|
HH, as Led Zep has said, even the "request clearance" bit is superfluous if you have submitted a FP. ATC call your flight plan up the moment they receive taxi/departure notification. They know you have planned to enter CTA, and what level you want. They know you will need a clearance. You will get one when they can issue it, which can depend on the traffic, sector layout (i.e a "CTA" sector overlying a "Class G" sector) etc. Having said that, if you have to maintain i.e FL180 without being told "expect a delay for clearance", I'd pipe up.
|
Superfluous perhaps, but still correct! Pending, subject to clearance, etc... are not!:ok:
|
Just because there is crap R/T from the majors and from ATC, doesn't justify individuals to follw suit. Might as well throw the regs out and just chat normally if that's the case.
"Copied you copied no IFR traffic":cool: |
"readback of your readback correct" :}
|
Really who care's! how about concentrating on your own flying, instead of worrying what everyone else is doing! is it going to cause a crash? NO, so dont worry about it!
|
Getting OT now, but to answer the question, ATC's care, and professional pilots care. Theres nothing worse in a busy R/T environment than having the frequency taken over by some guy (or girl) who uses 20 words to say what could (should) be said in 10. As RS said, standard phraseology is in the books for a very good reason. Is it going to cause a crash? Who knows, but I can think of plenty of scenarios where it could.
|
Great constructive first post.:D:D:rolleyes:
|
As a student with 20 or so hours there is no way my calls are perfect 100% of the time but heres why I try and make them so;
|
Im all for this topic - can be frustrating knowing that some people dont pick up the AIP and read it, yet we all have to share the same airspace. However things can get a little picky like adding an 's' on the end of a word - who cares!
With regard to a post about the old 'double-click' to acknowledge; we have all done it im sure however if you wish to get down to the nitty gritty - whilst reading the AIP i just noticed that in the event of a speachless radar approach this actually means NEGATIVE!! (if the clicks are 1 second each anyway) For those experienced guys out there a few 'made up' words are fine - you will actually find they use them because they have a bit of SA about what the controllers need/want given certain situations. Perhaps were taking things to far - spend a bit of time reading the AIP and do your best. Also don't always do what everyone else is doing! |
Highlighting only the " *denotes pilot transmission " in the AIP phraseology section has helped with my radio calls, with emphasis on the " ( ) " required transmission and " [ ] " optional information.
In my opinion, if you're flying RPT or charter, you are being paid to fly professionally and safely. The regulators have created procedures on how to maximise your chances to achieve this "Use of standard phrases for radio telephony communication between aircraft and ground stations is essential to avoid misunderstanding the intent of messages and to reduce the time required for communication" A question for the ATC reading... AIP states that when initiating contact with approach control in a radar identified environment transmit assigned level, flight conditions, if appropriate, and receipt of ATIS (code) What do I say regarding to flight conditions? In a procedural environment, I expect to transmit the word VISUAL if a visual approach can be made. In a radar environment, I expect to transmit "IMC" or VMC" only if requested to report. Is "flight condition, if appropriate" a request to report IMC [VMC, if appropriate]? And another one... During taxi - cleared to taxi A2, upon frequency change from GND to TWR, twr often say hold short. If A2 was my taxi clearance limit which I am now approaching without any other holding points along the way, shouldnt ATC say "hold position"? I'm not being too anal; I want to know whether i'm holding or holding short. :8 NOSIGN |
mistakes everywhere
Yes Howard , I would like to add ---shoule should be should.
MC |
Look good on finals, sound god on the radio. Thats the only way others will know how good (or bad) your piloting skills are.
