The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

RADIO CALLS!

Old 22nd Jan 2012, 06:09
  #161 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: melb
Posts: 2,162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Temp' don't go this is like politics, it's them & us!

Me bin flyin' for over 30 yrs I don't let the goody two shoes out there get to me & I've bin in some ugly situations where comms are the last thing I want to do by the book!
As they say sticks & stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me



Wmk2
Wally Mk2 is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2012, 06:23
  #162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 311
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SP is right on the money. Well argued and reasoned.

Di Vosh, I dont think this is quite correct:

Group one (Bloggs, S_P, Hold Short, et al) who consider that 100% AIP compliance 100% of the time is the only acceptable outcome when on the radio
No one as far as I can tell, has said 100% compliance 100% of the time, what they are arguing is an attempt to get it right, and that a professional attempts to be PROFESSIONAL IN ALL ASPECTS of their chosen field.

Those that don't at least, occasionally, read AIP (and seem to wear it as a badge of honour) are not professional, but think that they are some how 'above all that trainee stuff - I'm a REAL pilot'.

R/T is an INTEGRAL part of our job, and deserves as much consideration as every other component of our job.

I am not getting personal, but I do find it strange that a person who purports to have an extensive background in training, can SEEM to be so blasé about about aspects of their chosen PROFESSION.

Last edited by allthecoolnamesarego; 22nd Jan 2012 at 08:05.
allthecoolnamesarego is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2012, 06:41
  #163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 1A
Posts: 8,532
Received 72 Likes on 41 Posts
Originally Posted by SleadLead
I am increasingly spared the agony of listening to often to many an Australian trained pilot trying to pass something as simple as a position report on a busy frequency --- and get it ICAO correct.
Oh for FFS. Isn't that what some of us have been saying here? A PR is p1ss easy: try it a few times (as per AIP) and you'll get it right thereafter. It ain't that hard!! If the AIP PR format is wrong, then get it changed!

There is far more than just standard phrases, it's all about how to communicate --- including, for example, how you vary what you have to say, depending on the circumstances.
Righto, put your money where your mouth is and give us an example of "varying what you have to say".

Why don't you do something smart, invest in a copy of UK CAA CAP413 (99.9% straight ICAO) and actually learn about "aviation communications".
I've got better things to spend my money on. I am quite happy saying what's in the book which details what the rules in Oz are. If some ICAO-centric @#$% wants it changed, then go for it. Stop sledging those of us who take pride in getting right what really is pretty easy in the vast majority of situations, if you take the time to actually read the book.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2012, 06:49
  #164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,955
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Bloggs,
Your basic ignorance of "communications", as opposed to "radio procedures" is rather profound, is it not?
Given you many posts on this subject, and their collective contents, all you have done,continually and most effectively, is make the case, for Triadic, myself and other who have some understanding of the fundamentals -- and our views on what is wrong with R/T in Australia.
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2012, 07:05
  #165 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Mydadsbag
Posts: 1,113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Oh yaaawn....yaaawn....feckin.....yaaaaawn!

Get a life.....the lot of you....... Deliver the aluminum safely, get a safe message over the radio and above all else..... Mind your own damn business!


Bbbbbbbbzbzbzbzbzbzzzzzzzzzzz
Mr.Buzzy is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2012, 07:11
  #166 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 1A
Posts: 8,532
Received 72 Likes on 41 Posts
Originally Posted by LudSlid
Bloggs,
Your basic ignorance of "communications", as opposed to "radio procedures" is rather profound, is it not?
Given you many posts on this subject, and their collective contents, all you have done,continually and most effectively, is make the case, for Triadic, myself and other who have some understanding of the fundamentals -- and our views on what is wrong with R/T in Australia.
Yep, just as I expected, in now-typical Sled fashion. Theoretical mumbo jumbo but when specifically asked to stump up with an example of what you are talking about, you can't do it.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2012, 14:19
  #167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hmmm...I have a number of mates who are C&Ting at various airlines in Oz and out.

ONE of their bigger whinges is "Gen Y cant be ar$ed getting the radio calls right - and it carries over into most of their flying"

I hear from one of them that VB had a 50% failure rate on a recent command course - not because they couldn't physically fly but because they couldn't be ar$ed making an effort to get in the books and display a high standard in the nitty gritty detail....like correct radio phraseology as just ONE example.

I see a fair bit of "so who cares? Near enough is good enough"on this thread - well if you want to spend your careers in the RHS you can bet the company won't care.

They will simply promote people who DO care.

