Radio phraseology
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Radio phraseology
I've noticed recently many Aus pilots descending into that particular 'fly by mouth' ideology enjoyed by our American cousins.
To wit, and by no means exhaustive:
"ready in turn"
"out of FL..."
"taxi with...(ATIS)"
"visual on top" ???? (what exactly does this achieve?)
"request FL... if available" (you won't get it if it isn't!)
and reading back every taxiway designator in the clearance - not required!
Please people, read the AIP again and refresh professional phraseology. Otherwise it just sounds slack and bored.
To wit, and by no means exhaustive:
"ready in turn"
"out of FL..."
"taxi with...(ATIS)"
"visual on top" ???? (what exactly does this achieve?)
"request FL... if available" (you won't get it if it isn't!)
and reading back every taxiway designator in the clearance - not required!
Please people, read the AIP again and refresh professional phraseology. Otherwise it just sounds slack and bored.
MY PET HATE
ABC IFR taxi.
adding the callsign at the beginning and end of every transmition.
Using the stations callsign on every transmition. e.g ML centre, every time.
ABC was position _X_ at time ___
reading back visual approach and every other comment that ATC says.
Painful to listen to.
I believe these people think they sound more professional by talking more, what they don't realise is that the people who are aware of the correct procedures see them as foolish, and lazy.
adding the callsign at the beginning and end of every transmition.
Using the stations callsign on every transmition. e.g ML centre, every time.
ABC was position _X_ at time ___
reading back visual approach and every other comment that ATC says.
Painful to listen to.
I believe these people think they sound more professional by talking more, what they don't realise is that the people who are aware of the correct procedures see them as foolish, and lazy.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is that the people that "teach" it don't know any better themselves. In fact many don't even get "taught", one is just expected to "pick it up" by hearing others... and of course that does not mean it is correct (almost said 'right'..!).
Unfortunately many believe the airlines and the military are the ones that do it right. Sadly nothing could be further from the truth.
Readbacks... Many don't know or don't care and just read it all back... geeeez!
My pet hates...
Reading back the cancellation of a restriction – just not required.
eg: Cancel SID/Star and Speed. Most such phrases will be accompanied by another instruction which may need a readback - no need to read both back!
Airborne at a non tower airport saying "standby for departure" what else is he going to do. If you want SAR to start, just report "Airborne".
Controllers that don't use group FNCs when you do, such as one two three in lieu of one-twenty-three.
Controllers that say "feet" after every altitude that is below transition... what else is it going to be? Book gives the choice with internationals in mind, but every time....!!
Yes, could not agree more that some book reading is required and some education across the board.
"no known traffic"
Unfortunately many believe the airlines and the military are the ones that do it right. Sadly nothing could be further from the truth.
Readbacks... Many don't know or don't care and just read it all back... geeeez!
My pet hates...
Reading back the cancellation of a restriction – just not required.
eg: Cancel SID/Star and Speed. Most such phrases will be accompanied by another instruction which may need a readback - no need to read both back!
Airborne at a non tower airport saying "standby for departure" what else is he going to do. If you want SAR to start, just report "Airborne".
Controllers that don't use group FNCs when you do, such as one two three in lieu of one-twenty-three.
Controllers that say "feet" after every altitude that is below transition... what else is it going to be? Book gives the choice with internationals in mind, but every time....!!
Yes, could not agree more that some book reading is required and some education across the board.
"no known traffic"
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sadly Thaker you're dead right. Nowhere else in the world to they train Pilots to wa nk themselves as hard as in Australia! Although when I operate in Oz, I try to retain use of AIP pharseology however as I am employed by an overseas international carrier, I am also obliged to use ICAO standard phraseology. This varies considerably from Oz radio calls in numerous aspects, which would be to time consuming to go into here. I must make the point that use of standard phrases leads to greater safety as it simplifies communication. For example: ATC( Oz) asking the crew of an Asian airline for a "ride report at '350" (the ICAO std. is TURBULENCE report, FL 350..). The Asian crew responded with "...turning right HDG 350"...I think you can get the picture. I am also aware that the chief pilot of a small RPT carrier that has invented his own RT procedures and insists that his pilots inflict them on the rest of aviation. Painful!