Really who care's! how about concentrating on your own flying, instead of worrying what everyone else is doing! is it going to cause a crash? NO, so dont worry about it! No one is saying you can't make mistakes when it comes to RT but intentionally talking crap because it 'makes sense' or is 'easier' is just rubbish. As McGrath 50 said people are expecting to hear certain information in a certain order. Anything else said usually detracts from SA rather than building the picture. |
We all have the same AIP. Hopefully, we all read it and yet we can't come close to agreeing on radio calls and the AIP does not include all radio calls. It becomes further complicated by the use of the phrase "recomended' and different peoples interpretation of that.
|
Another one that gives me the squirts is the use of 'guard'.
There's no such thing. There is, however, a frequency that we monitor and it's 121.5. |
While we're all in a sharing mood....
Departure Reports It makes me shake my head every time someone says.... BN Centre, ABC departed XYZ at time 23, tracking to intercept 145 outbound reference the VOR/NDB...... If you take the time to read Jepps ATC AU-934 you can see that the reference aid is only required if giving the departure report to a tower controller. Even worse and I not only shake my head but actually cringe when I hear reference the GPS. Ahhhhhhh:ugh: |
We need the word visual please.
So - "ABC on descent 9000 received alpha, visual." If no visual is received we assume you are not and process for the IAL. If you later become visual then "ABC, visual" is nice. Saves me rabitting on about '..descend to 2,500, cleared ILS RWY 21 approach etc" and then in response I get "...2500 cleared ILS 21 approach and we are visual"!! So now do you want the visual approach or do you want the ILS? |
out of a regional port called taxi and then out of courtesy as the controller was busy (BN CEN) called "ABC departure YXXX" the controller got back "standby there might be a delay on clearance due crossing traffic"
CLL was 8500 and the APA was set to 8500 as a result of this. Called approaching this level as had the crossing traffic on TCAS about 10 miles long gone and the controller came back "ABC you nearly busted control airspace you are now cleared on climb etc etc" We informed him that it was company policy to set CLL in the APA and he came back angrily perhaps best to cruise at ifr levels...we put his aggravation down to the end of a long shift. perhaps a case of he forgot about us....we were operating under a IFR RPT plan.... thoughts........ |
ML CEN to Zep: "CONFIRM TRACKING 415?":eek::eek::eek: I'd also much rather hear a "request clearance" upon departure rather than a rabbit rabbiting on about clearances pending...:E |
Originally Posted by "Xeptu
I threw this in because I was sick of ATC coming back and telling me to remain outside controlled airspace, when departing blackstump in the middle of the desert.
Xeptu, two-oh-six or seven-three-seven, you operate in a system matey, and to put your one tiny little operation ahead of anyone else in the system shows immaturity, lack of big picture thinking, and.. lack of discipline. ATCOs are not out there to delay you. They are probably dealing with some other undisciplined twit that has not submitted correct details/stepping on someone elses tx/making dogs breakfast radio calls on ATS frequencies! As someone else said, harden up, get YOUR sh!t in one pile and deal with the real world. |
Really who care's! how about concentrating on your own flying, instead of worrying what everyone else is doing! is it going to cause a crash? NO, so dont worry about it! I have read about numerous aircraft accidents/incedents (mainly overseas) where there was "ambiguity" in a sequence of transmissions because of the use of non-standard phraseology between ATC and/or pilots which attributed to the event. The fact of the matter is, rules is rules. If you are not going to try and follow standard phraseology, why bother with flying hemishperical or carrying fixed reserve. You know you'll get there ok right?:= While we are on the subject, another one i love is "XYZ standby....standing by XYZ" And just for the record, no im not perfect and i like everyone else will sometimes make a balls up of even the most basic radio calls. Most important thing is think before you press that button!!!!!! "ABC traffic...........3 second silence....aircraft XYZ..........3 second delay.............where am i? 10 miles..........north................correction south..........we are agh.............out of 6 thousand agh...........on descent inbound from the south..............estimate circuit..........mmmm time 42............will position to descend on the dead side and join X-wind runway blah blah............traffic ABC" :ugh::ugh: |
appropriate IFR level below the step
curved approach
I would have to agree with ATC. Our company policy is the highest appropriate IFR level below the step, just in case you are stuck there for a while. The only time this can be tricky is at night with 4500 as the step and LSALT above! |
It makes me shake my head every time someone says.... "23 DME miles, ABC" *groan* |
"Visual on top" is my pet hate. Report visual when visual.
