Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Radio/ATC etiquette and professionalism

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

Radio/ATC etiquette and professionalism

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 16th Aug 2023, 00:34
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Coal Face
Posts: 1,297
Received 333 Likes on 127 Posts
“Literally Ready”. Of course. R/T should follow the zeitgeist.
Chronic Snoozer is online now  
The following users liked this post:
Old 16th Aug 2023, 01:20
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Coal Face
Posts: 1,297
Received 333 Likes on 127 Posts
Originally Posted by Mogwi
To be picky ….. Ready for take-off also went out of the window many years ago and was replaced with “Ready for departure”. That way, the information call could not be confused with a take-off clearance.

Mog
It’s always been my understanding that this was triggered by the Tenerife disaster. Recommendation 3 from the final report:

‘3.3. Avoidance of the word “TAKE OFF” in the ATC clearance and adequate time separation between the ATC clearance and the TAKE OFF clearance.’

http://www.project-tenerife.com/engels/PDF/Tenerife.pdf
Chronic Snoozer is online now  
The following users liked this post:
Old 16th Aug 2023, 03:21
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 5,951
Received 395 Likes on 210 Posts
I remember the Guard freq being user-selectable
Out of interest what aircraft/radio set up Rats?
megan is online now  
Old 16th Aug 2023, 09:23
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,792
Received 419 Likes on 231 Posts
Originally Posted by Chronic Snoozer
It’s always been my understanding that this was triggered by the Tenerife disaster. Recommendation 3 from the final report:

‘3.3. Avoidance of the word “TAKE OFF” in the ATC clearance and adequate time separation between the ATC clearance and the TAKE OFF clearance.’

http://www.project-tenerife.com/engels/PDF/Tenerife.pdf
I think it goes further in that the words "take-off" or "land(ing)" should not be used unless during the issue of a take-off and landing clearance, and the entire phrase "XXX Cleared to Land/for Take-off" must be heard . So phrases like "after take-off expect a right turn" are avoided. Which is why I can not understand why conflicting words like "Climb TO" are used when the "TO" can be confused for a number or such when clipped. Even phrases that mean well like "ABC Taxi A, B, C, Hold short of RWY 35" could be clipped so that the hold short gets confused for "cross rwy35" under the right circumstance, so there is no safety benefit in having said it. Yes, in a perfect world you would seek clarification if there was over-transmits, but in the real world people can assume when under the pump. It's better not to mention any runway until you are actively cleared to enter it or cross it, then it's clear you don't have clearance until such time you receive it. A better taxi procedure would be simply "ABC taxi via A, B, C, C holding point". Runway is assigned in the clearance so why say it again. And with all this talk, runway incursions still happen regularly, even at airline level, so the system is far from perfect.
43Inches is online now  
The following users liked this post:
Old 17th Aug 2023, 01:28
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,254
Received 195 Likes on 90 Posts
On the other side of the ready call, why does ATC ask if we are ready immediate? If I have called ready then of course I am ready immediate. In addition if you want me to be ready to depart immediately, then don't wait until I have lined up and parked the brakes before clearing me for an immediate departure.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2023, 01:46
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,792
Received 419 Likes on 231 Posts
Originally Posted by Lookleft
On the other side of the ready call, why does ATC ask if we are ready immediate? If I have called ready then of course I am ready immediate. In addition if you want me to be ready to depart immediately, then don't wait until I have lined up and parked the brakes before clearing me for an immediate departure.
I agree, from a pilots perspective all take-offs should be performed without delay. ATC should be able to assume this will be the case unless notified otherwise. I think the problem has been that some pilots do seem to dither unless instructed to move it. Once you call ready it's says to the tower you have nothing left to do except line up and roll. If you need 10,20,30 seconds lined up or such for whatever reason the pilots need to say this when calling ready.
43Inches is online now  
The following users liked this post:
Old 17th Aug 2023, 01:48
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Karratha,Western Australia
Age: 43
Posts: 481
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by 43Inches
I agree, from a pilots perspective all take-offs should be performed without delay. ATC should be able to assume this will be the case unless notified otherwise. I think the problem has been that some pilots do seem to dither unless instructed to move it. Once you call ready it's says to the tower you have nothing left to do except line up and roll. If you need 10,20,30 seconds lined up or such for whatever reason the pilots need to say this when calling ready.
If only this was the case....
Awol57 is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2023, 02:06
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Coal Face
Posts: 1,297
Received 333 Likes on 127 Posts
Originally Posted by 43Inches
I think it goes further in that the words "take-off" or "land(ing)" should not be used unless during the issue of a take-off and landing clearance, and the entire phrase "XXX Cleared to Land/for Take-off" must be heard . So phrases like "after take-off expect a right turn" are avoided. Which is why I can not understand why conflicting words like "Climb TO" are used when the "TO" can be confused for a number or such when clipped. Even phrases that mean well like "ABC Taxi A, B, C, Hold short of RWY 35" could be clipped so that the hold short gets confused for "cross rwy35" under the right circumstance, so there is no safety benefit in having said it. Yes, in a perfect world you would seek clarification if there was over-transmits, but in the real world people can assume when under the pump. It's better not to mention any runway until you are actively cleared to enter it or cross it, then it's clear you don't have clearance until such time you receive it. A better taxi procedure would be simply "ABC taxi via A, B, C, C holding point". Runway is assigned in the clearance so why say it again. And with all this talk, runway incursions still happen regularly, even at airline level, so the system is far from perfect.
It's in MATS.

