Radio calls in oz these days are generally a disgrace.

"Taxis this time", WRONG ,"Taxying"

"on climb", WRONG, "climbing to"

"on descent", WRONG, "descending to"

ETC ETC.

Departure calls from class D towers and MBZ's are some of the biggest jokes going around at the moment as well. All verbal diarrhoea. Have some modicum of professionalism and read your books a little more often.

I am LEAVING my girlfriends house now, (present tense).
Woops, I LEFT the condom on the pillow, (past tense).

It just aint that hard, (in the bedroom or in the air).

Scurvy,

1. I'll second Claret's comment. We use "Approaching" to tell you "we need the next level you can give us" to stop the friggin autopilot go into capture mode with all the attendant dramas.

2. I've never used "approaching" as a response to "report present level"

3. Please enlighten the masses about how a 100ft (in this case lower) more accurate level call would help any aircrft trying to conduct an instrument approach at say Alice: there is obviously an aircraft in front on the same/similar instrument approach or in the same area and the follower is never going to get visual if I, the one in front, hasn't got visual, being 1000ft lower! If the cloud base is XXXX, the only way an aircraft is going to get Visual is to be at XXXX. It won't matter if they get cleared to XXXX+300 or XXXX+400.

4. "Checking" separation with a lighty? Interesting concept! Wasn't it already assured by the clearance we were operating to?

5. I've never had the pleasure of being Maestro'd. Sounds like great fun...not.

Boofhead,
Yes it does, except that ATC must apparently allow a 400ft (??) buffer on the Transponder readout before assigning the level below or above us. If we give it on the R/T, they can assign it immediately. Sometimes I think they are just reading the paper and want us to remind them when we "left" a level. But they don't realise that I'm onto my first cup of coffee by then and by the time I put it down, put the Inside Sport down and hop on the radio, I'm a couple of thousand feet past when they wanted me to call anyway!

coitus interuptus,

Maybe you should talk to someone about this little problem? I'm sure one of these whiz bang nasal sprays can help you out.

TL

Capn Bloggs,

Let me enlighten you to the joys of using visual separation. An example if I may:

Cloud base 5400ft. Inbound on decent LEFT 4300ft (doesn't matter whether it's an instrument approach or not) and you are approaching over head for a sector entry for any approach. I assign you 5300ft, you get visual, I get you in sight and can give further decent and clearance for the approach using visual separation with the inbound. If I'd assigned 5500ft or worse 6000ft you are still in the muck and you have to do a holding pattern before I can give further decent. Additionally by getting you visual I can facilitate climb (using visual separation again) with someone departing who is maintaining under you in the sector entry.

Finally - if you are held up on decent for an approach by a preceding doing the same approach then there's a good chance he's on decent or maintaining a MSA or track LSALT etc which don't seem to come in even 500ft levels. I will always give you as much decent as possible - ie 1000ft above this level!!!!!!

Hope this helps.

RI

RI/Scurvy,

Point taken. :ok:

The only situation I can possibly see where assigning odd levels would be practical is in TMA or airspace owning towers. It is simply not practical enroute due to the interaction with TAAATS drop down menus.

Yarrayarra is spot on the money... the only time I want your exact level is when verifying it. At all other times all I want to know is what level (ie standard levels) you are out of so I can determine what is usable for me.

Tranition layer... good call.

Would it be acceptable for an aircraft which is on descent from f350 to f210 and passing f231 to say leaving f230? The righteous will say, "no way it doesn't happen!". Sure it doesn't!

Unfortunately over the years documents like AIP and even MATS get changed around, bastardized, returned to what it was before and throughout these changes, words get altered and meanings become wishy washy. The whole lot needs a bloody overhaul.

As for the use of the word "to" in level assignments, I will not use it. Every check I get comments about my phraseolgy and my refusal to use the word. It's just one less hole in the cheese.

As for the question of mode c in TAAATS, the allowable error is 200ft... therefore in the cruise at say A080, your mode c could be reading anywhere between A078 and A082 and you will not get grilled. Without going into how all the errors are calculated, without a pilot report on level left, we cannot assume you have left a level on mode c until you are out by 400ft.

Cheers,

R-S.

R.S good call!
common sense with knowledge and experience

I agree that the poor Flying Tiger crew should not have crashed under these circumstances, but they did. But is Ronnie correct that the Flying Tiger crew deserved to die because they misinterpreted the ATC instruction?

That train of thought would sure save us a lot of time arguing semantics to try to achieve standardisation of International radio communication.

But I think we are wasting our time trying to invent new "Australian unique" phraseology to confound the visiting International operators and also to make our Oz pilots look unprofessional when operating in other countries. This problem should only be tackled at an International level (ICAO).