Also people not reporting visual because they cannot see the airstrip. What a crock. Clear of cloud, in sight of ground or water, >5k vis....... As mentioned before it requires ATC to allow more space between you and following aircraft which in turn slows people down. |
"ABC is 34 miles... oh, say again 26 miles north..." :ugh:
SAY AGAIN = I am repeating what I just said for emphasis/clarity CORRECTION = I just ballsed it up and I am now giving you the right info |
Baffler15,
Lazy? Yes! No offence intended here, but as an ATC, if there is one thing that really pisses me off it is pilots who readback 'NINE' instead of 'NINER' when assigned descent. It's amazing how much it can sound like a 'FIVE'. Then I have to waste everyones time and seek confirmation before I can get on with the next thing. Most of the culprits do tend to be RPT jets. I can live with most of the other non-AIP phraseology (I'm certainly not perfect), but not this one, Cheers. |
I am a bit surprised that nobody has brought up "fully ready", "fully parked" or "fully established" yet.
|
Also people not reporting visual because they cannot see the airstrip |
Hempy.... are you sorry we asked........:8
|
Makespeed250,
Baffler15, Lazy? Yes! No offence intended here, but as an ATC, if there is one thing that really pisses me off it is pilots who readback 'NINE' instead of 'NINER' when assigned descent. It's amazing how much it can sound like a 'FIVE'. The Baffler :ok: P.S. If you say NIN-ER first though, I'll read NIN-ER back! ;) |
I'm with you neville - called visual (no airport in sight due to lotsa smoke - heading west into a setting sun but meeting all the visual approach requirements) only to be rewarded with tracking via some place that I could hardly make out. No drama I found the VTC in time - and really enjoyed the scenic diversion - found a few more fishing spots when next in town - but puk me there was a panicky scrouge around the nav bag for a few moments - wonder if any of the heavies would be asked to remain north of the hospital or track to east arm;)
anyhow, hearing a bit of this lately: XYZ we've departed... XYZ we're maintaining... (must be a multicrew thing;) - for single pahlot ops maybe we better insert I've and I'm). |
Xeptu,
I always call "Changing to CTAF". It frees up a radio for activating PAL, updating weather and if CTAF gets to busy I'm not trying to listen to two frequencies at once. And when in or approaching a CTAF I would think CTAF would be the more important freq to listen to. If ATC have something improtant to say they will still try to contact me but at least they know why if I dont respond. Makespeed250, I use to say it but I don't think I've heard anyone say Niner in years, pilots or controllers. Guess you are right tho so I'll go back to saying it.:) NF |
well once you use the term "changing to CTAF" ATC won't talk to you anymore, thats why your telling them that, its your call which way you want to go, depending on your particular operational needs at the time.
I say "niner" ITCZ you need to seek professional help, anger management classes or something like that. |
Lighten up everyone. Who gives a s*#t if a radio call is not word perfect from the AIP. There are a lot more factors to consider someone a professional operator that are far more important than radio phraseology.
