R/T phraseology .... AGAIN!
Folks,
One of my all time favorites, no urban myth, I was No.2 to the "offender";
Place YSSY 16R, early morning rush hour, and the tower doing their best, but "the usual suspects" a bit slow clearing the runway, so anticipate late landing clearances.
TWR: QF 1234, clear to land, no readack required (QF being at about 100-200ft)
QF: QF1234 Cleared to land 16R, no readback required, QF1234.
Wunnerful, Wunnerful, given the time and type, the voice activated speech generator had to have been with QF for at least 10 years.
Tootle pip!!
One of my all time favorites, no urban myth, I was No.2 to the "offender";
Place YSSY 16R, early morning rush hour, and the tower doing their best, but "the usual suspects" a bit slow clearing the runway, so anticipate late landing clearances.
TWR: QF 1234, clear to land, no readack required (QF being at about 100-200ft)
QF: QF1234 Cleared to land 16R, no readback required, QF1234.
Wunnerful, Wunnerful, given the time and type, the voice activated speech generator had to have been with QF for at least 10 years.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: BackofBourke
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My all time favourite is inbound to non-controlled aerodrome,
"ABC bla bla ESTIMATED TIME 25"
There is NO - ESTIMATED or TIME.
Hell, why don't they say "ESTIMATED TIME 25 UTC"
This seems to apply to heavies and lighties. Where are the chief pilots and checkies?
"ABC bla bla ESTIMATED TIME 25"
There is NO - ESTIMATED or TIME.
Hell, why don't they say "ESTIMATED TIME 25 UTC"
This seems to apply to heavies and lighties. Where are the chief pilots and checkies?
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: brisbane australia
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SYDNEY female ATC years ago
ATC..Speed bird 15 sorry due traffic I will have to hold you in the MANLY area for a few minutes, will advise you setcourse time.
BAW15....SPEED BIRD 15 roger, I love it when you talk to me dirty
BAW15....SPEED BIRD 15 roger, I love it when you talk to me dirty
Quote:
e.g. "Alpha Bravo Charle, report established with DME and altitude passing", only requires a response of "Alpha Bravo Charle"
This callsign only approach does not allow anybody to know that the student pilot has actually understood the request. Now, there is the argument that if they do not understand then they have no right to be there, (and before you all start throwing stones at me) I fully agree.
The fact is though, they are there, they dont always understand, and they will take up more airways time.
As frustrating as I find it, I personaly would prefer to know that they understood the call now, as oppose to latter, when it could be more critical (separation requirement). And lets face it, there would not be one single person here who as never spent longer on a call then required at some point.
e.g. "Alpha Bravo Charle, report established with DME and altitude passing", only requires a response of "Alpha Bravo Charle"
This callsign only approach does not allow anybody to know that the student pilot has actually understood the request. Now, there is the argument that if they do not understand then they have no right to be there, (and before you all start throwing stones at me) I fully agree.
The fact is though, they are there, they dont always understand, and they will take up more airways time.
As frustrating as I find it, I personaly would prefer to know that they understood the call now, as oppose to latter, when it could be more critical (separation requirement). And lets face it, there would not be one single person here who as never spent longer on a call then required at some point.
If Pilots simply read back what was required and it proved to be a problem for ATC then there would be changes to the read back requirement.
If the situation is "tight" and there has been no advice, then ATC can ask the question again when they expect he/she should be established, normally within 5nm of course.
When Pilots and their Instructors start making their own requirements because "they prefer this or that" then the system of change will not work.
An instructors job is to teach his trainee the rules, airmanship and how to fly an aircraft. Don't change the rules because you tink its a good idea.
As for check and training Captains, some of them couldn't spit out a position report correctly.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Mydadsbag
Posts: 1,113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yarp yarp yarp!
Bad day girls?
Get the message out, get the message back. Fly the plane and piss off home! How hard is it?
Everything will upset you if you let it!
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzz
Bad day girls?
Get the message out, get the message back. Fly the plane and piss off home! How hard is it?
Everything will upset you if you let it!
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzz
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: AUST
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When centre passes you traffic information you don't have to read back the aircraft callsigns!
Seems a big issue at horn island... Whiskeeeeeey.........ZuluYankee copy ABC, DEF, GHI, and JKL..... just 'copy traffic' will do. And please make sure you know your friggin callsign before pressing that PTT.
And it's departure, not IFR departure.
Seems a big issue at horn island... Whiskeeeeeey.........ZuluYankee copy ABC, DEF, GHI, and JKL..... just 'copy traffic' will do. And please make sure you know your friggin callsign before pressing that PTT.
And it's departure, not IFR departure.
Hear hear, Mr Buzzy.
This thread is really just an opportunity for the usual suspects to amaze us all with their knowledge.
Re the "pending clearance" whinge, I can see why a pilot would use this phrase.
When departing from an uncontrolled airport and climbing to, say FL220, use of this phrase stops ATC from replying with "remain outside controlled airspace etc." or similar, meaning don't climb above FL180 until you've got your clearance, which actually clutters up the radio more than simply saying "I'm climbing to FL220 pending clearance" does.
Not that that will satisfy those who sleep with their JEPP's...
Read back what you're supposed to read back, get the message out, land the plane, go home and think about something else.
This thread is really just an opportunity for the usual suspects to amaze us all with their knowledge.
Re the "pending clearance" whinge, I can see why a pilot would use this phrase.
When departing from an uncontrolled airport and climbing to, say FL220, use of this phrase stops ATC from replying with "remain outside controlled airspace etc." or similar, meaning don't climb above FL180 until you've got your clearance, which actually clutters up the radio more than simply saying "I'm climbing to FL220 pending clearance" does.
Not that that will satisfy those who sleep with their JEPP's...
Read back what you're supposed to read back, get the message out, land the plane, go home and think about something else.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Keeping The Enema Bandit in line
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about when the word "continue" is read back by the pilot after initial contact with the tower. What are you going to do, hover, chuck a U turn?? Morons.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for clearing that up for me - amazing how many people still acknowledge the cancellation of Sarwatch. I'll admit I'm guilty as charged.
I wasn't sure on the "resume own navigation" - I guess the idea that the controller has relinquished navigational control back to the pilot got me thinking.
Re the "climbing FLXXX pending clearance" - what is the correct phraseology Krusty?
How about people putting their callsign at the beginning and end of their leaving F180 call to centre and all stations? Starting to hear that more and more.
I wasn't sure on the "resume own navigation" - I guess the idea that the controller has relinquished navigational control back to the pilot got me thinking.
Re the "climbing FLXXX pending clearance" - what is the correct phraseology Krusty?
How about people putting their callsign at the beginning and end of their leaving F180 call to centre and all stations? Starting to hear that more and more.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont believe the callsign only response is sufficient. It does happen that pilots acknowledge an instruction/clearance when they don`t really understand it. Shouldnt happen but it does. Wastes more air time later when the controller asks the pilot, "What are you doing?" when an instruction has not been complied with. Then we listen to the pilot babble on with bull!"#$ , "oh I thought you meant...blah blah blah".
Bottums Up
Thread Starter
Syd Sider,
Speaking from my experience, I've had more delays in getting a clearance to descend, an airways clearance, or otherwise conducting verbal intercourse with ATC/ATS because of too much unnecessary verbiage, than I have because some one misheard and did the wrong thing.
IMHO, we're cluttering the airwaves to try and stop some one from making a mistake, that they're probably going to make whether they read it back or not.
Listened to another Bloggs at ASP today read back a plethora of useless stuff and missed one of only two things he was required to read back, that was the cleared level, so, Mr ATCO had to ask him again.
Speaking from my experience, I've had more delays in getting a clearance to descend, an airways clearance, or otherwise conducting verbal intercourse with ATC/ATS because of too much unnecessary verbiage, than I have because some one misheard and did the wrong thing.
IMHO, we're cluttering the airwaves to try and stop some one from making a mistake, that they're probably going to make whether they read it back or not.
Listened to another Bloggs at ASP today read back a plethora of useless stuff and missed one of only two things he was required to read back, that was the cleared level, so, Mr ATCO had to ask him again.
This thread is really just an opportunity for the usual suspects to amaze us all with their knowledge.
Re the "pending clearance" whinge, I can see why a pilot would use this phrase.
When departing from an uncontrolled airport and climbing to, say FL220, use of this phrase stops ATC from replying with "remain outside controlled airspace etc." or similar, meaning don't climb above FL180 until you've got your clearance, which actually clutters up the radio more than simply saying "I'm climbing to FL220 pending clearance" does.
Re the "pending clearance" whinge, I can see why a pilot would use this phrase.
When departing from an uncontrolled airport and climbing to, say FL220, use of this phrase stops ATC from replying with "remain outside controlled airspace etc." or similar, meaning don't climb above FL180 until you've got your clearance, which actually clutters up the radio more than simply saying "I'm climbing to FL220 pending clearance" does.
Can't remember the last time I heard ATC say remain outside controlled airpsace after my departure.
SYD Sider,
which part of a clearance would they give you that is not REQUIRED to be read back that could create a problem??
Clarrett,
IMHO, we're cluttering the airwaves to try and stop some one from making a mistake, that they're probably going to make whether they read it back or not.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about people putting their callsign at the beginning and end of their leaving F180 call to centre and all stations? Starting to hear that more and more.
What about: "ABC MAINTAINS 3000"
Either way is it better than the too-cool-for-school "BBN CTR, ABC with you".
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A bad one is
"ABC report leaving 2000"
"ABC leaving 2000"
but they've only left 1000!!!
DO NOT READ BACK REQUESTS TO REPORT.
From the old days
"Alitalia XXX report heading"
"Alitalia XXX we are headinga fora Eildon Weira?|"
"Alitalia XXX, thank you, report DME distance"
"Alitalia XXX, headinga 225"
"Alitalia XXX, thank you, report DME distance"
Alitalia XXX, 86 DME, and youa cana aska fora two thingsa ina the onea transmissiona!!!"
"ABC report leaving 2000"
"ABC leaving 2000"
but they've only left 1000!!!
DO NOT READ BACK REQUESTS TO REPORT.
From the old days
"Alitalia XXX report heading"
"Alitalia XXX we are headinga fora Eildon Weira?|"
"Alitalia XXX, thank you, report DME distance"
"Alitalia XXX, headinga 225"
"Alitalia XXX, thank you, report DME distance"
Alitalia XXX, 86 DME, and youa cana aska fora two thingsa ina the onea transmissiona!!!"
Alien Role,
Maybe--- You never know ---- I have actually seen it happen.
Paris/Orly, one summer afternoon of the usual delays, we were about No. 3.
An Air France Caravelle, somewhere behind us in the que must have decided ( what is French for?) sod it, taxied across the the grass in front of us, turned on the runway and departed.
One didn't need to be fluent in French to understand that the controller was somewhat less than understanding.
Just as well it hadn't rained for months.
Tootle pip!!
PS:
Re. efficient communication, a brief study of the relevant bits of ICAO Annex X, Vol.II and/or the relevant bit of PANS/RAC Doc.4444 (or the UK Radio Telephony Handbook, a very helpful little book) would help.
The all those 'orrible Oz. long winded position reports and other verbal atrocities might go away, with time. Have a look at how few (but quite adequate) are the ICAO recommended phrases, beyond that, say what you have to in conversational succinct language, as brief as possible.
The ICAO recommended phrases are also in the Jepp. WW text.
Tootle pip
Maybe--- You never know ---- I have actually seen it happen.
Paris/Orly, one summer afternoon of the usual delays, we were about No. 3.
An Air France Caravelle, somewhere behind us in the que must have decided ( what is French for?) sod it, taxied across the the grass in front of us, turned on the runway and departed.
One didn't need to be fluent in French to understand that the controller was somewhat less than understanding.
Just as well it hadn't rained for months.
Tootle pip!!
PS:
Re. efficient communication, a brief study of the relevant bits of ICAO Annex X, Vol.II and/or the relevant bit of PANS/RAC Doc.4444 (or the UK Radio Telephony Handbook, a very helpful little book) would help.
The all those 'orrible Oz. long winded position reports and other verbal atrocities might go away, with time. Have a look at how few (but quite adequate) are the ICAO recommended phrases, beyond that, say what you have to in conversational succinct language, as brief as possible.
The ICAO recommended phrases are also in the Jepp. WW text.
Tootle pip
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Atlas Shrugged
There's only one FINAL APPROACH, not two or three, just one.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: West Coast
Age: 58
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Echo, Echo ........
Ahhh this post about radio standards could go on and on, just like the similar thread before it and the one before that, and .....
As someone said last year, the majority of the reason for the problem is
A PISS poor set of instructions in the AIP.
If we are going to whinge about something then lets do it about the place where this all starts.
MAKE THE AIP SECTION, READABLE AND UNDERSTANDABLE FOR THE PILOTS THAT HAVE TO USE IT.
As someone said last year, the majority of the reason for the problem is
A PISS poor set of instructions in the AIP.
If we are going to whinge about something then lets do it about the place where this all starts.
MAKE THE AIP SECTION, READABLE AND UNDERSTANDABLE FOR THE PILOTS THAT HAVE TO USE IT.