strange LARS request
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: wakefield
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
strange LARS request
I was heading back to sherburn the other day after a local trip and requested matz penetration to rejoin sherburn circuit as normal, I was cleared to enter the matz at 1500ft as usual but then asked to confirm sherburn in sight "with 1 long transmision"
I read back the clearance and confirmed that I had sherburn in sight (it was good viz) I was again asked to "confirm sherburn in sight with 1 long transmision"
I have looked in cap413 but cant find any reference to such a phrase.
Can anyone shed any light on the correct response to this request, I am baffled.
( I am fairly new to sherburn so maybe this is a normal thing for the locals
)
I read back the clearance and confirmed that I had sherburn in sight (it was good viz) I was again asked to "confirm sherburn in sight with 1 long transmision"
I have looked in cap413 but cant find any reference to such a phrase.
Can anyone shed any light on the correct response to this request, I am baffled.
( I am fairly new to sherburn so maybe this is a normal thing for the locals
)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Liverpool based Geordie, so calm down, calm down kidda!!
Age: 60
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
6 Posts
If it was a military controller he was probably using DRDF to check your radial from his airfield. Here at woodvale, no radar means that DRDF is the only approach available. One long transmission (hold the key) allows an accurate measurement.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: North Yorks
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"so maybe this is a normal thing for the locals"
I've been flying from Sherburn for nearly 2 years, and I've never been asked to do this.
If it was the weekend, it's possible/probable they were only operating the Tower at Fenton, and not Approach.
I've been flying from Sherburn for nearly 2 years, and I've never been asked to do this.
If it was the weekend, it's possible/probable they were only operating the Tower at Fenton, and not Approach.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airfield in site
Church Fenton have followed this procedure for years. The controller only wishes to know that he can terminate the service being given to you.
If you make your statement using the same words that he has used in his request, he may think that you have simply read back his request, many pilots do that instead of using "wilco".
Use the words, "I am visual with Sherburn".
If you make your statement using the same words that he has used in his request, he may think that you have simply read back his request, many pilots do that instead of using "wilco".
Use the words, "I am visual with Sherburn".
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: wakefield
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am still baffled
Do I say "I am visual with sherburn" then wait with the button pressed, and if so , for how long.
Or do I just press the button and say nothing, again how long for?
How long is "one long transmision"?
I appreciate the need to know when to terminate the service but wouldnt this normally be when I tell them I am changing to the sherburn frequency, just as I approach the circuit.
It was a weekday, so I assume things would be normal at fenton.
I know Its only a small thing but I like to be as accurate as possible with my RT and if this is going to crop up again I would like to be able to deal with it properly.
Thanks for the answers so far
Do I say "I am visual with sherburn" then wait with the button pressed, and if so , for how long.
Or do I just press the button and say nothing, again how long for?
How long is "one long transmision"?
I appreciate the need to know when to terminate the service but wouldnt this normally be when I tell them I am changing to the sherburn frequency, just as I approach the circuit.
It was a weekday, so I assume things would be normal at fenton.
I know Its only a small thing but I like to be as accurate as possible with my RT and if this is going to crop up again I would like to be able to deal with it properly.
Thanks for the answers so far
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
long transmission
When DF was more common place and you were asked to transmit for DF, for D&D maybe;
you would press the transmit button and count backwards; "5 - 4 - 3 - 2 -1, G-CD".
you would press the transmit button and count backwards; "5 - 4 - 3 - 2 -1, G-CD".
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This terminology would be used by an ATCO if you were being offered a speechless homing procedure. There's a bit about it in CAP 413 Chapter 8 Page 4. Not applicable in your case, but useful to know about
As a non-ATCO pilot, I've practised this at a civilian field - no prior arrangement, but the resident Instructor did it often and the Tower were happy to oblige. Disappear into the local area and on the way back, make your speechless call. The ATCO then goes through a series of questions to ascertain who you are and what you want. You respond using the speechless code.
As a non-ATCO pilot, I've practised this at a civilian field - no prior arrangement, but the resident Instructor did it often and the Tower were happy to oblige. Disappear into the local area and on the way back, make your speechless call. The ATCO then goes through a series of questions to ascertain who you are and what you want. You respond using the speechless code.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi there Yorks.ppl
Whilst I don't know anything about operating into Sherburn, a request for a long transmission does imply the use of RDF equipment by the controller. If you are interested in reading about RDF phraseology, then CAP 413 Radiotelephony Manual Ch6 page 10 para 1.7 onwards is worth a look.
