Rule changes to radio procedures - Multicom & QNH
PPruNaholic!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Buckinghamshire
Age: 61
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Icarus2001, any chance I could get my hands on a copy of such as printed sheet with "standard" format VFR calls on it from anywhere? Would be helpful to read before arriving maybe...
Cheers!
Cheers!
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
toodogs - good one. But I take issue with your descent call "in two minutes"... much better to give an actual time for descent because that is what the ATS person writes down - no?
The great problem with radials/bearings is that many (VFR?) get confused and are often 180deg out.
squarebear If you are really doing such long legs using GPS then I would have to agree that you should use a small offset - 1 mile right is plenty. As said elsewhere, believe it or not the chance of a midair en-route is so close to zip it does not matter. It is in the terminal area that the risk goes up. You may think there is a risk, but it has so many zeros in front of the number to not worry about. I think you will find that wherever possible requests for A/QNH should be made to flightwatch, not on area.
The TCAS/TCAD discussion for GA is one that many cannot afford. Even tho the regionals have TCAS now, it will be a long time before you see it in GA until the cost comes down. Nevertheless there is a requirement to have your transponder ON at all times regardless of location (GAAP circuit area being the only exception I believe)
Aussie Andy I hear what you say, but please save us. The last thing we want is all the waffle that goes on in the UK. Yes it certainly would be good to have a "little book" with all the examples in it, but lets not go down the pomtalk path please.
The problem with the publishing of such a book is that CASA dont see a need, Airservices don't want to spend the money and can you tell me which committee would write it? Maybe us pruneheads could do a good job?? (don't laugh)......
And while we are on it; Why are some now saying "all stations xxxx" at the end of a broadcast as well as the beginning? You only have to say the place name twice which is quite easy without having to repeat yourself. Which university is teaching that??
The great problem with radials/bearings is that many (VFR?) get confused and are often 180deg out.
squarebear If you are really doing such long legs using GPS then I would have to agree that you should use a small offset - 1 mile right is plenty. As said elsewhere, believe it or not the chance of a midair en-route is so close to zip it does not matter. It is in the terminal area that the risk goes up. You may think there is a risk, but it has so many zeros in front of the number to not worry about. I think you will find that wherever possible requests for A/QNH should be made to flightwatch, not on area.
The TCAS/TCAD discussion for GA is one that many cannot afford. Even tho the regionals have TCAS now, it will be a long time before you see it in GA until the cost comes down. Nevertheless there is a requirement to have your transponder ON at all times regardless of location (GAAP circuit area being the only exception I believe)
Aussie Andy I hear what you say, but please save us. The last thing we want is all the waffle that goes on in the UK. Yes it certainly would be good to have a "little book" with all the examples in it, but lets not go down the pomtalk path please.
The problem with the publishing of such a book is that CASA dont see a need, Airservices don't want to spend the money and can you tell me which committee would write it? Maybe us pruneheads could do a good job?? (don't laugh)......
And while we are on it; Why are some now saying "all stations xxxx" at the end of a broadcast as well as the beginning? You only have to say the place name twice which is quite easy without having to repeat yourself. Which university is teaching that??
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BIK_116.8
As an example take a look at tracks such as HID - CS, CS - AUR HID - WP, WP - BAM and the like and you will see that they are just straight lines whether you use pre printed lines from the chart or put your own in with pencil and ruler.
I do take your point re the offset and I guess that the authorities see it too, as several years ago an AIC was distributed suggesting this same thing in regards to Oceanic Air Routes. This was due to a perceived increase in probability for mid air collision due to use of GPS for enroute navigation. (They obviously did not agree with the asymptotic zero probability concept)
Regards the TCAS, yep I ask why I don't have it but the owners wont give me one because they don't have to. Perhaps it would have made more sense to make TCAS mandatory as opposed to making GPWS mandatory (re certain sized Turbine equipment anyway).
Two Dogs and Triadic
The idea of informing Centre that top of descent is two minutes away is only to give him time so as he can obtain traffic for you. A top of descent call should be made at commencement of descent.
Two Dogs you also state
"I only give quadrants in lieu of radial/bearings. That is unless someone wants to get specific. It's too confusing, it seems otherwise"
Who is it confusing for,... ? It is certainly not for me and I believe it to be information I am entitled to get in the first instance, particulary if you are tracking on a VOR. Surely you could give a call such as.....20 mile West inbound on the 270 radial. Something like that should cover those who get confused on radials and still supply that precise information to those professional enough to understand. Don't "dumb down" because YOU believe that someone out there doesn't understand
With regards to radio calls I admit that I certainly do cringe when I hear some of the extended waffle or calls that are not anything like those published in the AIP and perhaps a little light reading every now and again is called for. But having said that I still appreciate hearing the position, descent, departure call from the VFR pilot. I don't particularly want any stealth aircraft fly through my level be he IFR or VFR.
Aussie Andy
I have seen such a book and I think that it is put out by Air Services Australia. As I use the AIP I have no first hand knowledge of it but have flicked through it. I believe that it was put out within the last couple of year to plug the gap when it was decided that the axing of the VFG with no replacement had not been such a good idea. A search of their website may help.
As an example take a look at tracks such as HID - CS, CS - AUR HID - WP, WP - BAM and the like and you will see that they are just straight lines whether you use pre printed lines from the chart or put your own in with pencil and ruler.
I do take your point re the offset and I guess that the authorities see it too, as several years ago an AIC was distributed suggesting this same thing in regards to Oceanic Air Routes. This was due to a perceived increase in probability for mid air collision due to use of GPS for enroute navigation. (They obviously did not agree with the asymptotic zero probability concept)
Regards the TCAS, yep I ask why I don't have it but the owners wont give me one because they don't have to. Perhaps it would have made more sense to make TCAS mandatory as opposed to making GPWS mandatory (re certain sized Turbine equipment anyway).
Two Dogs and Triadic
The idea of informing Centre that top of descent is two minutes away is only to give him time so as he can obtain traffic for you. A top of descent call should be made at commencement of descent.
Two Dogs you also state
"I only give quadrants in lieu of radial/bearings. That is unless someone wants to get specific. It's too confusing, it seems otherwise"
Who is it confusing for,... ? It is certainly not for me and I believe it to be information I am entitled to get in the first instance, particulary if you are tracking on a VOR. Surely you could give a call such as.....20 mile West inbound on the 270 radial. Something like that should cover those who get confused on radials and still supply that precise information to those professional enough to understand. Don't "dumb down" because YOU believe that someone out there doesn't understand
With regards to radio calls I admit that I certainly do cringe when I hear some of the extended waffle or calls that are not anything like those published in the AIP and perhaps a little light reading every now and again is called for. But having said that I still appreciate hearing the position, descent, departure call from the VFR pilot. I don't particularly want any stealth aircraft fly through my level be he IFR or VFR.
Aussie Andy
I have seen such a book and I think that it is put out by Air Services Australia. As I use the AIP I have no first hand knowledge of it but have flicked through it. I believe that it was put out within the last couple of year to plug the gap when it was decided that the axing of the VFG with no replacement had not been such a good idea. A search of their website may help.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
triadic and Square Bear,
I remember during my IR that I was giving time of top of descent calls to ATC. However, Joe Traffic pilot won't write it down. I base top of descent on distance (3:1) and work it out for time if I'm interested or ATC wants to know. ATC require a reasonable amount of time, I believe at least 1 minute prior to descent, as Square Bear wrote, in order to look at the traffic situation. Joe Traffic wants to know where I am (bearing/radial/quadrant and distance) prior to me flying through their level. It serves no purpose to do it after top of descent as you may not be able to get a word in for the first 1,000'! I understand that when vacating a level, it only needs to be called "ABC Left FLxxx when in controlled airspace. When OCTA, getting it all in 2 minutes prior to descent in one call kills two birds with one stone if it is addressed to Centre and All stations XXX. If you've already got traffic, QNH and your estimate hasn't changed, just call All stations XXX.
