And my all-time favourites:
"Traffic Tamworth, QLink 2008 the Dash, 30 DME on the 200 radial...."
and
"Traffic Dubbo, ABC departed 01, tracking 180, climbing to flight levels.
Bunch of Breitling wearing w@ankers....:yuk:

They only say that because they've forgotten what flight level they're climbing to...

Maybe you can just set 1013 all the time and say you're climbing to "flight level zero-three-fife" ... maybe throw in a bit of a Darth Vader style oxy mask noise? You know you want to!:)

A certain 717 RPT operator has some of the worse offenders.

"Turns", "enters", "back tracks" - "walks the dog":E
Trouble is a lot of impressionable GA boys and girls hear this garbage and think to themselves that sounds cool, I'll start doing it too. So the rot just goes on.

The best one we hear from pundits in the yarra valley is..

ABC ready rwy 18.............. :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Pilot standards?
 

Is this thread about pilot standards or R/T?

Of course pilot standards are decreasing. Maybe if people were taught how to fly by real instructors with real experience, and instructors who weren't half paralysed by fear themselves (due lack of experience), other poorly trained (and thus scared pilots themselves) wouldn't be quite so bothered by minor issues like R/T?

And maybe if pseudo "professionals" weren't so damnably up themselves about trivial issues then the poor amateurs might be allowed to show a bit more confidence when actually flying, thus allowing them the capacity to speak up when needed instead of worrying about who is listening and who will judge them badly for any minor irrelevant infringement of precious procedure.

I don't know about you but in my humble opinion correct use of R/T procedure is clearly an indication, in part, of pilot standards.

DBTW,

I'm with you.

Australia has "radio procedures", the rest of the world communicates.

It is instructive to see how short and sweet is the ICAO list of standard phrases, for all the other things you might want to say, in the act of communication, the rest of the world expects you to use your brains --- not rote repetition of stock phrases.

It always amuses me to hear some instructor say to the student (why are they doing it in the hearing of others?) "Your radio work needs improvement" ---- work??? Since when is simple communications work??

If a pilot is taught proper R/T communication, instead of a lot of pedantic phrases, where none are needed (and a very few are), maybe we would see more effective communication, and less mindless "procedures".

A good place to start is with the NZ regs. and advisory material, the UK CAAP for R/T and if your are really keen, the relevant bit of ICAO Annex 10, Vol.2. You will find an amazing similarity between those three, and a very distinct difference to Australian practice.

The nasty practice of self confessed xsperts ( X= an unknown quantity, spert is a drip under pressure) "correcting" other pilots over the radio is unknown outside Australia. I always have a chuckle when the xspert is (as is often the case) is wrong.

Tootle pip!!

This is a general information (read as wide area, not specific location) broadcast. The format for a CTAF remains as;

ENR 21.1.12
a. {Location} Traffic
b. {Aircraft Type}
c. {Callsign}
d. {Position/intentions}
e. {Location}

Please note, everyone, you should be making every call on CTAF utilising type, followed by call sign.

Point 1
This is reversed to the CTA/CTR initial contact. To a controller, it is more important to know who they are talking to.
In a CTAF, the more important factor is what type of aircraft are you looking for?
Point 2
Every call in a CTAF should have type and call sign prefixed (Chieftain, Romeo Kilo Delta). If you make a taxi call, then start circuits (for example) using call sign only, is the aircraft arriving 10 mins later going to hear RKD make a circuit call, assuming the Cessna they can see turning base is RKD? Are they then going to delay their join until they see the other aircraft they should have known to be looking for?
Point 3 (unrelated)
Assume when you make a departing broadcast on a CTAF that an incoming pilot may not be from the area and may not know where "Mulligan's Grandmother's Cat's Graveyard" is. Give a compass quadrant to help their situational awareness.:ok:

AIP GEN 3.4 5.14.8
3. Departure Call
DepartED (Only thing past tense, otherwise....)
TrackING
PassING
ClimbING to.......

Pattern here?

My favourite...
"With You......"
That DEFINITELY is not in AIP and why the flock would you want to sound like a Seppo intentionally????:mad::ugh::rolleyes:

Leadsled,
Must admit, I've never heard anyone correcting another's R/T over the radio. More likely just cringing whilst someone waffles on incessently rather than use standard phraseology, even if not absolutely 100% as per AIP, that would result in a concise and clear message.

I believe that phrase is common in the UK?

Thanks for your opinion YPJT. In my experience, correct use of R/T procedure tells nothing about the pilot other than his ability to reproduce words in a parrot like fashion. There is much evidence, both real and anecdotal (especially in this fine forum), that not everybody who talks the talk can actually walk the walk.

How agist you are, Cynical Pilot. I didn't mention youth at all. My point is more to do with the way pilots are now instructed by people who clearly carry much anxiety into the air. Read the threads around this site and think like a cynical pilot. You can see people feel challenged enough on a daily basis to say all kinds of things about all kinds of topics which clearly indicate they do not enjoy their flying at all. In a training environment, the level of discontent would be interpreted as people trying to convince themselves not to fly because it is too dangerous or threatening, so what are these people doing out there in the airspace!

