Merged: Pending clearance??
Bottums Up
It's cool speak, so the talker thinks they sound cool.
And like, "copied no IFR traffic", and a plethora of others, it makes the speaker think that they have complied with read back requirements that they find too difficult to learn.
And like, "copied no IFR traffic", and a plethora of others, it makes the speaker think that they have complied with read back requirements that they find too difficult to learn.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, the sheer number of ridiculous things that my fellow pilots insist on saying on the radio.
Here's another variation:
What's with the "reference XX VOR"? Completely unnecessary. My fellow pilots just love saying unnecessary things.
And, more and more these days, I am noticing the departure call preceeded by:
What's with the "IFR" bit? Completely and totally unnecessary - but I guess it sounds cool. Poor airmanship and an indicator of a lack of professional discipline on the part of the pilot.
What about "request traffic". This phrase is in widespread use by IFR pilots across Australia. IT IS COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY to "request traffic". Centre will always give it to you at the appropriate times. ALWAYS.
I have been flying IFR in Australia for over 10 years now and have never used this phrase - but Centre has always given me traffic when necessary.
Why on earth do pilots think they have to request traffic? Maybe because they hear so many others doing it. What next? Requesting takeoff clearance after the tower clears you to line up?
I know there is a phrase in the AIP for requesting traffic BUT THAT IS FOR TIMES WHEN CENTRE WON'T GIVE IT TO YOU AUTOMATICALLY (e.g. when VFR).
Hey you clowns that insist on "requesting traffic": If you're going to be consistent, how about you use it not only when changing level but start appending that phrase to your taxi report. E.g:
Here's another variation:
XXX Centre VH-ABC, Departed YXXX XX, tracking XXX reference XX VOR, on climb FL XXX
And, more and more these days, I am noticing the departure call preceeded by:
Centre, VH-ABC, IFR departure
What about "request traffic". This phrase is in widespread use by IFR pilots across Australia. IT IS COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY to "request traffic". Centre will always give it to you at the appropriate times. ALWAYS.
I have been flying IFR in Australia for over 10 years now and have never used this phrase - but Centre has always given me traffic when necessary.
Why on earth do pilots think they have to request traffic? Maybe because they hear so many others doing it. What next? Requesting takeoff clearance after the tower clears you to line up?
I know there is a phrase in the AIP for requesting traffic BUT THAT IS FOR TIMES WHEN CENTRE WON'T GIVE IT TO YOU AUTOMATICALLY (e.g. when VFR).
Hey you clowns that insist on "requesting traffic": If you're going to be consistent, how about you use it not only when changing level but start appending that phrase to your taxi report. E.g:
Centre, VH-ABC, C310, IFR, 3POB, taxying XXX for XXX, request traffic
Last edited by FGD135; 17th Nov 2009 at 22:45.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about "request traffic". This phrase is in widespread use by IFR pilots across Australia. IT IS COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY to "request traffic". Centre will always give it to you at the appropriate times. ALWAYS.
Traffic is NOT always given, particularly VFR traffic which is often far more danger than IFR traffic, specifically with unverified transponder levels.
I don't know how many times I've heard someone ask for traffic and they reply with, "no observed IFR (emphasis on IFR)" but when asked for VFR traffic, there could be half a dozen nearby.
Why on earth do pilots think they have to request traffic? Maybe because they hear so many others doing it.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FGD135....i think pilots are confusing the call 'reference the VOR/NDB' with the departure report out of a Class D aerodrome on tower frequency. Even then, it is wrong to say 'reference the VOR' etc the correct call is (procedural when notifying departure report to a control tower): DEPARTED (time) TRACKING (track being flown) [B][FROM (reference aid used to establish track)[B] or VIA (SID identifier)] CLIMBING TO (level) ESTIMATING (first reporting point) AT (time).
Also you do NOT say 'departed at TIME zero two', the correct call is 'departed at zero two'.
While i'm on the soap box, can someone tell me if there is an exemption for RPT aircraft to not transmit the full taxi call at a controlled aerodrome? Most if not everyone's call is usually 'XXXX bay 4 with echo request taxi'......when in fact (and nowhere in the Jepps does it say 'unless RPT') the call is [flight number] [aircraft type] [wake turbulence category if "super or heavy"] [POB] RECEIVED (ATIS identification) [SQUAWK (SSR code)] [aircraft location] [flight rules] [TO (aerodrome of destination)] REQUEST TAXI [intentions].
Also you do NOT say 'departed at TIME zero two', the correct call is 'departed at zero two'.
While i'm on the soap box, can someone tell me if there is an exemption for RPT aircraft to not transmit the full taxi call at a controlled aerodrome? Most if not everyone's call is usually 'XXXX bay 4 with echo request taxi'......when in fact (and nowhere in the Jepps does it say 'unless RPT') the call is [flight number] [aircraft type] [wake turbulence category if "super or heavy"] [POB] RECEIVED (ATIS identification) [SQUAWK (SSR code)] [aircraft location] [flight rules] [TO (aerodrome of destination)] REQUEST TAXI [intentions].
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VH-XXX,
Centre cannot give traffic information about VFR traffic. In 99.9% of cases, they do not know about VFR aircraft. They will give what information they can on unidentified radar observed traffic but that will usually be given only to IFR aircraft.
The phraseology abuse regarding "traffic" is confined to requests for IFR traffic by IFR aircraft.
Centre cannot give traffic information about VFR traffic. In 99.9% of cases, they do not know about VFR aircraft. They will give what information they can on unidentified radar observed traffic but that will usually be given only to IFR aircraft.
The phraseology abuse regarding "traffic" is confined to requests for IFR traffic by IFR aircraft.
The term "Pending Clearance" was first published in an AIP Supp, probably around 1999, when new airspace and radio procedures were being adopted. The Supp has been cancelled and thus the term should not be used. Try writing to Airservices, not me, if you want a copy.
The AIP Supp also had other recommendations to minimise radio chatter, such as, no need to say "Standby for departure" at the end of an airborne report when initiating a SARWATCH (when comms on the ground are not available). Funny how we have come full circle and seem to have more radio chatter, especially at a non-towered aerodrome.
I am lead to believe that AIP Supps are not issued with Jepps.
Do Jepps user have to download AIP Supps from Airservices?
The AIP Supp also had other recommendations to minimise radio chatter, such as, no need to say "Standby for departure" at the end of an airborne report when initiating a SARWATCH (when comms on the ground are not available). Funny how we have come full circle and seem to have more radio chatter, especially at a non-towered aerodrome.
I am lead to believe that AIP Supps are not issued with Jepps.
Do Jepps user have to download AIP Supps from Airservices?
Request Traffic - ATC do NOT always give me traffic when I would like it. They can't read my mind. If I know from prior experience and local knowledge that there are likely to be several aircraft given to me as traffic I want to find out about them in plenty of time BEFORE I make the initial CTAF call and before descent. As I'm often chugging around at 2-4000 feet TOD is after the inbound CTAF call so when ATC forgets about me in the non-airline piston twin I need to request traffic so I can start to sort out a plan of attack for separation and know which aircraft I should expect a response from. HOWEVER the pilots which say "Center, ABC, IFR Chieftain 1 POB taxing BLA for BLA runway 23 REQUEST TRAFFIC" really give me the sh*ts. He's going to give you traffic mate, that's what the taxi call is for.
"Standby for departure" I know this is an unnecessary call but it seems every time I make an airborne call with POB soon after take off to initiate SARWATCH and I haven't had a chance to calculate an accurate ETA for my next point I get an ATC response of "go ahead with departure" and I end up having to tell them "Standby" anyway.
"Standby for departure" I know this is an unnecessary call but it seems every time I make an airborne call with POB soon after take off to initiate SARWATCH and I haven't had a chance to calculate an accurate ETA for my next point I get an ATC response of "go ahead with departure" and I end up having to tell them "Standby" anyway.
I haven't had a chance to calculate an accurate ETA for my next point
Log your departure time via the clock in the aircraft, or on your wrist (if not funky on 9.5 UTC such as Darwin/Adelaide) Write in on your flight plan, add the ETI from your plan to the departure time for your next reporting point and wallah!!!
What about "request traffic". This phrase is in widespread use by IFR pilots across Australia. IT IS COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY to "request traffic". Centre will always give it to you at the appropriate times. ALWAYS.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Age: 44
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's another one:
Only need to let them know if you'll be visual all the way. No requirement to say on top.
Approach, XXXX on descent to 7000 with Echo visual on top
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
No requirement to say on top.
"visual on top of scattered", thanks for the weather report!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lol HHughes thats classic.
Thats like the chick in a 172 I heard about 2 weeks ago when i was going up to Albury who busted CTA around Melbourne and when given the standard call "vfr traffic in the sugarloaf reservoir area etc etc" she responded with her callsign and i quote "not sure what happened but i was leaning the mixture to best economy and the autopilot just kept on climbing and i didnt notice".
Theres a life story and some excellent cockpit management for you!
Thats like the chick in a 172 I heard about 2 weeks ago when i was going up to Albury who busted CTA around Melbourne and when given the standard call "vfr traffic in the sugarloaf reservoir area etc etc" she responded with her callsign and i quote "not sure what happened but i was leaning the mixture to best economy and the autopilot just kept on climbing and i didnt notice".
Theres a life story and some excellent cockpit management for you!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In response to my statement that Centre will ALWAYS give you traffic at the appropriate times, The Green Goblin said:
How about just using the phraseology as it existed before CASA removed it from the AIP. That phraseology allowed you to get the traffic well in advance of starting descent. That phraseology was:
Centre, VH-ABC, commencing descent XXX in 3 minutes
This is what I use. Instead of 3 minutes, I might use 1 or 2. Note that this was the documented phraseology that existed in the AIP before CASA, in their infinite wisdom, removed all the Australian phraseology and replaced it with the ICAO standard set.
Going slightly off topic now and onto the subject of airmanship. The post from Wing Root reads as though he prefers to get traffic from Centre before he speaks on the CTAF.
That is poor airmanship. Good airmanship is to monitor the CTAF in advance in order to build up the traffic "picture". Then, when advising Centre of imminent descent, you can add that you have "copied VH-DEF, VH-GHI" etc. (You would only mention the IFR aircraft of course).
Not always.......most of the time when i'm in class E on descent to class G i'll have to preempt centre as we need to run decent checklists, brief, do an all stations call and talk to the punters. If we have not received traffic by 10 mile to TOD I'll request it.
Centre, VH-ABC, commencing descent XXX in 3 minutes
This is what I use. Instead of 3 minutes, I might use 1 or 2. Note that this was the documented phraseology that existed in the AIP before CASA, in their infinite wisdom, removed all the Australian phraseology and replaced it with the ICAO standard set.
Going slightly off topic now and onto the subject of airmanship. The post from Wing Root reads as though he prefers to get traffic from Centre before he speaks on the CTAF.
That is poor airmanship. Good airmanship is to monitor the CTAF in advance in order to build up the traffic "picture". Then, when advising Centre of imminent descent, you can add that you have "copied VH-DEF, VH-GHI" etc. (You would only mention the IFR aircraft of course).
Centre, VH-ABC, commencing descent XXX in 3 minutes
It's much quicker and easier to say XXX TOD XXX Request traffic. Followed by an all stations broadcast.
There is a reason why we do this. In our descent checklist it has 'altitude alert' and PF responds with the LSALT which has been set after traffic is received. If we have not got traffic by that stage then a quick call to centre is initiated.
Sometimes if you just say "XXX, commencing descent XXX in X minutes" you will get the reply from centre "XXX copied no additional" when you have not received traffic in the first place. It's much faster and easier for us to preempt them IMO.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mig3
The AIP clearly states what the ONLY format of the taxi call is. It is not expected that pilots modify the call at their discretion just because it 'makes sense'. I'm sure that a lot of other pilots say 'pending clearance' just because it 'makes sense' but it is WRONG. I agree that the taxi call is a bit of a mouthful as you quite rightly said that ATC already have part of the info already from the airways clearance. However, I still say it because the AIP says to say it, just like I say a departure report etc in the correct format. The whole reason for the gripe of the the OP et al is because of poor radio discipline in the first place. It seems to me that you're quite lax about your radio calls as are a lot of other pilots, I for one am not.
The AIP clearly states what the ONLY format of the taxi call is. It is not expected that pilots modify the call at their discretion just because it 'makes sense'. I'm sure that a lot of other pilots say 'pending clearance' just because it 'makes sense' but it is WRONG. I agree that the taxi call is a bit of a mouthful as you quite rightly said that ATC already have part of the info already from the airways clearance. However, I still say it because the AIP says to say it, just like I say a departure report etc in the correct format. The whole reason for the gripe of the the OP et al is because of poor radio discipline in the first place. It seems to me that you're quite lax about your radio calls as are a lot of other pilots, I for one am not.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Centre cannot give traffic information about VFR traffic. In 99.9% of cases, they do not know about VFR aircraft.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Aust
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to me that you're quite lax about your radio calls as are a lot of other pilots, I for one am not.
planemad_bk, It seems that you are not as on top of your game as you think you are. Have a read of what the differant symbols mean.
Some things are not required to be read back twice. For example.
A flight plan has been submitted with A/C type, Rego, callsign, and flight rules. So you do not have to repeat these in a taxi call.
Same as transponder code and destination. They have been received and read back during obtaining an airways clearance.
Your position on the field has been determined during a request to push back, so this no longer needs to be transmitted.
So all that is left is POB (excluded for RPT and probably only for commercial privacy reasons, I dont really know), and whether or not you have received an up to date ATIS (and of coarse the actual request to taxi).
if there is an exemption for RPT aircraft to not transmit the full taxi call at a controlled aerodrome?
Join Date: May 2008
Location: austland
Age: 42
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems that you are not as on top of your game as you think you are. Have a read of what the differant symbols mean.
Some things are not required to be read back twice.
Some things are not required to be read back twice.