"...taxying Blonkity for Wonkity, request traffic and transponder code"
 

To which I would answer, "ABC, no reported IFR traffic (assuming there isn't any), squawk 1234."

On the other hand if the report was recieved as, "ABC, taxying Blonkity for Wonkity."

I would answer, "ABC, no reported IFR traffic (assuming there isn't any), squawk 1234."

Why do pilots request traffic on taxying and when changing level when we are required to issue the traffic statement (either "NRIT" or "Traffic is") when IFR aircraft taxy or change level, so will pass it anyhow?

Why do pilots bother their collective asses about codes also, surely that is our problem? If we haven't passed one (for a couple of reasons we might not) you can sqawk the generic.

Because they don't know any better. Next time, PLEASE, say something, the guy you advise will get the message, other guys listening will get the message and it will probably be bar talk that night and more people will get the message. We would all appreciate it.

Its like all these crazy readbacks that some ATC's want, particularly military, and some pilots simply do. Because they don't know any better

Ready in turn!

I prefer to call "Ready out of turn":} just to confuse the ATCO.

What about:
"Proposed descent"
"maintains" (plural for maintaining - a special R/T for multi-crew aeroplanes)
"THE xxxx"
"cruising one-five-zero-zero" (hillbilly still using his VFG from 1983)

or those who just read back everything because they're too lazy to pick up their AIP/JEPPS.

NEXT!:ugh:

there are about 10000 of these i'm sure:

what about "tracking 132, reference the NDB" during a departure report from a nontowered aerodrome. really is w*nkers trying to sound cool by adding the reference the NDB or omni - the navaid used to establish track is only required when passing a departure report to a class D tower.

pilots aren't all to blame, where the hell does "left (or right) exit approved" come from at BK? if ATC doesn't approve it, what stops you from doing it anyway, provided you exit the runway strip and stop short of any other runway strips?

my fav is "in turn contact centre", I believe it is the opposite of "at the same time contact centre" :ugh:

And then there are the.Taxiing this time..........
OH so that wasn't you taxiing 2hrs 43mins ago. Glad we sorted that out

Karrank

To answer the question. They were taught that way. And taught a bad habit from someone who was wrong. :=

We have one guy who continues this dogmatic mantra. I have asked him to stop and I have told him to stop. With no success. :ugh: :{

Please Karrank you can help us both. :D Tell these pilots to stop requesting code and traffic. Writing the words makes me cringe.

Goodluck:ok:

Not to forget the evergreen classic:

"Standby for departure":ugh: :yuk: :yuk:

What RENURPP & Jarse said.

The number of times one hears a plethora of unrequired bullsh!t read back, then the tower has to ask for the required bits that were missed! :{ :ugh:

Gawd 'elp us! :ugh: :ugh:

News you said

"To answer the question. They were taught that way. And taught a bad habit from someone who was wrong".

I think you are quite possibly correct.

A call I have heard at several QLD regional airports over the last year or so is;

"ABC taxying for the training area, ONE PLUS ONE."

I guess they are saying this so that ATC understands that there is an Instructer on board, but where does this appear in the AIP. Seems that some Flying Schools are making up their own radio calls and teaching this ability right from the beginning.

BTW what is the radio call when the Instructor is not on board,....ONE MINUS ONE!

Hugh - "Standby for departure" isn't such a bad thing. As an enroute controller, I go looking for an aircraft 10 mins after they call taxiing. If it has been a while, some pilots will give us "Centre, ABC, airborne YXXX, standby for departure" so we don't bug them for the departure.
RENURPP:
Let me guess, "Cleared Visual Approach". Are you ever going to let that one go????:ok: :E :}

Cheers all,

NFR.

NFR,
actually that is a requirement as of thursday, it SHOULD be read back, as should any clerarance for an instrument approach..

CC was in the jump seat a few days ago and we were having a laugh at ATC requiring some wierd readback, for the life of me i can't remember what it was.

The instructor obviously comes first, so the call would be "ZERO PLUS ONE"!!!

"standby for departure"
 

As an IFR instructor I've previously used this call on many occasions. Often I will be simulating a low cloud departure from an non-controlled aerodrome without the benefit of published SID's. It's highly likely in this scenario that you'll leave the CTAF area ( where separation is pilot to pilot ) before actually intercepting outbound track. In this case a " standby for departure" call alerts atc that they have me on frequency and can forward any relevant traffic since receiving my departure call.
Used to be a lot easier to decide just when to make this call when ctaf's had a boundary , now if operating single comms it's a bit of an educated guess particularly if your in something that gets to a reasonable altitude before 10 miles.

I've been asked to readback reporting requirements by Military ATC, which I was always under the impression was a no-no.

And yes, I read it back, because otherwise they wouldn't give me my clearance :rolleyes:

Another thing required with the new ammendments is to call maintaining altitude if not radar identified.

I remember when I first started instructing IFR I was hounded by the seniors at the time as to why I didn't teach things such as request traffic, code etc.

As I moved onto charter conducting multiple IFR sectors I learnt by experience that I didn't have to call ABC TOD request traffic then make yet another call telling them that I'm leaving....these days it's just ABC leaving altitude and I know I'll get traffic...plus you should have a good idea of who's around anyway with situational awareness.

The point is that the students i taught will do the request this and that and it is because I didn't know any better but with some experience I hope they'll know better.

Isn’t that a formation thing the Air Force do? 1+1 is the number of people in each aircraft in the formation. So 1+2+1 is a formation of 3 with 2POB in one of the Aircraft.

Comon' how about?

"Centre IFR Taxi!!"

'Scuse me, but aren't you supposed to provide 2 minutes notice of an intended level change OCTA? Or did that get scrubbed from AIP while I wasn't looking...