Rather than counting backwards during your "long transmission" it may be more correct to finish the transmission with your full callsign spoken slowly.
All the best
G-I-L-E-S W-E-M-B-L-E-Y - H-O-G-G
Whilst I don't know anything about operating into Sherburn, a request for a long transmission does imply the use of RDF equipment by the controller. If you are interested in reading about RDF phraseology, then CAP 413 Radiotelephony Manual Ch6 page 10 para 1.7 onwards is worth a look.
Rather than counting backwards during your "long transmission" it may be more correct to finish the transmission with your full callsign spoken slowly.
All the best
G-I-L-E-S W-E-M-B-L-E-Y - H-O-G-G
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Bournemouth, UK
Age: 53
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have thought that the best time and place to find out what the controller wanted was to ask him there and then. Read back the bits of the clearance that you understood and end the transmission with "please explain what you mean by one long transmission". Forget Cap413 phraseology, just use plain English. The controller will then know that you don't know what he's asking. If he gets asked to explain often what he means then it will highlight to that station an issue with their procedures that might need to be amended or documented better in AIP, etc. And just as important it will give the pilot a chance to learn something new.
If there is anything in a clearance that you don't understand then surely you can't except any of the clearance.
I know we are talking about a MATZ and theoretically, as long as you stay clear of the ATZ, you don't have to talk to them, but is that really a wise idea?
Regards
Stoney
If there is anything in a clearance that you don't understand then surely you can't except any of the clearance.
I know we are talking about a MATZ and theoretically, as long as you stay clear of the ATZ, you don't have to talk to them, but is that really a wise idea?
Regards
Stoney
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: wakefield
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for all the interest and answers so far.
stoney x, With hindsight you are quite correct, I should have asked for clarification but I was slightly put off balance by the request and comon sense went out of the window, briefly!! This was also coupled with a flight where the whole RT thing had been muddled, I am certainly not critising the chap at fenton (who I have always found to be excelent, ditto linton) because I have no idea what he may have had going on with UHF but the RT script that I carefully prepare before each flight was completely usless.
I have now spoken to the air trafic supervisor at linton (thanks linton, polite and helpfull as ever) who suggests that the "confirm sherburn (Or where ever) in sight with 1 long transmision" request is part of a speachless aproach procedure that they practice on UHF
He also suggests that there may have been some confusion if such a procedure was being practised on UHF simultainiously with my matz penetration request.
In any event it seems that there was no reason for the request as I was talking to them in the usual way.
So we can all stop racking our brains, it seems the whole thing was a simple mix up
PS Stoney x I concur, flight through a matz without talking to them is unwise/possibly suicidal.
stoney x, With hindsight you are quite correct, I should have asked for clarification but I was slightly put off balance by the request and comon sense went out of the window, briefly!! This was also coupled with a flight where the whole RT thing had been muddled, I am certainly not critising the chap at fenton (who I have always found to be excelent, ditto linton) because I have no idea what he may have had going on with UHF but the RT script that I carefully prepare before each flight was completely usless.
I have now spoken to the air trafic supervisor at linton (thanks linton, polite and helpfull as ever) who suggests that the "confirm sherburn (Or where ever) in sight with 1 long transmision" request is part of a speachless aproach procedure that they practice on UHF
He also suggests that there may have been some confusion if such a procedure was being practised on UHF simultainiously with my matz penetration request.
In any event it seems that there was no reason for the request as I was talking to them in the usual way.
So we can all stop racking our brains, it seems the whole thing was a simple mix up
PS Stoney x I concur, flight through a matz without talking to them is unwise/possibly suicidal.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: somewhere over the rainbow...
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, ive flown from sherburn for 3 years, and Ive never heard them ask for that long transmission stuff. Sounds like a mistake to me. Fenton are usually really helpful (except for the girl on duty last week who couldnt understand anything any other pilot was saying- guess she was new).
Eoin
Eoin
Over the years I have received many strange requests from military controllers. They do not use CAP413 and are not obliged to have any knowledge of it.
One of the best was whilst holding over a NDB at a military airfield; I was requested to "kep it tight"
My response was: is that greater or less than the standard 4 minutes? The reply was Keep it Tight! My final reply was Roger.
One of the best was whilst holding over a NDB at a military airfield; I was requested to "kep it tight"
My response was: is that greater or less than the standard 4 minutes? The reply was Keep it Tight! My final reply was Roger.