A fear of flying is a completely rational response to quite an unnatural domain.

Somewhere in the last several decades, the training method seems to have shifted from explanation, demonstration, monitoring and coaching, to one where we want everyone to have anxiety problems. IE: "if you don't limit yourself to exactly what I tell you, you will die."

The topic of this thread is an indication of my point. Clear concise R/T is the aim so that people can build situational awareness. This has been interpreted into "if you don't say exactly what I want you to say, you are unprofessional and dangerous." Well that's simply not a correct interpretation. It speaks more about the anxiety level of the receiver of flawed information! They obviously feel their life is threatened by another whose only anxiety might be about keying the mic!

I defy any professional pilot anywhere in the world to claim that they have never keyed the mic only to have compete bollox burst forth over the airwaves. You can choose to be embarrassed by that or not. The true measure of professionalism is to carry on and get the job done. Work to the best of your ability with the tools you have to hand to achieve the mission. Part of the burden a true professional must carry in Australia is that you are expected to know a myriad of rules and procedures that do not accurately reflect how well you sit in the cockpit. Another burden is that these rules allow other people to share the airspace, and their priority may not be the same as yours. That latter burden doesn't make their position any less justified than yours.

Absolutely, 100% correct!
Bloody oath I would.

Were not speaking age by itself here, it's age/experience and motivation.

Here's a more appropriate comparison.

Your child learns to ride a bike. Is just proficient enough to make it around the block without falling off.
Next week your kid opens a bike riding school to teach every one else.

You could easily replace bike with Car, horse or any other skill.

Teaching is not "owned" by "older" people, however having some real life experience is a huge advantage.
A young person maybe a fantastic communicator, howeverif they haven't yet experience what they want to communicate it can be all hypothetical non sense.

Experience and the ability to communicate are both essential.

It's not limited to instructors, it continues into airlines. The wrong people are training people for the wrong reasons in many cases.
The best training pilots should be training the new starts. Your initial training is the building block for the rest of your life, that's from dayone of your Initial training to your first jet job.
By the time you are ready to move from the right seat to the left you really should just need some simple coaching, yet companies, from flying schools to airlines use their longer term, not necessarily best, trainers to train advanced training.

Next week your kid is running the class and teac

'DBTW' well said:D
R/T proc's are just part of airmanship. Our rule books are an introductory offer, a 'guide' so to speak, get out there in the real world & use the one thing that lacks a LOT...common sense!


Wmk2

Just to clarify, is the issue people have with "turns" is it should be turning?

If you want to give your call while in the turn onto base why wouldn't you say turning base rwy 36 etc. This gives the other traffic somewhere to look as everyone should be turning in just about the same place.

It would have been in about 2005 that CASA recommended the turning calls.

Got quite hectic when everyone up "norf" tried it for a couple of weeks and gave up. The amount of clutter clogging area was insane.

I think it persisted for a couple of years, but you rarely hear it now.

I must admit the enters, backtracks, lines up, rolls, departs, joins, turns, maintains drives me nuts.

Whatever happened to our friend 'ing'?

It's a like a cancer too. One person in an area starts doing it and the habit catches on until it becomes "the way we do it". Soon all the local Pilots in an area are doing it.

Clinton,

You know, as well as I do, that I know that, and so does any properly educated pilot.

The core of the Australian problem is that we have to take it to extremes ---- just compare the number and extent of the ICAO recommended phrases and the Australian AIP, the difference is stark.
The US notifies just three minor variation to ICAO SARPs in this area, all to do with descent clearances, Australia list page after page after page.

Unless, of course, many of you think Australia is the only soldier in the battalion marching in step.

And at the most basic level, I continually hear discussions about: "Do you put the callsign first or last", or words to that meaning.

As an instructor, that is a problem I can sort in 15 minutes max --- without reference to any list of "radio procedures" ---- but the fact that the question is even asked ( and I have never heard it asked outside Australia) reveals the most basic lack of understanding.

And all to often reveals a pilot whose basic (lack of) training was done in Australia. All to often position reports given by Australian pilots are painful to the ear ---- and take up far too much air time.

What you should be doing, and it is all so easy to comprehend, if you have access to UK CAA CAP 413, Radiotelephony Manual, or ICAO Annex 10, Vol.2, also in ICAO PANS/RAC Doc. 4444, or the NZ AIP and related advisory material, is read and comprehend. Both the UK and NZ publication properly reflect the ICAO basic procedures, which have not changes in essence (because they don't need to) since we were communicating via a morse key, not a microphone --- when you had to really keep it brief.

The result, all to often, is noise parrot fashion, that has little to do with effective communications ---- I hear it all to often.