Square Bear,
I have had experiences of pilots being confused with radial or bearing. For example they are tracking inbound along the 185 radial and call tracking on the 005 radial. It's not until they state their quadrant that it all becomes clear. If I know that the specific radial will be handy my call is "All stations Black Stump, ABC, type, IFR, 70 dme to the SSE inbound along the 160 radial on descent, passing FLxxx, Black Stump at 35. If there is no-one I know of around Black Sump then just a quadrant does the job. If traffic appears after the call and they want to know more, I'll give it to them.
I remember during my IR that I was giving time of top of descent calls to ATC. However, Joe Traffic pilot won't write it down. I base top of descent on distance (3:1) and work it out for time if I'm interested or ATC wants to know. ATC require a reasonable amount of time, I believe at least 1 minute prior to descent, as Square Bear wrote, in order to look at the traffic situation. Joe Traffic wants to know where I am (bearing/radial/quadrant and distance) prior to me flying through their level. It serves no purpose to do it after top of descent as you may not be able to get a word in for the first 1,000'! I understand that when vacating a level, it only needs to be called "ABC Left FLxxx when in controlled airspace. When OCTA, getting it all in 2 minutes prior to descent in one call kills two birds with one stone if it is addressed to Centre and All stations XXX. If you've already got traffic, QNH and your estimate hasn't changed, just call All stations XXX.
Square Bear,
I have had experiences of pilots being confused with radial or bearing. For example they are tracking inbound along the 185 radial and call tracking on the 005 radial. It's not until they state their quadrant that it all becomes clear. If I know that the specific radial will be handy my call is "All stations Black Stump, ABC, type, IFR, 70 dme to the SSE inbound along the 160 radial on descent, passing FLxxx, Black Stump at 35. If there is no-one I know of around Black Sump then just a quadrant does the job. If traffic appears after the call and they want to know more, I'll give it to them.
Last edited by Toodogs; 10th Nov 2002 at 01:57.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
g'day.
Was overflying a location the otherday (VFR) when I heard an IFR
A/C give an inbound call to the same location. No quadrant or bearing or anything as to which direction he was inbound on. So I called this guy up and asked `which quadrant are you inbound from?' and he proceeded to say `inbound from RUSTY'..... as I very quickly reached for the ERC chart to find out where the hell `RUSTY' was, he became visual, on descent only 2-3 NM abeam my position at the same level. Then he had the tenacity to ask me if we had given a taxi call....WTF??? The VFR guys and girls amongst us arent the only ones to blame for the poor standard of radio calls given by the minority of pilots out there.
My two cents worth....
A.S
Was overflying a location the otherday (VFR) when I heard an IFR
A/C give an inbound call to the same location. No quadrant or bearing or anything as to which direction he was inbound on. So I called this guy up and asked `which quadrant are you inbound from?' and he proceeded to say `inbound from RUSTY'..... as I very quickly reached for the ERC chart to find out where the hell `RUSTY' was, he became visual, on descent only 2-3 NM abeam my position at the same level. Then he had the tenacity to ask me if we had given a taxi call....WTF??? The VFR guys and girls amongst us arent the only ones to blame for the poor standard of radio calls given by the minority of pilots out there.
My two cents worth....
A.S
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aviation_Sl#t,
You're quite right. There are some shocker calls out there, even from those flying heavy machinery for airlines who's companies I would have thought might have beaten all that crap out of there crews.
Things like:
Requesting a clearance and only stating call sign and level on climb to.
OR
Having been told: "ABC, cleared to leave control area on descent, no reported IFR traffic, contact centre on 120.8".
their callback includes the whole shebang when all they needed to say is the frequency and callsign.
You're quite right. There are some shocker calls out there, even from those flying heavy machinery for airlines who's companies I would have thought might have beaten all that crap out of there crews.
Things like:
Requesting a clearance and only stating call sign and level on climb to.
OR
Having been told: "ABC, cleared to leave control area on descent, no reported IFR traffic, contact centre on 120.8".
their callback includes the whole shebang when all they needed to say is the frequency and callsign.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is another view on the QNH change, distributed widely within the RAPACs and elswhere.