|
I find it a little concerning that so many people are so flippant about correct RT. Standard RT is there for the sole reason of safety and as Gettin' There said there are numerous examples of where seemingly innocent non-standard RT has contributed an accident. Here are two examples:
1. Tenerife - One of the major contributing factors identified was the incorrect RT used by both the pilot ("We're at take-off") and the controller ("OK"). 2. Flying Tigers 747 crash 1990 - Controller instructs the pilot to "descent two four zero zero" (meaning 2400ft) however pilot interprets as "descend to four zero zero" (400ft) and subsequently impacts a hill. The controllers use of non-standard RT by omitting a simple word like 'to' caused 4 people to die. I don't get every call right (everyone has an occasional brain fart) but nor do I deliberately diverge from the standard RT. in Darwin they wanted you to be able to see the airstrip before calling visual |
Xeptu,
I kind of agree however several times after calling "Changing to CTAF" the controllers have tried to call me to advise additional IFR traffic. I dont have a problem with them doing so as they are trying to help but as I said: getting smashed:ouch: in rain doing a circling approach at the minima:ugh: 3am at night into a black hole... they can wait till I'm done Aviating and Navigating before I do the Communicating. At least I gave the heads up that I may be doing so. NF |
Originally Posted by Xeptu
ITCZ you need to seek professional help, anger management classes or something like that.
Angry ITCZ? Nah mate. Happy as Larry.:ok: My Rx for you: Flight Discipline, Tony Kern. Good Read. Get you out of that rut. Along with your AIP :E |
Originally Posted by Eclan
Originally Posted by Hempy
even the "request clearance" bit is superfluous
Admittedly I am not a whiz on the current phraseology but when I was taught some years ago, the phrase was. "Request AIRWAYS clearance." If that's still the case then perhaps a little more introspection may be required.
Originally Posted by GEN 3.4 - 55
4. Departure Reports
departing a non−towered aerodrome a.* DEPARTED (location) (time in minutes) TRACKING (three digits) CLIMBING TO (intended level) ESTIMATING (first reporting point) AT (time), or b.* DEPARTED (location) (time in minutes) TRACKING TO INTERCEPT (track) CLIMBING TO (intended level) ESTIMATING (first reporting point) AT (time). The original point of my post was because non-standard phraseology was slipping into documentation here because RPT pilots are using it and I wanted to get some idea of why. [edit] I would also like to add that from the other side of the microphone, the standard of local pilot phraseology generally improves in direct proportion with his/her aircraft's seating capacity. I guess that just goes to prove something...... |
ITCZ
Yes I waded in and identified myself as the subject of the original post, something few have the balls to do, and those who know me have grown to appreciate that quality. To put the record straight, the term was used over a period of about one week during a time of complex and constantly changing restricted airspace. At the time in my view it was appropriate and AIP provides for that. I do not seek your or anyone elses approval to excercise it. I do not condone the use of deliberate non standard radio procedures or more than the absolute minimum necessary. For the record that irks me too. I'm surprised however that it has become popular in such a short time and have no clue as to why, if that is the case. Hempy The reason why non standard RT procedures are on the rise is because the greater bulk of them are done by the First Officer. In our current labour market, they are younger, less experienced and in bigger aircraft much sooner than they were 10 years ago. |
and it came to pass...
Fellow aviators...
I came, I read and I am amazed!:confused:....... Agree on the "Pending Clearance" - they made that up and its BS. Let's just agree.:rolleyes: but it is contagious. "Ref the NDB/GPS"...ditto :rolleyes: Agree on alt pre-select FL180. Standard stuff:ok: Guy who got told off by ATC at 8,500.....more power to you brother, dont let em get you down. Very generous in your assessment.:ok: Guy who mentioned the US - to you I suggest go and fly there if you want to see and enjoy an ATC system at its very best, in spite of traffic density, ice, blizzards, hurricanes, workload and poor working conditions. A pleasure at all times. Nothing's too hard and what we do not have here - a system where all are equal regardless of aircraft type. Many of the Tracans (terminal radar centers) still have big green screens, not the "most advanced air traffic system in the world" (TAATS) so called. It's not the technology that makes a difference. |
"Pending Clearance" ????????
Hi all havn't posted much but lately I have been hearing a lot o the the following,
XXX Centre VH-ABC Departed YXXX Time XX Tracking to intercept XXX passing A XX on climb to FL XXX "PENDING CLEARANCE" Etc ...... No where can I find in Jepp's the phraseology unless I have missed can someone point out to me, otherwise stop using the Phrase. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:09. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.