Changes to departure reports
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re that new phraseology in the AIC:
What exactly is the first word supposed to be for 4a from the table? The first word(s) will be whatever (location reference departure aerodrome) translates to, but what exactly that is is the subject of this post.
Departing from Jabiru for Darwin, for example, where I expect to become SSR identified following the departure report, is this the correct report:
"Brisbane Centre, XYZ, Jabiru, Passing 3,000 on climb FL130, estimating Darwin 36".
What exactly is the first word supposed to be for 4a from the table? The first word(s) will be whatever (location reference departure aerodrome) translates to, but what exactly that is is the subject of this post.
Departing from Jabiru for Darwin, for example, where I expect to become SSR identified following the departure report, is this the correct report:
"Brisbane Centre, XYZ, Jabiru, Passing 3,000 on climb FL130, estimating Darwin 36".
The question is why give an estimate if you are identified? I can't figure that one out! The simplest report would have been "ABC passing 1400, climbing to FL190", like the airborne report without the heading info.
Also, why "on climb" vs "climbing to" for other departure reports. Seems a bit rushed in its implementation.
Also, why "on climb" vs "climbing to" for other departure reports. Seems a bit rushed in its implementation.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have always thought the phrase; "..........on climb (what ever thousand feet)....." is preferable. The possibility of a misunderstanding by using "...climbing to (etc.)....." is too apparent.
Last edited by PLovett; 27th Jun 2012 at 11:56. Reason: Wrong 2, to, two........
Grandpa Aerotart
Apparent?
I think the individual who originally posited the idea should be restrained from further public utterances.
How can "climbing to six thousand" possibly be confused in the real world with "climbing two six thousand" when there is no such altitude?
I think the individual who originally posited the idea should be restrained from further public utterances.
How can "climbing to six thousand" possibly be confused in the real world with "climbing two six thousand" when there is no such altitude?
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 27th Jun 2012 at 11:27.
Grandpa Aerotart
Even if your first language is not English there is STILL no such ALTITUDE as 'two six thousand' it's 'Flight Level two six zero'.
If that's too hard for someone with level 4 English proficiency don't give them a fcking license for anything more difficult than a car.
If that's too hard for someone with level 4 English proficiency don't give them a fcking license for anything more difficult than a car.
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 27th Jun 2012 at 11:33.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not everyone in the world uses Australian procedures.
Within Australia, use of "to" is clear and simple. But not every pilot in Australia, departs and arrives within Australian airspace... That's why ICAO exists. To harmonise between States in order to prevent confusion &/or accidents, primarily for international aviation.
I don't really care about the "to" discussed above. Better things to think about. But I wish local pilots were at least hesitant to criticize something that ICAO thinks is a Really Good Idea.
Within Australia, use of "to" is clear and simple. But not every pilot in Australia, departs and arrives within Australian airspace... That's why ICAO exists. To harmonise between States in order to prevent confusion &/or accidents, primarily for international aviation.
I don't really care about the "to" discussed above. Better things to think about. But I wish local pilots were at least hesitant to criticize something that ICAO thinks is a Really Good Idea.
Last edited by Oktas8; 27th Jun 2012 at 12:42.
Originally Posted by FDG135
What exactly is the first word supposed to be for 4a from the table? The first word(s) will be whatever (location reference departure aerodrome) translates to, but what exactly that is is the subject of this post.
Departing from Jabiru for Darwin, for example, where I expect to become SSR identified following the departure report, is this the correct report:
"Brisbane Centre, XYZ, Jabiru, Passing 3,000 on climb FL130, estimating Darwin 36".
Departing from Jabiru for Darwin, for example, where I expect to become SSR identified following the departure report, is this the correct report:
"Brisbane Centre, XYZ, Jabiru, Passing 3,000 on climb FL130, estimating Darwin 36".
) by the time they get their departure report out.
Also, why "on climb" vs "climbing to" for other departure reports.
While you're there, IM, remove "estimating" from the departure report. We don't use it in any of the other position reports we make.
Re that new phraseology in the AIC:
What exactly is the first word supposed to be for 4a from the table? The first word(s) will be whatever (location reference departure aerodrome) translates to, but what exactly that is is the subject of this post.
Departing from Jabiru for Darwin, for example, where I expect to become SSR identified following the departure report, is this the correct report:
"Brisbane Centre, XYZ, Jabiru, Passing 3,000 on climb FL130, estimating Darwin 36".
What exactly is the first word supposed to be for 4a from the table? The first word(s) will be whatever (location reference departure aerodrome) translates to, but what exactly that is is the subject of this post.
Departing from Jabiru for Darwin, for example, where I expect to become SSR identified following the departure report, is this the correct report:
"Brisbane Centre, XYZ, Jabiru, Passing 3,000 on climb FL130, estimating Darwin 36".
I.e. "Brisbane Centre, XYZ, 5 miles west of Jabiru, passing 3000 on climb FL130 estimating Darwin 36."
Or similar.
I think it's meant to be (exapanded) Your location, in reference to the departure aerodrome.
Where's Jack Ranga and co. to give us a perspective from the other side.
Cynical Pilot: There is always the easy way, just don't say to. eg. "Passing 4500, Climbing 6000."
Couldn't agree more!!
KISS!! Climbing, descending, leaving, joining, turning, taxiing!
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where's Jack Ranga and co. to give us a perspective from the other side.
A lot of IFR pilots cannot manage a taxy call let alone any new procedure. Standard phraseology is not used by the majority of pilots these days so the chance of any new procedure being used correctly? Snowball
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Running up that hill
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I gave up trying to understand the logic of phraseology when they changed "leave control area on descent" to "leave control area descending" to improve safety, but here goes
The location reference aerodrome seems to be a double check to make sure what we see on the screen is you. Feels like a throwback to the days when ATC gave you a position when identified.
Estimate also seems redundant. Most of the time I won't enter a pilot estimate anyway in theses circumstances. I don't need it and as often as not it will be revised at TOC anyway.
The useful part is level passing for Mode C verification, but a lot of our regular operators have been giving that in their departure reports for years anyway.
If the aim was to save us and pilots time, the phraseology would simply be "ABC passing (current level)". I know where you are and what level you planned and I don't need an estimate.
But isn't the whole point behind the new reports that they will have you on their screen anyway? No need to give a distance etc. I would think, only a need to verify your altitude.
Estimate also seems redundant. Most of the time I won't enter a pilot estimate anyway in theses circumstances. I don't need it and as often as not it will be revised at TOC anyway.
The useful part is level passing for Mode C verification, but a lot of our regular operators have been giving that in their departure reports for years anyway.
If the aim was to save us and pilots time, the phraseology would simply be "ABC passing (current level)". I know where you are and what level you planned and I don't need an estimate.