I think there are some valid points in this one and again shows that the seemingly haste with which some of these changes are being put up is suffering because they have not been checked by a cross section of users. There is still no educational material. There are at least two local pilots that have had NOTHING in the mail including the AIPSUPs on this, and I bet they are not the only ones.
Yes, maybe a stuff-up, but we pay! And one would think we had learnt those leasons by now?
Stop the presses!
I have just been reading AIP SUP H52/02 for the tenth time trying to make
sense of the wording and have just realised that if we interpret the AIP
Book Amendments as they are written, "area QNH" as we now know it will
disappear on 28/11/02.
That makes the training material incorrect in several places and various
parts of the SUP in conflict with each other.
Let me explain:
The AIP Book amendments (SUP Annex A), are what will become law when the SUP
self-cancels.
These book amendments make it quite clear that they apply to ALL (my
emphasis) operations below the Transition Altitude (not just VFR) and no
reference at all is made to the term "area QNH". The term "current Area
Forecast QNH" is used and this is a vastly different thing.
The statement in the training material that "IFR aircraft will continue to
be provided with local or area QNH by ATS" therefore appears to be
incorrect.
It also looks as though the three references to "area QNH" in paras. 2.4a&b
of the SUP are incorrect. They appear to be in conflict with the beginning
of the same paragraph which states "Pilots of all aircraft operating in
any class of airspace below the Transition Altitude must use a current Local
QNH obtained from ..........." Note that it says "all" and that means both
VFR and IFR.
This view appears to be supported also by, firstly para. 2.3 "ATC will
provide IFR aircraft with the appropriate QNH". (No mention of area QNH
there) or secondly, the changes (in Annex A) to AIP ENR 1.7 Figure 1 which
drop the term "area QNH" altogether.
So what is really going on ?
Will there be such a thing as area QNH after 0211271600 or not?
If the AIPs are to be amended in accordance with the SUP there certainly
will be no such a thing.
This confusion poses another important question namely which version of
reality was used in the safety case and therefore is the safety case valid?
I am glad it is you and not me trying to produce something educational from
this.
It appears to me that the SUP, if not the entire NAS stage 1, has all the
hallmarks of a hasty, ill-conceived stuff-up.
Please tell me I am wrong!
I have just been reading AIP SUP H52/02 for the tenth time trying to make
sense of the wording and have just realised that if we interpret the AIP
Book Amendments as they are written, "area QNH" as we now know it will
disappear on 28/11/02.
That makes the training material incorrect in several places and various
parts of the SUP in conflict with each other.
Let me explain:
The AIP Book amendments (SUP Annex A), are what will become law when the SUP
self-cancels.
These book amendments make it quite clear that they apply to ALL (my
emphasis) operations below the Transition Altitude (not just VFR) and no
reference at all is made to the term "area QNH". The term "current Area
Forecast QNH" is used and this is a vastly different thing.
The statement in the training material that "IFR aircraft will continue to
be provided with local or area QNH by ATS" therefore appears to be
incorrect.
It also looks as though the three references to "area QNH" in paras. 2.4a&b
of the SUP are incorrect. They appear to be in conflict with the beginning
of the same paragraph which states "Pilots of all aircraft operating in
any class of airspace below the Transition Altitude must use a current Local
QNH obtained from ..........." Note that it says "all" and that means both
VFR and IFR.
This view appears to be supported also by, firstly para. 2.3 "ATC will
provide IFR aircraft with the appropriate QNH". (No mention of area QNH
there) or secondly, the changes (in Annex A) to AIP ENR 1.7 Figure 1 which
drop the term "area QNH" altogether.
So what is really going on ?
Will there be such a thing as area QNH after 0211271600 or not?
If the AIPs are to be amended in accordance with the SUP there certainly
will be no such a thing.
This confusion poses another important question namely which version of
reality was used in the safety case and therefore is the safety case valid?
I am glad it is you and not me trying to produce something educational from
this.
It appears to me that the SUP, if not the entire NAS stage 1, has all the
hallmarks of a hasty, ill-conceived stuff-up.
Please tell me I am wrong!
Yes, maybe a stuff-up, but we pay! And one would think we had learnt those leasons by now?