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: in a suitcase
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gotta agree with you "Ralph the Bong" before the aviators South of the Equator (and ATC as well) start criticising the rest of the fraternity I suggest they clean up their own act as they are certainly not up to ICAO standards:
My 2c worth.
My 2c worth.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Infinity.... and beyond.
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thwaker and Ralph
Some interesting points.
There should be no need to have 'different' phraseology. We are not that unique. I firmly believe that lack of standardisation is a safety issue.
Mea culpa. You certainly got me thinking on that one. I have skimmed through AIP and have found no reference to "ride' reports. I will admit to being guilty of using the phrase, probably because that is what everyone else has been doing. I had never considered the possibility of it being misunderstood in the way you describe. I will change.
leftfrontside
Your criticism is taken on board. Thanks to Ralph, my act will be just a tiny bit 'cleaner' from now on.
Thwaker
There seems to be a stuck caps key on this frequency.
Some interesting points.
Although when I operate in Oz, I try to retain use of AIP pharseology however as I am employed by an overseas international carrier, I am also obliged to use ICAO standard phraseology.
For example: ATC( Oz) asking the crew of an Asian airline for a "ride report at '350" (the ICAO std. is TURBULENCE report, FL 350..). The Asian crew responded with "...turning right HDG 350"...
leftfrontside
Your criticism is taken on board. Thanks to Ralph, my act will be just a tiny bit 'cleaner' from now on.
Thwaker
There seems to be a stuck caps key on this frequency.
Take on board the critisisms, but I would suggest we hit a raw nerve with some of you guys.
We are allowed an opinion and mine is that if people are too lazy to read and digest the AIP they are probably too lazy to read their SOP's and technical manuals.
Probably wear big watches as well.
Who really has their hand on it???
We are allowed an opinion and mine is that if people are too lazy to read and digest the AIP they are probably too lazy to read their SOP's and technical manuals.
Probably wear big watches as well.
Who really has their hand on it???
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: 24 27 45.66N 54 22 42.28E
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This goes out to GTR who gave spodman a hardtime cos he didn't want "approaching FL200" when asked to report present level.
If you are unaware we don't ask for pilots to report present level cos we have nothing better to do. Before we can use our Mode C information for separation we need to verify it. Saying you are approaching FL200 when on our radar you are showing FL196 means we have to reverify you Mode C hence using up more precious time.
Its pretty simple, and I don't think pedantic on our part, to expect when asked for a present level that you just read off the one you have in front of you right then and there.
In relation to the theme of the thread, my humble opinion from working in the gulf, is that we need to find a mid point between the yanks who don't read anything back and respond to everything with "Roger" or "Wilco" and many of the Asian and Russian pilots who have been chipped so many times over their poor R/T that they read back everything (usually getting most of the content incorrect). Overall the Poms,Kiwis and Aussies who fly for Emirates, Gulf Air, and increasingly Qatar Airways have the clearest, most concise and correct readbacks of any of the nationalitys.
I have to admit I have always used the term "ride report" (Spodman you trained me for a bit can I blame you, still tell guys over here about the "SBIATH" strip and the pure fear it used to put through me when placed in the board).
The only defence I have is that I don't mention the level when asking for the ride report, eg. "ABC report ride report". He's not likely to give me a ride report for FL310 when he's cruising at FL350 is he. The only diffulty it causes is when you distribute the report to other aircraft you'll need to mention what level that aircraft was at, which from experience you need to to do anyway whether the reporting aircraft mentioned his level or not as the "cloth ears" element usually kicks in when a/c hear someone elses callsign at the start of a transmission.
If you are unaware we don't ask for pilots to report present level cos we have nothing better to do. Before we can use our Mode C information for separation we need to verify it. Saying you are approaching FL200 when on our radar you are showing FL196 means we have to reverify you Mode C hence using up more precious time.
Its pretty simple, and I don't think pedantic on our part, to expect when asked for a present level that you just read off the one you have in front of you right then and there.
In relation to the theme of the thread, my humble opinion from working in the gulf, is that we need to find a mid point between the yanks who don't read anything back and respond to everything with "Roger" or "Wilco" and many of the Asian and Russian pilots who have been chipped so many times over their poor R/T that they read back everything (usually getting most of the content incorrect). Overall the Poms,Kiwis and Aussies who fly for Emirates, Gulf Air, and increasingly Qatar Airways have the clearest, most concise and correct readbacks of any of the nationalitys.
I have to admit I have always used the term "ride report" (Spodman you trained me for a bit can I blame you, still tell guys over here about the "SBIATH" strip and the pure fear it used to put through me when placed in the board).
The only defence I have is that I don't mention the level when asking for the ride report, eg. "ABC report ride report". He's not likely to give me a ride report for FL310 when he's cruising at FL350 is he. The only diffulty it causes is when you distribute the report to other aircraft you'll need to mention what level that aircraft was at, which from experience you need to to do anyway whether the reporting aircraft mentioned his level or not as the "cloth ears" element usually kicks in when a/c hear someone elses callsign at the start of a transmission.
Hey Airnoservices,
You in Bahrain?
If you are, could you identify the yank controller who won't stop arguing/talking/chatting/asking dumb questions on the wireless there.
Just last week heard him on West frequency having a ten minute stoush with some bloke who was quering a level change and speed restriction by Riyadh, the next FIR he was heading into.
Pity if anyone wanted to make a distress call.
Have to say that all the Ozmate and Kiwi controllers over here, that l have heard, are first rate.
halas
You in Bahrain?
If you are, could you identify the yank controller who won't stop arguing/talking/chatting/asking dumb questions on the wireless there.
Just last week heard him on West frequency having a ten minute stoush with some bloke who was quering a level change and speed restriction by Riyadh, the next FIR he was heading into.
Pity if anyone wanted to make a distress call.
Have to say that all the Ozmate and Kiwi controllers over here, that l have heard, are first rate.
halas
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Renurp and some of you others have alot to learn I think. The AIP/JEPPs are as ambiguous as a document could be in regard to radio phraseology. There are plenty of examples of where readbacks are required but the book says not. E.g a STAR should be read back in it's entirety should it not? Well not according to page Au-922 of the jepps, because the phrase is not in BOLD! As are many of the other required readbacks.
More to the point, who really cares except some of you radio police? If in doubt (which I am because of all the ambiguity) read it all back. What harm are you doing? and at the least both you and the controller know exactly what you heard and comprehended.When they write a CLEAR CONCISE phraseology section, I will adhere to it religiously, until then forget it!
In europe where they employ a bit of LATERAL THINKING, everything is read back. You have to be absolutely sure in such a busy environment.
The already mentioned ANAL RETENTIVE Australian attitude is apalling to say the least. My God you actually give a damn about what some one else is saying. I find that inherrently sad indeed. Procedural correctness is good and should as much as possible be adherred to. Those who think a little laterally understand the fluid nature of the industry and adapt accordingly. Time to think outside the box!
More to the point, who really cares except some of you radio police? If in doubt (which I am because of all the ambiguity) read it all back. What harm are you doing? and at the least both you and the controller know exactly what you heard and comprehended.When they write a CLEAR CONCISE phraseology section, I will adhere to it religiously, until then forget it!
In europe where they employ a bit of LATERAL THINKING, everything is read back. You have to be absolutely sure in such a busy environment.
The already mentioned ANAL RETENTIVE Australian attitude is apalling to say the least. My God you actually give a damn about what some one else is saying. I find that inherrently sad indeed. Procedural correctness is good and should as much as possible be adherred to. Those who think a little laterally understand the fluid nature of the industry and adapt accordingly. Time to think outside the box!
