Many instructors and training pilots teach what they have been taught themselves and without a specific course that is examined there is very little if any standardisation from the flying school to the airlines. Even many airline pilots talk too much. Just listen to the excessive readbacks you hear these days! (you could have a thread on that alone!)
As for operations in a CTAF (or MBZ) the very basic philosophy should be that you only conduct direct exchanges with traffic that is in (potential) conflict with you (in order to avoid that conflict). There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to talk to everyone that you hear in the CTAF/MBZ just because they are there. If they have made a broadcast in response to your initial call and they are not in conflict then that should be it.
Of course the problem mentioned above in regard to training might prompt an unnecessary exchange if the required information is not provided in the broadcast. (ie: position/altitude/intentions etc)
In an ideal world an initial call (inbound or taxi) should prompt a broadcast from anyone else in potential conflict. If there is no conflict expected as a result then that should be it - period. Any subsequent broadcast should be recorded and assessed for conflict in a similar manner. Only if a conflict is apparent should direct communications take place.
Some of the worst offenders are some regional airlines who seem to teach their folk to talk to everyone they hear even if there is no possible conflict whatsoever. A certain Saab operator is a big offender in this regard. Of course what happens next is that Joe Private Pilot hears all this carry on and thinks that it must the right (??) or done thing and tries to copy it without the background knowledge of what he is trying to achieve as a result. All this only adds to the garbage and makes the problem even worse. #$%^&* !!
As was said in an article some time back, one should consider what "value" is obtained from any radio call. If there is no value, then why make the call?? Of course the exercising of some common sense and good airmanship to all this would also help. Trouble of course is that neither of these items is found in the training world these days. CASA and ASA don't seem to understand the issues either, otherwise they would be addressed - no?
It is not only "weekend pilots" that make too many calls, but charter and regional airline pilots are "offenders" but perhaps for different reasons.
Certainly the lack of any STANDARDISED training in R/T is a very significant reason for so much verbal garbage these days. Many instructors and training pilots teach what they have been taught themselves and without a specific course that is examined there is very little if any standardisation from the flying school to the airlines. Even many airline pilots talk too much. Just listen to the excessive readbacks you hear these days! (you could have a thread on that alone!)
As for operations in a CTAF (or MBZ) the very basic philosophy should be that you only conduct direct exchanges with traffic that is in (potential) conflict with you (in order to avoid that conflict). There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to talk to everyone that you hear in the CTAF/MBZ just because they are there. If they have made a broadcast in response to your initial call and they are not in conflict then that should be it.
Of course the problem mentioned above in regard to training might prompt an unnecessary exchange if the required information is not provided in the broadcast. (ie: position/altitude/intentions etc)
In an ideal world an initial call (inbound or taxi) should prompt a broadcast from anyone else in potential conflict. If there is no conflict expected as a result then that should be it - period. Any subsequent broadcast should be recorded and assessed for conflict in a similar manner. Only if a conflict is apparent should direct communications take place.
Some of the worst offenders are some regional airlines who seem to teach their folk to talk to everyone they hear even if there is no possible conflict whatsoever. A certain Saab operator is a big offender in this regard. Of course what happens next is that Joe Private Pilot hears all this carry on and thinks that it must the right (??) or done thing and tries to copy it without the background knowledge of what he is trying to achieve as a result. All this only adds to the garbage and makes the problem even worse. #$%^&* !!
As was said in an article some time back, one should consider what "value" is obtained from any radio call. If there is no value, then why make the call?? Of course the exercising of some common sense and good airmanship to all this would also help. Trouble of course is that neither of these items is found in the training world these days. CASA and ASA don't seem to understand the issues either, otherwise they would be addressed - no?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe it was that champion of GA Dick Smith who wanted ti stop all the radio calls to save money.
The saving money part included grouping area frequencies with control frequencies which we have today.
But the chatter didn't stop - it just meant that all the crap RT now jams up the centre / approach frequency when so ATC instructions can not be issued / heard.