I am reminded of the definition of education: "A process whereby the information in the notes of the teacher passes to the notes of the student, without passing through the minds of either".

The conduct of "radio procedures" here in Australia, as opposed to effective communications, is all to often accompanies by the same deficit of mental consideration as immediately above.

As I have written in a number of different forums, we are wedded to the "pingya" system of instruction in the use of radio,( and much else) such as the "recommendation" of a rather too well known instructor in the Sydney area: "Read everything back so they (whoever they are) can't pingya".

In other word, driven by "compliance", not common sense (aka airmanship) communications.

Tootle pip!!

PS 1: DPTW, spot on again.

PS 2: I have just been reminded of the proposal from within CASA ( it got as far as a draft DP) to make all "non-compliance" with "radio procedures" strict liability offenses ---- only in Australia would such a lunatic proposal even be considered, let alone committed to paper.

I always have a smile when I hear "this time" and expect someone with a sarcastic sense of humour to pipe up and ask "so what did you do last time" :E

Or next time... :confused:

Geez Leady,
tell me its not true!! strict liability for getting a word wrong!!
Oh good grief, as if we are not enough of a laughing stock around the world
as it is!! thanks to Clint (no relation to Eastwood, dirty he may be, but Harry he aint) and his bottom feeding legal mates and the other ClusterF...Ks in CASA (All the rest of the world is wrong and WE are right brigade), so are they now going to "BUST" foreign pilots flying into OZ for not conforming???
Inspector Plod "it is alleged that on or about the 20th Sept you used an unaproved word when transmitting to Brisbane Centre..a crime of strict liability"....Captain Mohamed.."So stick it up your nose you son of a Camel Fa...t"...Inspector Plod.."Aha!!!I thought so...so you admit your guilt of contravention of Australia's Totally unique, Totally out of touch, Totally Bu...sh..T regulations"...Captain mohamed "Stick it up your nose.....etc"
Oh dear, where did common sense go??
When I was taught to fly we used to look to the tower for light signals..short concise and to the point instructions..today that particular aerodrome would be at a minimum Class D. worked fine..now we have polliwaffle

The (Y) ing and the (Y) angst).
 

Now, I learn' t me situational awareness at the tit, (don't stick your finger in the dogs arse), Grandpa's stable, (don't stand behind Bessie, she kicks); at school (don't piss off the Deputy Head, he will whack you) ; as a youth in the mountains (watch the overhang, the rocks are loose) as a young man on big boats (watch the water and hang onto the boat). Etc. etc.

I'd learned me good manners by the grand old age of seven, give up a seat, open a door; etc.

Now, 'learning me trade' I found that good manners and situational awareness (taught as a child) served me well, further developed by first class instructors provided a peaceful attitude towards all men and machines in the airspace surrounding me.

I've long lost count of the amount of 'good drivers' who have moved aside to allow a faster RPT to 'go first'; I probably owe a few beers on that one.

I've long lost count of the amount of times I have 'eased' the arrival of a 'neophyte' getting beaten up by the weather, navigational 'uncertainties' or plain old fear; I'm probably owed a few beers on this one.

In all, provided all parties are 'aware', attempt to communicate and show a modicum of understanding of the 'other' blokes situation, then for my money; the 'pedantic' legally constipated “professionals” can go and join the lunatics in the asylum.

Must own up to a big grin (or groan) when I hear “Jabiru 123 ROLLING runway whatever. Cracks me up – Rolling FCS, gim'me a break. :D

Good “Pro's” just get the job done and find a good seat at the bar.

Selah.

And just to 'back you up'....

One of the 'last' 'in flight' emerg. calls we had in Perth FSC, prior to our closing, was a 'pilot' who had departed a station in the NW, his GPS 'fell over', And....

- He wasn't sure about his departure time - like - 'well, how long have you been in the air'..?? Er, approximately then..??

- He wasn't sure about how much fuel he had on board - like - what is, or might, be your endurance..??

- He was in a valley and his vis. was reduced due to smoke...

- He was heading 'sort of SW'... in the late afternoon in the Pilbara....

- And.... he had NO charts....

So, after getting him to climb to an alt. where he could increase his 'circle of vision' and see above the valley rims, and to alter his heading to (eventually) the NW direction so that EVENTUALLY he would (Hopefully) intersect the Railway line into Paraburdoo, then turn S and FOLLOW the said line to its terminal at the mine site,....and the airport should be just over there......
I have to say, it was like pulling teeth - like - just to get the info.

I can understand the guy being 'embarrassed' about his having to make the call...BUT AT LEAST he had the fortitide to make it!

We got him located and in proximity to the airport, 'as the sun was slowly sinking in the west', and the 'Pilbara haze' was developing.

I did ask him to ring the FSC, but he didn't want to just then.
( I simply wanted to ask him about his flight 'preparation'......we were not there to admonish him)
He did the next morning, so I was informed.
And was 'grateful'.....Good result in the end......

But ...:hmm::(:eek: