Changes to departure reports
 

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...up/a12-h11.pdf

Hope everyone's versed on the changes for tomorrow.

Re that new phraseology in the AIC:

What exactly is the first word supposed to be for 4a from the table? The first word(s) will be whatever (location reference departure aerodrome) translates to, but what exactly that is is the subject of this post.

Departing from Jabiru for Darwin, for example, where I expect to become SSR identified following the departure report, is this the correct report:

"Brisbane Centre, XYZ, Jabiru, Passing 3,000 on climb FL130, estimating Darwin 36".

The question is why give an estimate if you are identified? I can't figure that one out! The simplest report would have been "ABC passing 1400, climbing to FL190", like the airborne report without the heading info.

Also, why "on climb" vs "climbing to" for other departure reports. Seems a bit rushed in its implementation.

Hmm this doesn't look terribly well thought out.

Departing YRED IFR into Class C why would you be worried about giving an estimate?

"Climbing to two thousand five hundred"? Would have thought they'd have dropped the "to" as its superfluous and confusing.

That's a good change, well done.

There are many more calls that could be trimmed the same way.

I have always thought the phrase; "..........on climb (what ever thousand feet)....." is preferable. The possibility of a misunderstanding by using "...climbing to (etc.)....." is too apparent.

Apparent?

I think the individual who originally posited the idea should be restrained from further public utterances.

How can "climbing to six thousand" possibly be confused in the real world with "climbing two six thousand" when there is no such altitude?

If your 1st language is not english (to) is a number!! that's why ICAO don't use it in radio comm's.

Even if your first language is not English there is STILL no such ALTITUDE as 'two six thousand' it's 'Flight Level two six zero'.

If that's too hard for someone with level 4 English proficiency don't give them a fcking license for anything more difficult than a car.

Bravo.......:D

Last few posts are just awesome :ok::ok::ok:


Hehehehe lucky I don't have an incontinence problem ;)

Not everyone in the world uses Australian procedures.

Within Australia, use of "to" is clear and simple. But not every pilot in Australia, departs and arrives within Australian airspace... That's why ICAO exists. To harmonise between States in order to prevent confusion &/or accidents, primarily for international aviation.

I don't really care about the "to" discussed above. Better things to think about. But I wish local pilots were at least hesitant to criticize something that ICAO thinks is a Really Good Idea.

So, where in the world is to/two six thousand an altitude?

Blogg's hypothesis: "What is your location with reference to the departure aerodrome". In other words, they have to know where you are to help them identify you. Not such a major issue in a bug-frightner that does 40 knots, but in a 737 out of KTA outside tower hours, they could be 20nm away (at 5500ft :}) by the time they get their departure report out.

Agree. KISS please! I also like the "on climb" argument ( sorry Tart). :D

While you're there, IM, remove "estimating" from the departure report. We don't use it in any of the other position reports we make. http://www.smilies.our-local.co.uk/i...iles/pray2.gif

I think it's meant to be (exapanded) Your location, in reference to the departure aerodrome.

I.e. "Brisbane Centre, XYZ, 5 miles west of Jabiru, passing 3000 on climb FL130 estimating Darwin 36."

Or similar.

But isn't the whole point behind the new reports that they will have you on their screen anyway? No need to give a distance etc. I would think, only a need to verify your altitude.

Where's Jack Ranga and co. to give us a perspective from the other side.

:D:ok::D

Couldn't agree more!!

KISS!! Climbing, descending, leaving, joining, turning, taxiing!

Aimpoint, ATC's who hold a CPL, ME-CIR, Flight Instructor Rating etc, their opinion is not sought or valued so all sorts of non-sensical changes seem to appear. A lot of the time they don't make any sense to an ATC let alone a pilot.

A lot of IFR pilots cannot manage a taxy call let alone any new procedure. Standard phraseology is not used by the majority of pilots these days so the chance of any new procedure being used correctly? Snowball ;)

I gave up trying to understand the logic of phraseology when they changed "leave control area on descent" to "leave control area descending" to improve safety, but here goes

The location reference aerodrome seems to be a double check to make sure what we see on the screen is you. Feels like a throwback to the days when ATC gave you a position when identified.

Estimate also seems redundant. Most of the time I won't enter a pilot estimate anyway in theses circumstances. I don't need it and as often as not it will be revised at TOC anyway.

The useful part is level passing for Mode C verification, but a lot of our regular operators have been giving that in their departure reports for years anyway.

If the aim was to save us and pilots time, the phraseology would simply be "ABC passing (current level)". I know where you are and what level you planned and I don't need an estimate.