Merged: Pending clearance??
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Brisbane
Age: 69
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
appropriate IFR level below the step
curved approach
I would have to agree with ATC. Our company policy is the highest appropriate IFR level below the step, just in case you are stuck there for a while. The only time this can be tricky is at night with 4500 as the step and LSALT above!
I would have to agree with ATC. Our company policy is the highest appropriate IFR level below the step, just in case you are stuck there for a while. The only time this can be tricky is at night with 4500 as the step and LSALT above!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: South O Equator
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Visual on top" is my pet hate. Report visual when visual.
Also people not reporting visual because they cannot see the airstrip. What a crock. Clear of cloud, in sight of ground or water, >5k vis....... As mentioned before it requires ATC to allow more space between you and following aircraft which in turn slows people down.
Also people not reporting visual because they cannot see the airstrip. What a crock. Clear of cloud, in sight of ground or water, >5k vis....... As mentioned before it requires ATC to allow more space between you and following aircraft which in turn slows people down.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Third Barstool on the left
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"ABC is 34 miles... oh, say again 26 miles north..." 
SAY AGAIN = I am repeating what I just said for emphasis/clarity
CORRECTION = I just ballsed it up and I am now giving you the right info
SAY AGAIN = I am repeating what I just said for emphasis/clarity
CORRECTION = I just ballsed it up and I am now giving you the right info
Guest
Posts: n/a
Baffler15,
Lazy? Yes!
No offence intended here, but as an ATC, if there is one thing that really pisses me off it is pilots who readback 'NINE' instead of 'NINER' when assigned descent.
It's amazing how much it can sound like a 'FIVE'.
Then I have to waste everyones time and seek confirmation before I can get on with the next thing.
Most of the culprits do tend to be RPT jets.
I can live with most of the other non-AIP phraseology (I'm certainly not perfect), but not this one,
Cheers.
Lazy? Yes!
No offence intended here, but as an ATC, if there is one thing that really pisses me off it is pilots who readback 'NINE' instead of 'NINER' when assigned descent.
It's amazing how much it can sound like a 'FIVE'.
Then I have to waste everyones time and seek confirmation before I can get on with the next thing.
Most of the culprits do tend to be RPT jets.
I can live with most of the other non-AIP phraseology (I'm certainly not perfect), but not this one,
Cheers.
Also people not reporting visual because they cannot see the airstrip
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: L.D.U.
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Makespeed250,
I did say that I only rarely say NIN-ER, not never (that was FIFE)! Hopefully, if I'm ever yapping to you on an ATC freq, you might just get lucky! 
The Baffler
P.S. If you say NIN-ER first though, I'll read NIN-ER back!
Baffler15,
Lazy? Yes!
No offence intended here, but as an ATC, if there is one thing that really pisses me off it is pilots who readback 'NINE' instead of 'NINER' when assigned descent.
It's amazing how much it can sound like a 'FIVE'.
Lazy? Yes!
No offence intended here, but as an ATC, if there is one thing that really pisses me off it is pilots who readback 'NINE' instead of 'NINER' when assigned descent.
It's amazing how much it can sound like a 'FIVE'.
The Baffler
P.S. If you say NIN-ER first though, I'll read NIN-ER back!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: in a sorry state of permit-icitus
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm with you neville - called visual (no airport in sight due to lotsa smoke - heading west into a setting sun but meeting all the visual approach requirements) only to be rewarded with tracking via some place that I could hardly make out. No drama I found the VTC in time - and really enjoyed the scenic diversion - found a few more fishing spots when next in town - but puk me there was a panicky scrouge around the nav bag for a few moments - wonder if any of the heavies would be asked to remain north of the hospital or track to east arm
anyhow, hearing a bit of this lately:
XYZ we've departed...
XYZ we're maintaining...
(must be a multicrew thing - for single pahlot ops maybe we better insert I've and I'm).
anyhow, hearing a bit of this lately:
XYZ we've departed...
XYZ we're maintaining...
(must be a multicrew thing
- for single pahlot ops maybe we better insert I've and I'm).
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Age: 44
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Xeptu,
I always call "Changing to CTAF". It frees up a radio for activating PAL, updating weather and if CTAF gets to busy I'm not trying to listen to two frequencies at once. And when in or approaching a CTAF I would think CTAF would be the more important freq to listen to. If ATC have something improtant to say they will still try to contact me but at least they know why if I dont respond.
Makespeed250,
I use to say it but I don't think I've heard anyone say Niner in years, pilots or controllers. Guess you are right tho so I'll go back to saying it.
NF
I always call "Changing to CTAF". It frees up a radio for activating PAL, updating weather and if CTAF gets to busy I'm not trying to listen to two frequencies at once. And when in or approaching a CTAF I would think CTAF would be the more important freq to listen to. If ATC have something improtant to say they will still try to contact me but at least they know why if I dont respond.
Makespeed250,
I use to say it but I don't think I've heard anyone say Niner in years, pilots or controllers. Guess you are right tho so I'll go back to saying it.
NF
Last edited by Night Flight; 5th Aug 2008 at 04:19.
well once you use the term "changing to CTAF" ATC won't talk to you anymore, thats why your telling them that, its your call which way you want to go, depending on your particular operational needs at the time.
I say "niner"
ITCZ you need to seek professional help, anger management classes or something like that.
I say "niner"
ITCZ you need to seek professional help, anger management classes or something like that.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Brisvegas
Age: 46
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lighten up everyone. Who gives a s*#t if a radio call is not word perfect from the AIP. There are a lot more factors to consider someone a professional operator that are far more important than radio phraseology.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it a little concerning that so many people are so flippant about correct RT. Standard RT is there for the sole reason of safety and as Gettin' There said there are numerous examples of where seemingly innocent non-standard RT has contributed an accident. Here are two examples:
1. Tenerife - One of the major contributing factors identified was the incorrect RT used by both the pilot ("We're at take-off") and the controller ("OK").
2. Flying Tigers 747 crash 1990 - Controller instructs the pilot to "descent two four zero zero" (meaning 2400ft) however pilot interprets as "descend to four zero zero" (400ft) and subsequently impacts a hill. The controllers use of non-standard RT by omitting a simple word like 'to' caused 4 people to die.
I don't get every call right (everyone has an occasional brain fart) but nor do I deliberately diverge from the standard RT.
Nev - I don't know who or what lead you to believe this but as a current DN controller I can assure you that this is not the case.
1. Tenerife - One of the major contributing factors identified was the incorrect RT used by both the pilot ("We're at take-off") and the controller ("OK").
2. Flying Tigers 747 crash 1990 - Controller instructs the pilot to "descent two four zero zero" (meaning 2400ft) however pilot interprets as "descend to four zero zero" (400ft) and subsequently impacts a hill. The controllers use of non-standard RT by omitting a simple word like 'to' caused 4 people to die.
I don't get every call right (everyone has an occasional brain fart) but nor do I deliberately diverge from the standard RT.
in Darwin they wanted you to be able to see the airstrip before calling visual
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Age: 44
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Xeptu,
I kind of agree however several times after calling "Changing to CTAF" the controllers have tried to call me to advise additional IFR traffic. I dont have a problem with them doing so as they are trying to help but as I said: getting smashed
in rain doing a circling approach at the minima 3am at night into a black hole... they can wait till I'm done Aviating and Navigating before I do the Communicating. At least I gave the heads up that I may be doing so.
NF
I kind of agree however several times after calling "Changing to CTAF" the controllers have tried to call me to advise additional IFR traffic. I dont have a problem with them doing so as they are trying to help but as I said: getting smashed
in rain doing a circling approach at the minima 3am at night into a black hole... they can wait till I'm done Aviating and Navigating before I do the Communicating. At least I gave the heads up that I may be doing so.NF
Last edited by Night Flight; 5th Aug 2008 at 10:21. Reason: BEER
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Xeptu
ITCZ you need to seek professional help, anger management classes or something like that.
Angry ITCZ? Nah mate. Happy as Larry.
My Rx for you: Flight Discipline, Tony Kern. Good Read. Get you out of that rut. Along with your AIP
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Eclan
Originally Posted by Hempy
even the "request clearance" bit is superfluous
Admittedly I am not a whiz on the current phraseology but when I was taught some years ago, the phrase was. "Request AIRWAYS clearance." If that's still the case then perhaps a little more introspection may be required.
Originally Posted by GEN 3.4 - 55
4. Departure Reports
departing a non−towered aerodrome
a.* DEPARTED (location) (time in minutes) TRACKING (three digits) CLIMBING TO (intended level) ESTIMATING (first reporting point) AT (time),
or
b.* DEPARTED (location) (time in minutes) TRACKING TO INTERCEPT (track) CLIMBING TO (intended level) ESTIMATING (first reporting point) AT (time).
departing a non−towered aerodrome
a.* DEPARTED (location) (time in minutes) TRACKING (three digits) CLIMBING TO (intended level) ESTIMATING (first reporting point) AT (time),
or
b.* DEPARTED (location) (time in minutes) TRACKING TO INTERCEPT (track) CLIMBING TO (intended level) ESTIMATING (first reporting point) AT (time).
The original point of my post was because non-standard phraseology was slipping into documentation here because RPT pilots are using it and I wanted to get some idea of why.
[edit] I would also like to add that from the other side of the microphone, the standard of local pilot phraseology generally improves in direct proportion with his/her aircraft's seating capacity. I guess that just goes to prove something......
Last edited by Hempy; 6th Aug 2008 at 14:37.
ITCZ
Yes I waded in and identified myself as the subject of the original post, something few have the balls to do, and those who know me have grown to appreciate that quality. To put the record straight, the term was used over a period of about one week during a time of complex and constantly changing restricted airspace. At the time in my view it was appropriate and AIP provides for that. I do not seek your or anyone elses approval to excercise it. I do not condone the use of deliberate non standard radio procedures or more than the absolute minimum necessary. For the record that irks me too. I'm surprised however that it has become popular in such a short time and have no clue as to why, if that is the case.
Hempy
The reason why non standard RT procedures are on the rise is because the greater bulk of them are done by the First Officer. In our current labour market, they are younger, less experienced and in bigger aircraft much sooner than they were 10 years ago.
Yes I waded in and identified myself as the subject of the original post, something few have the balls to do, and those who know me have grown to appreciate that quality. To put the record straight, the term was used over a period of about one week during a time of complex and constantly changing restricted airspace. At the time in my view it was appropriate and AIP provides for that. I do not seek your or anyone elses approval to excercise it. I do not condone the use of deliberate non standard radio procedures or more than the absolute minimum necessary. For the record that irks me too. I'm surprised however that it has become popular in such a short time and have no clue as to why, if that is the case.
Hempy
The reason why non standard RT procedures are on the rise is because the greater bulk of them are done by the First Officer. In our current labour market, they are younger, less experienced and in bigger aircraft much sooner than they were 10 years ago.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and it came to pass...
Fellow aviators...
I came, I read and I am amazed!
.......
Agree on the "Pending Clearance" - they made that up and its BS. Let's just agree.
but it is contagious.
"Ref the NDB/GPS"...ditto
Agree on alt pre-select FL180. Standard stuff
Guy who got told off by ATC at 8,500.....more power to you brother, dont let em get you down. Very generous in your assessment.
Guy who mentioned the US - to you I suggest go and fly there if you want to see and enjoy an ATC system at its very best, in spite of traffic density, ice, blizzards, hurricanes, workload and poor working conditions. A pleasure at all times. Nothing's too hard and what we do not have here - a system where all are equal regardless of aircraft type. Many of the Tracans (terminal radar centers) still have big green screens, not the "most advanced air traffic system in the world" (TAATS) so called.
It's not the technology that makes a difference.
I came, I read and I am amazed!
.......Agree on the "Pending Clearance" - they made that up and its BS. Let's just agree.
but it is contagious."Ref the NDB/GPS"...ditto
Agree on alt pre-select FL180. Standard stuff
Guy who got told off by ATC at 8,500.....more power to you brother, dont let em get you down. Very generous in your assessment.
Guy who mentioned the US - to you I suggest go and fly there if you want to see and enjoy an ATC system at its very best, in spite of traffic density, ice, blizzards, hurricanes, workload and poor working conditions. A pleasure at all times. Nothing's too hard and what we do not have here - a system where all are equal regardless of aircraft type. Many of the Tracans (terminal radar centers) still have big green screens, not the "most advanced air traffic system in the world" (TAATS) so called.
It's not the technology that makes a difference.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: melbourne
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Pending Clearance" ????????
Hi all havn't posted much but lately I have been hearing a lot o the the following,
XXX Centre VH-ABC Departed YXXX Time XX Tracking to intercept XXX passing A XX on climb to FL XXX "PENDING CLEARANCE" Etc ......
No where can I find in Jepp's the phraseology unless I have missed can someone point out to me, otherwise stop using the Phrase.
XXX Centre VH-ABC Departed YXXX Time XX Tracking to intercept XXX passing A XX on climb to FL XXX "PENDING CLEARANCE" Etc ......
No where can I find in Jepp's the phraseology unless I have missed can someone point out to me, otherwise stop using the Phrase.