https://www.airservicesaustralia.com...s-saf-2000.pdf
Chronic Snoozer is online now  
Old 17th Aug 2023, 02:06
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,792
Received 419 Likes on 231 Posts
Put it this way, ATC monitors the average time each airline takes to line up and roll, there are certain operators that are well known to be slow, and they will get the 'be ready immediate' more often than others. And its not to do with line up procedures as within the same airline on same types there can be significant variation.
43Inches is online now  
Old 17th Aug 2023, 05:41
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: somers
Posts: 60
Received 11 Likes on 6 Posts
Interesting how a firm grip of non essential trivia is how professionalism is judged these days. The job has become so easy that all reality is lost. Can't imagine anyone getting worked up over hearing "affirmative" on the radio.
prickly is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2023, 07:55
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 5,296
Received 424 Likes on 211 Posts
...until it turns out that "affirmative" was not the word actually transmitted.
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2023, 08:10
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 160
Received 92 Likes on 48 Posts
COMMS

Has anyone ( besides me ) ever had (usually after a long layoff or when flying to a country for the first time ) a really bad day on the radios ?

Or had problems reading back a rapid fire clearance somewhere ( USA !)when local accents /terminology abounds?

SUGGEST some clever person comes up with some simple reactive training recordings of ATC chat from ‘difficult’ parts of the globe which can be listened to at your leisure prior to departure and enable you to practice your patter.

Might save some major embarrassment (FS hazard) later?



mahogany bob is online now  
The following 2 users liked this post by mahogany bob:
Old 17th Aug 2023, 08:28
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: All at sea
Posts: 2,197
Received 168 Likes on 106 Posts
Originally Posted by mahogany bob
COMMS

Has anyone ( besides me ) ever had (usually after a long layoff or when flying to a country for the first time ) a really bad day on the radios ?

Or had problems reading back a rapid fire clearance somewhere ( USA !)when local accents /terminology abounds?

SUGGEST some clever person comes up with some simple reactive training recordings of ATC chat from ‘difficult’ parts of the globe which can be listened to at your leisure prior to departure and enable you to practice your patter.

Might save some major embarrassment (FS hazard) later?
That’s not a bad idea.
Generally I am OK with accents and can even cope with the fast talking Yanks, by writing the anticipated clearance down, then modifying it as necessary. I think that is how most visitors to the USA do it, at least until they have more familiarity.
But there was a female controller at Surat Thani in Thailand who had me totally defeated.
All I could do was read back the clearance I had written down beforehand and hope that it was correct, because there was no way I could pick up anything beyond our call sign and a few numbers.
Mach E Avelli is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2023, 06:57
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: somers
Posts: 60
Received 11 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
...until it turns out that "affirmative" was not the word actually transmitted.
I rest my case. Trivia rules. Time for a hobby.
prickly is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2023, 07:29
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 5,296
Received 424 Likes on 211 Posts
You're overlooking the safety basis for the change in terminology from "affirmative" to "AY-firm".

It's not trivia. It's to reduce the scope for confusion about what was said and, therefore, what was meant.
Lead Balloon is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 18th Aug 2023, 08:00
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Up The 116E, Stbd Turn at 32S...:-)
Age: 82
Posts: 3,096
Received 45 Likes on 20 Posts
Talking

Slight 'Drift'......

Many 'Moons ago' a particular 'lightie' was enroute Griffith to Hay, NSW, and was 'pushing' last light.
The SY FSO had tried 'tactfully' to ask the pilot to confirm his ETA.
Eventually, he turned around to face the FSCentre room, and in his best 'authoritive' (theatrical) voice, simply asked the pilot,

"ABC, are you able to make Hay while the sun shines"?

Brought the 'house' down it did.....and got the appropriate response from the pilot.

No 'confusion' there.........

Troo story.
Ex FSO GRIFFO is offline  
The following 4 users liked this post by Ex FSO GRIFFO:
Old 18th Aug 2023, 08:21
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: All at sea
Posts: 2,197
Received 168 Likes on 106 Posts
Originally Posted by prickly
I rest my case. Trivia rules. Time for a hobby.
Clear and standardised communication in a dynamic environment is hardly trivial. Even less trivial when you add those with poor English to the mix.
‘Flap’ versus ‘flaps’ is trivial. ‘Check’ versus ‘checked’ is trivial. Some airlines love that ****.
For a firm grip of the non essential there’s also plenty among certain examiners. An example: on an IPC the GA Examiner asked me what the difference was when identifying a TACAN versus a VOR. I knew he was after the timing interval, because he was a good 25 years my junior and thus was unlikely to have much Morse code, if any. But I was not about to give him the pleasure of the answer he wanted (he really wanted “I don’t know”).
A trivial question deserved a trivial answer, which was “the Morse sounds different, one is more squeaky than the other, and by the way can YOU read Morse at 10 words per minute? “ That shut him down.
Mach E Avelli is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 19th Aug 2023, 02:55
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2022
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 24 Likes on 7 Posts
Originally Posted by megan
Out of interest what aircraft/radio set up Rats?
I will send you a PM.
Rataxes is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2023, 13:39
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 641
Received 18 Likes on 15 Posts
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
You're overlooking the safety basis for the change in terminology from "affirmative" to "AY-firm".

It's not trivia. It's to reduce the scope for confusion about what was said and, therefore, what was meant.
I was wondering if I had missed some change in FAA requirements but, no, I hadn't. Current on-line versions of "Pilot/Controller Glossary" and "Aeronautical Information Manual" both state that "affirmative" should be used.

I'm in favor of standardization but will continue to use the terminology required where I fly.
EXDAC is online now  
Old 20th Aug 2023, 06:58
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 165
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by EXDAC
I was wondering if I had missed some change in FAA requirements but, no, I hadn't. Current on-line versions of "Pilot/Controller Glossary" and "Aeronautical Information Manual" both state that "affirmative" should be used.

I'm in favor of standardization but will continue to use the terminology required where I fly.
Perhaps if the USA adopted ICAO phraseology and enforced it, it would be a better place to fly, particularly for ESL pilots.
Has the US registered a difference with ICAO for this nonstandard phraseology?

Last edited by parishiltons; 20th Aug 2023 at 07:47.
parishiltons is offline  
The following users liked this post:


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.