Great progress.
While we are on it how about some of you who are the culprits read the AIP on exactly what has to be read back (too much in the AIP to start with) or at least ask an (experienced) instructor.
Include in that what is required when under radar control - it differs. Example: ATC are supposed to give a reason for radar vectors - you don't read back the reason!
Some of the RT I hear for a simple circuit entry you would think the Space Shuttle was returning to Edwards AFB with an emergency!
The saving money part included grouping area frequencies with control frequencies which we have today.
But the chatter didn't stop - it just meant that all the crap RT now jams up the centre / approach frequency when so ATC instructions can not be issued / heard.
Great progress.
While we are on it how about some of you who are the culprits read the AIP on exactly what has to be read back (too much in the AIP to start with) or at least ask an (experienced) instructor.
Include in that what is required when under radar control - it differs. Example: ATC are supposed to give a reason for radar vectors - you don't read back the reason!
Some of the RT I hear for a simple circuit entry you would think the Space Shuttle was returning to Edwards AFB with an emergency!
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
read-backs!
Don't get me started on read-backs!
As one involved in the 1997 review of radio procedures including read-backs to more align the Australian procedures with ICAO one of the concerns was that unless the AIP was written to reflect the deliberations of the working group and appropriate training was put in place the default position of many pilots that either did not understand the requirements or did not care, was to read everything back. Seems that is the case now as even the trainers have very different views on what should and should not.
Unfortunately CASA failed in writing the AIP amendment to reflect the working groups detailed recommendations and then failed to place any significant training in place.
Why is it that some pilots read back weather and traffic info?? Der! Not to mention all the other things they think should be read back but in Australia do not. Eg: cancellation of a restriction, or information that is in no way an "instruction".
This failure of the training in radio procedures etc has carried thru to most aspects of our operations (including ATS and the airlines) in Australia and the result is what we have - far too much talk and the topic of this thread is just the tip of the iceberg. Just as well we don't have much traffic otherwise it would be much worse.
As one involved in the 1997 review of radio procedures including read-backs to more align the Australian procedures with ICAO one of the concerns was that unless the AIP was written to reflect the deliberations of the working group and appropriate training was put in place the default position of many pilots that either did not understand the requirements or did not care, was to read everything back. Seems that is the case now as even the trainers have very different views on what should and should not.
Unfortunately CASA failed in writing the AIP amendment to reflect the working groups detailed recommendations and then failed to place any significant training in place.
Why is it that some pilots read back weather and traffic info?? Der! Not to mention all the other things they think should be read back but in Australia do not. Eg: cancellation of a restriction, or information that is in no way an "instruction".
This failure of the training in radio procedures etc has carried thru to most aspects of our operations (including ATS and the airlines) in Australia and the result is what we have - far too much talk and the topic of this thread is just the tip of the iceberg. Just as well we don't have much traffic otherwise it would be much worse.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Antics in the bungles
I don't entirely agree that the GA guys who hack about the bungles are entirely clear with their position reports and the level of chat of the area freq is not something to be proud of either. Due to their familiarity (and boredom) with flying the same route so often, I found that there is a fair bit of non standard slang type-position reporting. That may be fine for each other but you guys should remember that you don't own that airspace and others fly through it also. The other business that I thought was a bit dodgy is all the "formation" flying and closer than required overtaking that goes on in there.
Either your chief pilot doesn't know you guys do it or he condones it but it'll catch up with a couple of you formation flyers one day. If you want to be fighter pilots, join the airforce. If you think the passengers enjoy it then you are wrong. it just makes them nervous and distracts from the scenic that they paid top dollar to enjoy.
Either your chief pilot doesn't know you guys do it or he condones it but it'll catch up with a couple of you formation flyers one day. If you want to be fighter pilots, join the airforce. If you think the passengers enjoy it then you are wrong. it just makes them nervous and distracts from the scenic that they paid top dollar to enjoy.