My personal bug bear is read backs;

"XYZ call departures now"

"Call departures now XYZ"
Much Ado is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2012, 20:16
  #168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Oz
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Alright, here we go.

Things that i don't like in radio calls:

-Pilots (And i'm not only looking at GA ones here) who don't include all required information on first contact, neccesitating numerous calls to deliver the required info. And i'm not being nit picky here, things like levels, ATIS, inflight conditions, all of which affect the way we can process you.

-Pilots who argue the toss about whether they need a departure report or not. Granted, it is not as clear now as it once was, but if in doubt, ask. And if the ATC requests your departure report, theres a fairly good chance you need to give one. Don't argue.

-Not reading back "Holding point" in taxy clearances. Required info people. For those who are in the "well he gets the gist of it in this readback" club, not good enough. ATC are routinely stood down because they didn't enforce this readback, and the aircraft entered the runway without a clearance. Guess what? They cop the kick for it. I'm not saying it's right, just saying that's the way the system is.

And i'm sure there's plenty more. If you think ATC are being pedantic, we are. We have to deal with a potential stand down if we miss a readback, so for our own longevity in our careers, unfortunately, this is what is has come to.
CrankyATC is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2012, 21:21
  #169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Posts: 2,462
Received 290 Likes on 112 Posts
LeadSled, if you don't like our procedures, you can always go home.

If we went to the UK, you can be sure that we would have to comply with their procedures, so why don't you read the book on AUSTRALIAN procedures and whether you like them or not, comply with them.

No one is saying we have to be 100% correct 100% of the time. What we are saying, is that if you at least try and make the call as per the AIP, then it sure as hell sounds more professional than making up your own call.

It's not hard people, to have a read of the AIP and brush up on things you may not have read for the last 5 years. If this PPRuNer can do it and then apply it, so can you.

morno
morno is online now  
Old 22nd Jan 2012, 23:32
  #170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Enroute from Dagobah to Tatooine...!
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I'm surprised this one hasn't popped up yet in this multitudinous page thread... Two little words: "planned route" in a route clearance readback. Seems to get missed more these days and more often than not, by airline pilots. One particular nice and professional Melbourne ATCer is regularly 'pinging' pilots on this one. I think the best comeback from him goes along the lines of, "Sorry sir, I need a 'planned route' after XXX. One day you will go from XXX direct to Perth and you will be in trouble and so will I!"

No doubt a simple oversight on occasions but one that does have significance in its meaning. As is so often the case in our profession, small errors can have results of major consequence.

Keep it professional but as this ATCer demonstrates, you can keep it fun and keep it real too!

PS - Perhaps one of the reasons we are so pedantic in Australia is because of the lack of radar coverage. ATC can't always 'see' what we are doing. They rely on accurate descriptions in our radio calls and procedures as per the example above. Standard phrases perhaps increase in importance as a result.
Captain Nomad is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2012, 00:30
  #171 (permalink)  
SW3
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In a Multi crew environment we MUST use standard phrases and procedures for safety and to ensure everything is done correctly. One action signals another to begin. SOPs also allow it to be much easier to detect any abnormality. This concept is no different to radio procedures.
In short, follow the procedures, THEN revert to plain English if the message isn't coming across. Concise procedures may not seem a big deal but remember we all share the same airspace, no matter what you fly. An extra 15 seconds transmitting unnecessary calls can mean 1.0nm travelled for some.
SW3 is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2012, 00:38
  #172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,955
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
LeadSled, if you don't like our procedures, you can always go home.
Morno,
For your information, this is home, and "radio communications" is one aspect of aviation at which we do not excel, with the consequent safety implications.

Much like the rest of the world, UK by and large DOES NOT differ from ICAO. Anybody who has access to the Jepp. World Wide Text can easily determine the differences to ICAO filed by most countries, in the case of UK, US,NZ, CA to name but several, may have one or two minor differences. Last time I looked, in the US it was three, all to do with conditional descent clearances. Alternatively, most NAA AIPs are now online.

The Australian WW Text entry goes on for pages. Why is flying here so different --- it's not --- except for the Australian psychological 12 mile limit, that has such a stultifying effect on the thinking of you "little Australian(s)" who have no knowledge of, and apparently have no wish to have any knowledge of ---- what happens in the big wide world of aviation.

At least, in recent years, we have moved a little closer to the rest of the world, but not nearly far enough, in understanding the difference between "communicating" and just what is little more than rote recitation of set phrases, with little thought.

The most common examples of this occur around airfields in G, with Regionals and pilots of larger GA aircraft the main offenders against good communication. At least in controlled airspace there will be a somewhat frustrated controller demanding the gaps be filled in.

I sympathies with the lot of the controllers, their standards enforcement mob are very inflexible --- a bit like Australian "radio procedures", really.

Bloggs, I wouldn't even attempt to try and explain some of the nuances of position reporting to you, it would be a waste of time and effort.

Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2012, 00:44
  #173 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Posts: 2,462
Received 290 Likes on 112 Posts
So far LeadSled, you haven't been able to show us any of the differences. Go on, try us, .

I don't care whether we comply or don't comply with ICAO, these are the procedures, stick to them.

It'd be a bit like going to an airline and saying "No, you all do it the wrong way, I learnt this much better way at the last place I was at, stuff ya's, I'm going to do it that way". That just doesn't happen.

mono
morno is online now  
Old 23rd Jan 2012, 00:53
  #174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,955
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Morno,

Strangely, every major Australian operator, including the one who employed me for so many years, has supported Australia complying with ICAO SARPs, rather than having unique Australian procedures.

At the time, some years ago now, when the policy decision was taken to move towards ICAO compliance in this area, it was significant that AIPA supported the proposition, but AFAP were vehemently opposed.

Another example of the difference between those with some knowledge of the big wide world of aviation, versus those mentally confined within our 12 mile limit.

Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2012, 01:01
  #175 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Posts: 2,462
Received 290 Likes on 112 Posts
That's all good and well LeadSled, BUT, whether you like it or not, they're not the rules employed here in Australia.

I don't nessecarily disagree that we have some silly procedures here that probably don't comply with ICAO, but they are the rules and procedures under which we must operate. Why? Because when there's an incident or accident and you're answering the questions in that court room of "Why did you not comply with the procedures as set out in AIP?", with "Because I think ICAO is much better", I don't think it's going to get you anything other than the blame.

morno
morno is online now  
Old 23rd Jan 2012, 01:24
  #176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,955
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Morno.

And there we have it in a nutshell ---- from the mouths of babes etc ---- Australian "compliance with procedures", on pain of criminal sanction, versus effective communication to get the best (air) safety outcomes.

"Compliance" takes precedence, regardless of the fact that there is quite a large body of study and analysis, proven valid (Hudson, Kern, Reason, Maurino et al) that shows why this approach does not, and cannot, produce the best achievable air safety outcomes.

A good example, even if unintended, of why Australia's air safety outcomes are nothing to write home about, and not nearly as good as we keep kidding ourselves they are --- seen through our 12 mile limit inspired rose tinted glasses.

Australian aviation regulation's dedication to complex prescriptive procedures, with criminal penalties, versus outcome based regulation, where the outcome is the best achievable air safety outcome.

Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2012, 01:56
  #177 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Problem solved

Had a spare hour so, foolishly read this thread. It's to easy boys and girls they solved it. Circa 1953. From the immortal Goon Show..

Greenslade: You will find the answer to that question in the Radio Times, price thruppence. Three copper coins, mark you, and by jove, it has become so interesting I would much sooner settle down and read it than listen to the radio any day.


Mutters never, not ever again. Silly boy, buddy, silly.
Kharon is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2012, 02:59
  #178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Posts: 2,462
Received 290 Likes on 112 Posts
It's like talking to a brick wall, .

What other rules do you not comply with because you think they're a silly idea LeadSlead?
morno is online now  
Old 23rd Jan 2012, 03:10
  #179 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 1A
Posts: 8,532
Received 72 Likes on 41 Posts
So what was a simple "Do your calls properly" thread has turned into yet another rant by Sleddie about the disgraceful state of aviation in Oz.

Originally Posted by LeedSleed
Bloggs, I wouldn't even attempt to try and explain some of the nuances of position reporting to you, it would be a waste of time and effort.
Nuances of a flippin' position report? Ya joking, aren't you? Talk about making something simple difficult! Heading North, hold mic in left hand and speak with gruff voice. Southbound, hold mic in right hand and squeal. Hang on, that'll be the effo's leg so better brief him what nuance applies then... Maybe we could implement PR nuance policy in Ops Manual. Better still, in AIP!! Then there wouldn't be any arguments.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2012, 03:18
  #180 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: with the other ex-CX pond scum (a zoologist was once head of Flight Ops)
Posts: 1,850
Received 48 Likes on 20 Posts
...and Leady, the 'great communicator', what you excrutiatingly append each and every one of your posts with should be bloody
TOODLE pip!


toodle pip - Wiktionary
Captain Dart is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.