Ahh some sense at last..:ok:

Storm in a teacup ....:{

esreverlluf ... It's no sense harping on about your AIP. As a foreigner I don't even know the colour of the cover of your AIP let alone what's written in it. But I sure know what the Jepp says. And that's what I'm going parrot out of the transmitter. Thank goodness for ADS. :cool:

Jock - It's not the international operators/itinerants that upset me - it's the locals that should know better. Hell - I'm sure I bugger things up a little bit R/T wise when outside Oz.

This is the D & G forum after all . . .

I'm glad you know your position in life considering it appears from from UN ZUD. :p

I dont make the rules...I just follow them.....READ YOUR AIM....how hard can it be????:{

Bloggsie

Thanks, there are a whole host of reasons why the accurate level ‘left’ in the departure report (tower terminal area) or on descent (although those will generally be asked for if needed) can save you and me unnecessary work/talking and thus headaches i.e.
- VFR inbound expected (seen on TSAD or perhaps is a local who we know will return around a certain time or has already called at a VFR reporting point) around the time you are ‘wheels off’…… you report out of 2600 in the departure report and the VFR is at 2500, then I can clear him/her in without bothering you with traffic info that just ain’t gunna matter to you nor have to ask you for another level report unnecessarily whilst you are concentrating on cleaning up and hitting the straps.
- IFR inbound on a DME arrival at 18DME with a clearance limit of say 7DME, you are ready to roll……now I may make a ‘pluck’ and estimate where you might be by the time they need to have the limit removed, in which case I will ask for a specific level report, most of the time in this circumstance the level left by a Jet in the departure report will be high enough to enable a cancelling of the clearance limit without further interrupting you, me or the conflicting traffic.
- In an arriving sequence (irrespective of approach type) the more accurate the level reports the greater the descent offered to the following aircraft this can be critical if there are more than two in a sequence with an intermediate cloudbase.
As RI explained and the brief examples above…….the list goes on…….
That said, it is apparently not so critical for the light starved ‘Battery Roosters and Hens’ in the BN and ML coops…..

Capt ClaretNo argument with that…….the point I was making was simply that at 1900ft climbing to 8000ft, calling ‘approaching’ is farkall use to us for clearing useable levels for others and it serves no useful purpose to you for expediting climb assignment particularly if we will have to go back and ask the ‘level left’ (two transmissions, wasted time, potential delays for others).

All I ask is that you all just add an accurate ‘level left’ when making the departure report. Make an early departure call by all means!

Regarding climb assignments and the issue of ‘capture at low levels’…… I personally (and most others who work in regional towers) will always attempt to get a higher level from the sector either when you are lining up or just airborne to avoid that very thing………even if the centre for whatever reason cannot issue higher through the TWR, ‘traffic permitting’ I will flick you to them early for climb issuance to avoid same.

Where able, I facilitate options to avoid vertical stops because I am aware off and understand the problem from your seat………..isn’t this conversation about mutual enlightenment and thus assistance?!?!


plazSure, if you like the sound of your own voice and have the time to make multiple transmissions when one would suffice!........comon’ dude…… oh I know, ATC is one big happy family……….as long as you reside in one of the big coop’s....:suspect: ...:ooh: .....:E

Scurvy.

Thanks for that.

In the interests of greater "mutual enlightenment and thus assistance", TSAD is an acronym for?

Tower Situational Awareness Display …….effectively a radar that is not certified as such as the data throughput is not guaranteed to arrive on the screen within the required time frame to be used as radar.

We can use it for very little, it is extremely useful for monitoring separation and sequencing already set up procedurally and for ensuring some of our less experienced GA cousins are where they say they are.

In reality, the data is proving very reliable, it could before long be used more effectively, although ‘Radar ratings’ and the commensurate implications for the shareholder (guess who) would be financially unpalatable me thinks........
:mad: ..........:{ ............:hmm:

Scurvey,

Thanks. Are the TSADs at all non radar towers or just some of them? If not all, which ones?

One wonders, is big brother watching? :8

ps when I say big brother, I'm not suggesting you or ATC, more a tung in cheek go at tha potential for gummint to look, and introduce infraction revenue raising techniques.

A bit of a test!

If I was flying a jet and was asked my present altitude, as ATC wanted to clear another aircraft to climb to my last vacated level. The following aircraft is also a jet how ever has a better rate of climb. I called and said at what altitude am I at???
What level can ATC clear the following aircraft to, assuming 1000 ft seperation.


If I was flying a jet and was asked my present altitude, as ATC wanted to clear another aircraft to climb to my last vacated level. The following aircraft is also a jet how ever has a better rate of climb. I called and said at what altitude am I at???
What level can ATC clear the following aircraft to, assuming 1000 ft seperation

RENURPP
 

Another variation on the theme....

ICAO doc4444 says that a level can be assigned to an aircraft when the conflicting aircraft has left that level.

example CPA002 "Left F250", we say "GFA 751 climb FL 250", couple of caveats there somewhere about similar performance aircraft etc. Not what we used to do in OZ I can tell you:ooh: then (and possibly now) we had to have a minimum of 1000 feet.

....you farken losers.....:confused: