Whatever you say, say it S-L-O-W-L-Y

I've been know to transmit to some new pip-squeak CPL who thinks that the only way to be a 'professional' pilot is to rattle out their R/T as fast as they can, becoming totally incomprehensible as a result, and requiring a 'say again' - which wastes everybody's time - " If you fly as fast as you talk, I'm getting out of here"

So when ATC say "ABC disregard". Should you read back "disregard, ABC" or is it "disregarded, ABC" or even "disregardeded, ABC"? "disregard" is an instruction, so it must be read back, Not many do this though, why not?

"disregard" is present tense, but you are reading back your compliance to the instruction, so it then becomes past tense, so you should probably say "disregarded". But if you are reading back a compliance of disregarded, then you should say "disregardeded". Is that right?

Of course if you are a little slow and hadn't totally disregarded the instruction before you read it back, then surely it would be "disregarding, ABC"...:E

One more. When ATC say "in with a ground station" should you read that back so that ATC know that you know that they were in with a ground station and just didn't hear you because they were watching the cricket?

Out of all threads on proon I find the phraseology one's the most helpful and informative. Especially from all you international pilots telling us how good it is overseas, keep up the good work :ok:

You crack me up :D There were a lot of 'in with a ground station' when Clarkey scored his 300, I tell ya that for nuthin' ;)

And I generally find that if you read back everything i.e. an exact mirror of what ATC has just said saves more time overall than learning phraseologies from AIP :ok:

Yawn.

Really guys????

Whilst I'm all for doing and saying all the right things as PROFESSIONALS some of you really need to get a grip.

For goodness sake, BIG PICTURE STUFF.

Doesn't matter if you end up in a smoking hole just as long as you got the RT 100% correct!!!

Funny.

At the end of the day it's "communication" it doesn't really matter how you say it as long as it is UNDERSTOOD.

Nooooo, please Nits, I'd prefer if the gems keep comin'

And by the way, I'm lobbying ICAO, CASA, FAA, ASA etc to have:

'Request traffic & Squwark' included in taxy calls. (because most ATC's are dip****s and can't remember to give it to you)

You're and your. Is it so hard to distinguish the two? For people arguing over correct phraseology, correct grammar shouldn't be so difficult.

Leaving........this thread.

Who cares? So what if you come onto radar squawking 3000? :E

Nit, my RAAF instructor eons ago said that if your R/T is slack, the rest of your flying is probably slack too. Do (say) it by doing (saying) it right. :ok:

Blogggggs :ugh: I'd prefer if you were squawking 1200 when you depart so I can give you traffic on yourself..............gees mate?

I'm with the topic starter that we should make phone conversation the norm for radio speak.

"Yo atc mate how 'r you going? Can I get you some IFR stuff?"

And no we don't have radar coverage everywhere in Australia.

Was hoping this would be a funny thing you have heard of the radio thread.

Writing an email now to get it brought back in crash comic!:D

Here's one for an ATC type person...

AIP GEN 3.4 4.14.3
(ATC callsigns)
The name of the location or the service may be omitted provided that satisfactory communication has been established.

I would take this to mean that once you have made an initial contact,
(eg Sunshine Coast Tower, ABC, Maintaining 2 thousand 5 hundred
ABC, Sunshine Coast Tower, descend to 1 thousand 5 hundred
Descend to 1 thousand 5 hundred, ABC)
{No, it's not a complete example, I know...},

Every subsequent contact should begin with either Sunshine Coast or Tower?
(eg Tower, ABC maintaining 1 thousand 5 hundred
ABC, Tower.)

Bloggsy......yes I do agree BUT let's keep it real! Some here are being a tad pedantic.

It matters because 1) it's the correct way and 2) the reason they stipulate "leaving" not "left" is because of an incident where an incorrect read back using "left" not "leaving" caused a breakdown in separation. It was then mandated as "leaving".

"left" is too easily confused with a direction of turn as in "left 320" meaning a heading change rather than an altitude vacated.

So am I right in saying that even when you're radar identified in Ausi, upon every single frequency change you have to give either
a) the altitude you're maintaining
b) the altitude you're descending to
or
c) the altitude you're climbing to

Yes. Except tower, ground and clearance :-)

Folks,
As I have posted every time this thread, in various guises, pops up --- you could all do well to have a look at what ICAO requires, and traditional ICAO (as per, for example, NZ AIP or UK CAA R/T Handbook) ) R/T procedures.

If Australian student pilots were taught rudiments of standard R/T procedure, and the why and how they came to be what they are (except in Australia) we wouldn't need this thread again. Sadly, rote learning (from the grossly excessive "standard phrases in the AIP), rather than the principles of good R/T communication, is a core problem.

Trouble is, instructors who were taught by their instructors, who don't know either, and the anal Australian approach to compliance, at the cost of communication ---- and the problem has become self perpetuating.

As I have said so often, Australia has "radio procedures", the rest of the world communicates.

If you knew, inwardly digested, understood and followed ICAO SARPs on this subject (Annex X, Vol. 2, or PANS/RAC 4444) all the silly questions, including where some of you get tense about tense, and most of the other questions/complaints would just go away.

But, sadly, that's not the "Australian way".

Tootle pip!!

PS: And, please, only read back what is required.

For those that love to say 'reference the omni/NDB' when departing non-towered aerodromes:

1. Pull out Jepps or AIPs
2. If Jepps, go to section ATC, Communications para 8.8 (page AU-936). If AIPs, go to GEN 3.4 para 5.14.8 (page GEN 3.4-56).
3. Have a read of 'Departure Report - Procedural when notifying departure report to a control tower'.
4. Then read the next item 'Departure Report - non-towered aerodrome'.
5. Compare and contrast.
6. Stop saying 'reference the omni' when departing a non-towered aerodrome.

You Qlink pilots started it, now every man and his dog is using it!

For those jumping on the 'get over poor R/T' bandwagon - it's our job to get the correct information to ATC efficiently. It's really not that hard.

Thanks Andobar. Spot on...! That's exactly correct...

What I like is pilots giving their inbound radial to a non-controlled aerodrome when there is no aid or just an NDB!

If there is no VOR there is no radial. Simple! :D

Ohhh and to those pressurised aircraft drivers, when departing a non-controlled aerodrome, SAY the flight level you are on climb to! Not just FLIGHT LEVELS!

Remember there are and very well could be PRESSURISED VFR AIRCRAFT flying below FL180 or more so below FL245 in some sections of Australian airspace! :eek:

Radio Phraseology as described in the AIP or Jepp is not definitive, easily locatable (there is subtext in differing locations of said references), nor is it consistent, the profiles are arguable "clumsy" and subject to change without obvious notification. Go on tell me it isn't!

When you blame the hordes for not getting it right, you are probably not allocating responsibility in the correct area.

Attention Messrs Hold Short et al, it might help you to produce (and publish) a definitive reference of all the necessary radio calls - if you find this too difficult to compile, then go back and read some of the posts of those who have significant and wide ranging experience and see why they say what they say about this subject.

Luckily for all, such a document exists Butcher. It's the AIP. I agree it isn't the easiest text to read but the information is there for those who can be bothered to seek it.

Experience is not an excuse for sloppy RT. If anything, lack of experience is.

It's not hard to be professional. AIP GEN 3.4 is an easy starting point.

While even I don't get my calls word for word perfect, they are at least as close as possible to the AIP.

How many people read back their squawk codes on taxi at places like Brisbane? I know the guys down at RFDS are now doing it. Why? Because it says so in AIP.

morno

correct Morno! Even the number of POB is required for non RPT operators too if you read the AIP. Quite a lot of detail required and NOT just "abc, at GA apron, request taxi".

On the humorous side... today I was inbound to an aerodrome at roughly a similar time to another IFR aircraft. I broadcast what was required, which included my revised eta. And he responded with all the right information but had to add on the end " and when we arrive we'll make sure your off the runway before we land"!

Now that's a super idea I must say! :)

"Hey Zapa, you bored? Trawling DG RP from Mehico? How about you mind your own business?"

Sorry bloggs, Im as ozzie as the next bludger.

But as an employee of a foreign carrier, it bugs me when I return to oz and listen to the way ATC talk to foreign pilots non english as a first language types. Insisting on word perfect oz only phraseology is stoooopid considering this crew just flew through 50 different countries last month and only gets to hear oz atc once a year.

It may make you feel all warm and cozy inside to pretend professionalism is word perfect r/t but a better way would be to fit in the rest of the world. The most important thing is to get the message across and when atc ask a foreign pilot to report over oodnadatta instead of oscar oscar delta then .......arghhhh!

Same with most other rules/regs and crap ozmates go on with totally clueless that there is an entire world out there doing just fine thankyou very much

rant over

Zapata, do you mean like insisting on getting a readback of required items? Little things like flight levels, headings & clearances. I doubt anyone insists on word perfect phraseology. Geez, you wouldn't be referring to the American way when you say the rest of the world would you? :E

We're human. If you usually refer to OOD as Oodnadatta & far more often than as oscar oscar delta then it's going to slip out as the usual way occasionally.

That really helps when descending at 300 kias, and around 3000' FPM, on profile and the aircraft captures the last assigned level because one can't get a word in edge ways for all the reading back of "copied no IFR traffic" etc etc etc.:ugh:

What Zap said.

Both national and foreign carriers seemed to be doing OK with ATC at Heathrow Director, Tokyo Control and SOCAL Approach last time I was there, without being castigated for not reading back previously-requested weather deviations etc. The Aussie read-back requirements are getting ridiculous.

And why does Australia have the ground tugs on aircraft frequencies at our international gateways? Further clutter.

The last major ATC incident that affected my airline was in Australian airspace not that long ago. And in three decades of aviation the only time I've seen two go-rounds in a row due to ATC was at an Australian international airport.

Out of ten on my global rating for efficiency, ease of use and 'pleasantness', the Aussie ATC environment gets a lukewarm 'four' (the Brits get 'ten', and China and India share 'one').

Ahhhh, this thread is giving me a headache!!

What i can say is some of those Pel Air AA boys are the worst, not all of them just a few. I have heard some shockers from them, for instance, "Centre (not Melbourne Center just "Center" VAI taxis Mildura" THAT IS IT, how crap is that!!and i have heard ****e similar to that from those boys numerous times and they are meant to be so called "some of the better more experienced pilots!" does not show much ambition to be professional at all. Sorry you AA pel air guys but had to be said.

The other one that is super annoying is people requesting traffic......WHY?? that's what ATC is there for, TO GIVE YOU TRAFFIC. I heard someone taxing at East Sale one day and requested traffic, the controller came back and said "no need to request traffic sir that's why we are here" that just says it all.

Non standard calls just sound ****e, the end! how some people come up with their own radio phraseology who knows but why don't you do all of us a favor and read yours Jeps.

How horrible would it be if our airways started sounding like they do in the US?

Keep it Professional

...the US does pretty well, actually, especially considering the volume of traffic, domestic and international, that it handles. Why would it be 'horrible?'

But there is a bearing!:ok:

Indeed HH, but some seem not to know the difference:hmm:

Compliance rules, ok!...
 

LeadSled

My opinion:

Over the last 20 or 30 years, the Australian Government has lost the ability to legislate for or otherwise create productivity or performance in either the public and private sector. This is coupled with a simliar loss on how to monitor productivity or performance.

This has resulted in a public service that is only able to monitor compliance! In the absence of being able to create productivity, all the government can do is create more regulations, which creates the need to monitor compliance with the new regulations. This is how the public service measures success, IMHO.

This attitude is now pervading Australian society and we're picking up on it.

Evidenced by threads such as this one, where people appear to be losing sleep over whether someone else says "Taxi's" instead of "Taxiing".

Really, some of you guys are holding on a bit tight. :hmm:

Hold Short. You sound like you need to get out in the world a bit more. I'm guessing you've never flown into Darwin where the controllers insist on POB even if you're RPT?

Guess you've not operated in an HF environment then? I first heard other pilots calling "IFR Taxi" when I was flying in the Tiwi islands where there is only HF comms on the ground at many places. It gave the HF operator a second to get his/her self ready to copy. I repeated a few taxi calls to HF before I got into this habit.

As mentioned earlier, if you're flying IFR and you call up on the ground to cancel "SAR", I'm thinking the Controller is going to know that it's Sarwatch and not Sartime.

You're getting wrapped around the axles on some pretty anal stuff like "Sar" vs. "Sarwatch". How about all the IFR pilots who cancel Sar (sorry, Sarwatch :ooh:) when they're over 5 Nm from the airport? Saw this plenty of times when I'm in the circuit. Someone cancels Sar(watch) at my aerodrome, I'm looking for them then they'll call "10 miles inbound" on CTAF.

There's some gold in this thread...

Funny stuff. I can't recall the last time I was asked to turn LEFT onto heading FL350 :} :}. Confusion? Not sure about you, but I think that the words "turn onto heading" before the number prevent any confusion. Similarly, "climb to" or "descend to" generally give me the impression that the Controller wants me to climb or descend, and not turn.

Another gem:

Most people I see "flight levels" when departing non-towered airports. ATCO's often give traffic as "climbing flight levels". Why? Possibly because it's highly unlikely that anyone listening on CTAF is going to care, as long as they know I'm climbing to over 10,000'! Any IFR would already be aware of me and my intentions already, similarly to meatbombers.

When is a VFR (pressurised or not) going to be monitoring a CTAF? Arriving, departing, or transiting. How many CTAF's extend up to the flight levels? And how many VFR pilots flying at flight levels monitor the CTAF's they're flying over?

If a VFR is arriving to an AD and decides to monitor CTAF from 40Nm (13,000' ish) and hears an RPT giving a departure report on a reciprocal heading and hears that the RPT is climbing to "Flight levels" instead of "FL180", he's not going to care which flight level.


LOVE comments like that. :yuk: Did your instructor also say that if you had sloppy parade ground drill it meant that you're probably a sloppy pilot as well? Makes about as much sense.

DIVOSH!

Divosh... :D:D:D:D

Post of the thread!

'Divosh'.....we luvs ya !:D:D:DCouldn't have said it better myself:ok:
I also couldn't be bothered typing all what you did but well done as it's insane how crazy some are getting over this!



Wmk2

I've got so much material here! Just can't wait to fly past Townsville again! :E

BROADCASTING.....

Leaving, Taxi's, for Flightlevels, reference the NDB, if available, etc etc...

"All stations TSV, ABC, a magnificent Aztec is 10nm inbound from the south, on descent from 5000, circuit at 10!

How simple is it?

Advice.......

Make radio calls to the best of your ability and training...

Flick to the AIP's/Jepps if you're curious (which we should all do from time to time anyway).

If you find you're calls have been slightly off... like saying "on climb to" rather than "climbing to"......
Then just start using the right terminology?
Rather than starting on one of the pedantic lovers threads.

It's the thing about being a pilot. There's so many things we have to get right... Keep flicking through the manuals, your whole career you'll realize how many little things you say and do that aren't quite 100% polished.

Great post divosh :)