Madeup Tower, G-ABCD...
Hi Tower i'm Dave.
Hi Dave, what do you want?
Oh well.. i want a FIS
Ok, pass your details
Hi Dave, what do you want?
Oh well.. i want a FIS
Ok, pass your details
Hi Tower i'm Dave.
Hi Dave, what do you want?
Here are my details and I'd like an FIS please
Hi Dave, what do you want?
Here are my details and I'd like an FIS please
Hi Tower i'm Dave and I'd like an FIS please.
Hi Dave, what do you want?
Here are my details
Hi Dave, what do you want?
Here are my details
If the request is short and standard, sure, pass it in the initial call. Sometimes it can help the ground station to pick up the right piece of paper or even expect the right pattern of words. But the Tower can probably anticipate that you're going to ask for FIS rather than a bacon sandwich.
If the request is non-standard, or long and complex, then there's not much point in confusing the controller. It works both ways. Even after communication has been established, I'd prefer a "G-ABCD, Stephenville" to pre-warn me of a non-standard message or request that might need a pen and paper. Conversely, you'll also frequently hear those professional pilots on the control frequencies saying "Stephenville G-ABCD request" to pre-warn the controller of a non-standard request which would undoubtedly lead to a "say again" if it came unannounced.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the request is non-standard, or long and complex, then there's not much point in confusing the controller.
"Lelystad Radio, N999X, request a taxi"
"N999X, Lelystad Radio, be advised this is an uncontrolled field. You can taxi without clearance."
"No sir, N999X request you call a taxi to take us into town."
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Age: 38
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obviously someone's getting their knickers in a twist. I'm not trying to instil rage into people by making this thread i'm just raising something which happens alot which isn't standard stuff and to me, personally makes no sence to do.
Can I just reiterate that this thread is in the Private Flyers forum and this isn't intended for professional pilots. I doubt a 757 flying into the UK is going to ask for a Flight Information Service.
This is purely for outside controlled airspace, not main airports.
Fg Off Max Stout : You've not read what I wrote.
Again, the initial call isn't a lenthy waffle, what im getting at is when you first talk to them, you tell them what you want, saving them having to call you back to ask you what you want..
If he wants me to standby, perform a barrel roll, jump out the plane.. whatever... he knows what i want straight away, he doesn't need to call me back to ASK me what i want.
Maybe it's just me, I know there's lots of non standard stuff but most of it is sence, and will cut a corner perhaps.. But by making him call you back to ask you what you want isn't cutting a corner, it's just silly.
Sorry Grandpa
Can I just reiterate that this thread is in the Private Flyers forum and this isn't intended for professional pilots. I doubt a 757 flying into the UK is going to ask for a Flight Information Service.
This is purely for outside controlled airspace, not main airports.
Fg Off Max Stout : You've not read what I wrote.
If on first contact you launch into a two minute epic, you may block a busy frequency, cause aircraft that are awaiting an urgent clearance to enter holds or risk busting a previous clearance limit, cause aircraft to go out of range before they can get further handovers, screw over the controller who's listening and talking on a frequency you can't hear and, after all that, you'll still get a "Station calling stand by".
Lengthy waffel? The initial call should be Call sign and what you want to request... thats only..
If he wants me to standby, perform a barrel roll, jump out the plane.. whatever... he knows what i want straight away, he doesn't need to call me back to ASK me what i want.
Maybe it's just me, I know there's lots of non standard stuff but most of it is sence, and will cut a corner perhaps.. But by making him call you back to ask you what you want isn't cutting a corner, it's just silly.
Sorry Grandpa
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I just reiterate that this thread is in the Private Flyers forum and this isn't intended for professional pilots. I doubt a 757 flying into the UK is going to ask for a Flight Information Service.
This is purely for outside controlled airspace, not main airports.
This is purely for outside controlled airspace, not main airports.
A pilot who flies for a living (i.e. a professional, commercial pilot) may be flying in roles that are encompassed with GA e.g. from private field to private field, charter work, corporate work; it's all classified as GA. Private flights can be flown by commercial pilots and there are issues which we have in common. Please do not confuse "private flying" with "amateur flying"!!!!!
We all (mostly!!) have the same RT licence so to say that this forum and this thread is only for PPL holders is daft, quite frankly.
Secondly, it's not a black and white issue of either uncontrolled airspace or main airports; I fly from an international airport which has radar service and which is not in controlled airspace.
Obviously, given a number of explanations and the matter still doesn't make sense to you, makes me think you're not able to take on new ideas. You may well prefer your call initiation but it's a bit disingenuous to say it's sloppy RT if people don't agree with you.
My knickers are not in a twist; you asked for an explanation of why people did things, you got the explanations but now youre saying they're wrong. It's not wrong, it's different and nobody else seems to be bothered one way or another (OK, maybe one other person is!!).
Cheers
Whirls
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The front end and about 50ft up
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well mate, as I said there's anothing wrong with what you suggest at the right time and place. Add any details (over and above agency and C/S) that you consider relevant on your first call if you judge it appropriate. I'm not really getting my knickers in a twist - it just really grips me that you seem to trying really hard not to listen to anyone who has answered your question of 'why' and whose views don't match your own (which I suspect are based on rather limited experience). PPL R/T should not be different to ATPL R/T so don't be so quick to discount the opinions of professionals who talk to controllers on a daily basis.
Once again you are throwing around terms like 'silly' regarding those who have given you a true and correct answer to your question. You've even had a controller reply to you agreeing with what many of us have said, but I guess you'll write him off a sloppy and unprofessional idiot, as well. I suggest that if you wish to progress in aviation you'll want to adjust your attitude somewhat. Good luck anyway.
Once again you are throwing around terms like 'silly' regarding those who have given you a true and correct answer to your question. You've even had a controller reply to you agreeing with what many of us have said, but I guess you'll write him off a sloppy and unprofessional idiot, as well. I suggest that if you wish to progress in aviation you'll want to adjust your attitude somewhat. Good luck anyway.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Age: 38
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've read what everyone has written and taken it on board.. the reason i'm saying it's silly is because to me, it does seem silly.
You told me to get my finger out my arse and cut out some "sh1t"? I don't think it's only me that needs to look at ones attitude.. When did I say idiot? Why are you making things up?
Either way, there's people on here that agree and some that don't. If an RT examiner who has to be a professional, tells me that it's wrong to do it then who should I believe, Him? Or some old flyers on PPRUNE?
P.S. Wasn't referring to your knickers Whirls
You told me to get my finger out my arse and cut out some "sh1t"? I don't think it's only me that needs to look at ones attitude.. When did I say idiot? Why are you making things up?
Either way, there's people on here that agree and some that don't. If an RT examiner who has to be a professional, tells me that it's wrong to do it then who should I believe, Him? Or some old flyers on PPRUNE?
P.S. Wasn't referring to your knickers Whirls
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: My house
Posts: 1,339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RT examiners don't have to be professionals, just have to pass a test with a CAA examiner. I would expect them to have a descent knowledge and a sensible view on things.
I agree with Whirls and co on this one, and im not an old flyer, im a fATPL holder with 100hours GA experience on top of the commercial.
I am surprised that you think a controller would have this response:
Tower, this is Nick,
Hello Nick, what would you like?
I would like a Basic service please
Ok Nick tell me your details.
On the initial call I usually say:
Radar, G-ABCD (flying from EMA they are busy at times)
G-ABCD pass your details/message
PA28 blah blah request Basic service.
If they are not so busy I might add on the Basic service request on the initial call. It really does not matter, you will offend many people on here if you start flashing cap413 around saying everyone who does this is sloppy, or has a poor RT maner.
This has been said before in an above post.
No offence meant just an opinion
Nick
I agree with Whirls and co on this one, and im not an old flyer, im a fATPL holder with 100hours GA experience on top of the commercial.
I am surprised that you think a controller would have this response:
Tower, this is Nick,
Hello Nick, what would you like?
I would like a Basic service please
Ok Nick tell me your details.
On the initial call I usually say:
Radar, G-ABCD (flying from EMA they are busy at times)
G-ABCD pass your details/message
PA28 blah blah request Basic service.
If they are not so busy I might add on the Basic service request on the initial call. It really does not matter, you will offend many people on here if you start flashing cap413 around saying everyone who does this is sloppy, or has a poor RT maner.
This has been said before in an above post.
No offence meant just an opinion
Nick
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Timbuktoo
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've read what everyone has written and taken it on board.. the reason i'm saying it's silly is because to me, it does seem silly.
Dave, the above can be read as because you say it is silly, it is, irrespective of what others say.
You probably didn't mean it this way, but think this might be an example of what Fg Off Max Stout is referring to.
Dave, the above can be read as because you say it is silly, it is, irrespective of what others say.
You probably didn't mean it this way, but think this might be an example of what Fg Off Max Stout is referring to.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I doubt a 757 flying into the UK is going to ask for a Flight Information Service.
"Approach, Speedbird 123, request"
"Speedbird 123 standby"
[...]
"Speedbird 123, go ahead"
"Speedbird 123 request a weather update for XXX"
The "request" told the controller that something non-standard and potentially long-winding was forthcoming. But the exact same thing would be understood if the word "request" was left out.
And to make matters worse, amongst others Ryanair pilots are known to dial up INFO frequencies on box 2 to ask for weather updates if their main frequency is too busy and their destination is not on VOLMET.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The front end and about 50ft up
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dave, maybe it does seem silly to you but you've been told why it's not silly. My slightly forceful comment was merely a response to your general reaction to the replies you've been given and the four examples I quoted (out of many I could have used). Your manner just get's people's backs up.
Whilst you haven't used the word idiot, that has been your inference and you have said 'timewasting', 'pointless', 'sloppy', 'silly' and said that professionals should not use such R/T. You may not like what you perceive as my attitude but, the bottom line is that I get paid to operate aircraft and I have a bit of experience behind me. Feel free to disagree with my suggestions but don't tell me I'm wrong and sloppy unless you can back it up. This shouldn't even be a right/wrong issue - we're merely explaining why many people use this sort of R/T, but you seem determined to object to the explanation.
I suggest that next time you don't waste your time or ours by posting a question on the Professional Pilots' Rumour Network if you've already decided what the answer should be and you won't accept anyone else's opinion. Don't forget that 'Flying instructor' does not necessarily mean particularly experienced.
'Lighten up'...yeah. I was pretty chilled out until you basically told me that I've been doing my job wrongly for several years.
Whilst you haven't used the word idiot, that has been your inference and you have said 'timewasting', 'pointless', 'sloppy', 'silly' and said that professionals should not use such R/T. You may not like what you perceive as my attitude but, the bottom line is that I get paid to operate aircraft and I have a bit of experience behind me. Feel free to disagree with my suggestions but don't tell me I'm wrong and sloppy unless you can back it up. This shouldn't even be a right/wrong issue - we're merely explaining why many people use this sort of R/T, but you seem determined to object to the explanation.
who should I believe, Him? Or some old flyers on PPRUNE?
'Lighten up'...yeah. I was pretty chilled out until you basically told me that I've been doing my job wrongly for several years.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dave,
I really can't believe that you've gotten so wound up about this. The difference is so small.
Your way, which is correct in the UK only
The ICAO way, which is correct everywhere else
The difference is so small that noone should be getting too upset about it.
But since you're getting so upset about people using the incorrect phrasology in the UK, do you follow the correct phrasology when outside the UK, or do you stick to UK phrasology when abroad even though it's incorrect?
dp
I really can't believe that you've gotten so wound up about this. The difference is so small.
Your way, which is correct in the UK only
Made up twr, Gxxx request traffic service
Gxxx, made up twr pass your message
Made up twr, Gxxx <message>
Gxxx, made up twr pass your message
Made up twr, Gxxx <message>
The ICAO way, which is correct everywhere else
Made up twr, Gxxx
Gxxx, made up twr pass your message
Made up twr, Gxxx <message> flight information service
Gxxx, made up twr pass your message
Made up twr, Gxxx <message> flight information service
But since you're getting so upset about people using the incorrect phrasology in the UK, do you follow the correct phrasology when outside the UK, or do you stick to UK phrasology when abroad even though it's incorrect?
dp
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Jockistan
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During a number of visits to & talks from the NATS chaps at our nearby busy BAA operated airport, the thing they say annoys them most is pilots that call up dont state what they want in their initial call.
Their reason - if you tell them what you want in your initial call then they can prioritise you accordingly without the need for further dialogue.
Therefore my calls are usually XXXX Approach, request Flight Information Service or XXXX Approach, request zone transit.
Their reason - if you tell them what you want in your initial call then they can prioritise you accordingly without the need for further dialogue.
Therefore my calls are usually XXXX Approach, request Flight Information Service or XXXX Approach, request zone transit.
Guest
Posts: n/a
In my experience, which is not huge but has been gained since 1993, what a controller wants on initial contact will vary with workload and their personal preference.
So a judgment is required.
If the frequency is quiet, I might say more "Madeup App, G-ABCD, VFR west abeam Buttville, 2000 feet, with Alfa, to rejoin.
On the other hand, if the frequency is busy, it will be "Madeup App, G-ABCD" and I'll be expecting a "standby, remain outside controlled airspace (if the latter is applicable)"
This is a matter of airmanship.
CAP 413 is a pilot's guide and is not exhaustive.
Thisi s really a very minor point and DaveD would do well to step back and avoid over focussing on somethihng that is relatively unimportant.
There are far more important things to concentrate on IMHO
So a judgment is required.
If the frequency is quiet, I might say more "Madeup App, G-ABCD, VFR west abeam Buttville, 2000 feet, with Alfa, to rejoin.
On the other hand, if the frequency is busy, it will be "Madeup App, G-ABCD" and I'll be expecting a "standby, remain outside controlled airspace (if the latter is applicable)"
This is a matter of airmanship.
CAP 413 is a pilot's guide and is not exhaustive.
Thisi s really a very minor point and DaveD would do well to step back and avoid over focussing on somethihng that is relatively unimportant.
There are far more important things to concentrate on IMHO
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thisi s really a very minor point and DaveD would do well to step back and avoid over focussing on somethihng that is relatively unimportant.
"An aircraft should request the service required on initial contact when freecalling a ground station."
Everything else is opinion.....
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DaveD, "MadeupControl, G-ABCD" is a perfectly acceptable way of establishing two-way contact.
I have both heard and used it many times in my professional career - just because you have never understood it, doesn't mean that it can't be appropriate. Also, the fact that you can't find it in CAP 413 doesn't necessarily make it bad practice.
It can be beneficial when trying to get a word in on a busy frequency and you have anything other than a briefest request, just to ensure you have the controller's attention and are not just blocking his frequency by inadvertently stepping on another transmission. As another example, you may be talking to an area ATS (e.g. London Information), where there may be another conversation going on that you are unable to hear. Or maybe the frequency has been quiet for a while and you wish to confirm you still have two-way contact before launching into a long request.
Certainly, if you are taking an initial R/T test and wish to be totally "CAP 413 standard" for your examiner, you can choose not to use it. However, even though your R/T examiner may not have the experience to explain it's benefit to you, I can assure you that, in appropriate circumstances, it is in frequent use. It is clearly expected from time to time; otherwise, why would "G-XXXX, pass your message" be standard RTF phraseology, as a reply to an aircraft?
JD
I have both heard and used it many times in my professional career - just because you have never understood it, doesn't mean that it can't be appropriate. Also, the fact that you can't find it in CAP 413 doesn't necessarily make it bad practice.
It can be beneficial when trying to get a word in on a busy frequency and you have anything other than a briefest request, just to ensure you have the controller's attention and are not just blocking his frequency by inadvertently stepping on another transmission. As another example, you may be talking to an area ATS (e.g. London Information), where there may be another conversation going on that you are unable to hear. Or maybe the frequency has been quiet for a while and you wish to confirm you still have two-way contact before launching into a long request.
Certainly, if you are taking an initial R/T test and wish to be totally "CAP 413 standard" for your examiner, you can choose not to use it. However, even though your R/T examiner may not have the experience to explain it's benefit to you, I can assure you that, in appropriate circumstances, it is in frequent use. It is clearly expected from time to time; otherwise, why would "G-XXXX, pass your message" be standard RTF phraseology, as a reply to an aircraft?
JD
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Essex, Innit
Age: 55
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dave
You're confused & thus confusing - compare & contrast your comment
with the title of your thread
My Preference for initiating contact is the standard callsign / callsign, wait for acknowledgement.
I immediately thought about this in a situation where the "service" request is a joining instruction from approach. In these circumstances, to call up "XXX Approach, G-ABCD request joining instructions" without giving other essential info such as current location is just going to cause the controller more work & lengthen the process.
At the very least I would then expect a withering "G-ABCD, pass the rest of your message"
There are a lot of knowledgeable folk posting on here (I do not include myself in this) so I would take their advice & experience at face value and accept that different situations require different responses.
Regards, enq.
You're confused & thus confusing - compare & contrast your comment
This is purely for outside controlled airspace, not main airports.
Madeup Tower, G-ABCD...
I immediately thought about this in a situation where the "service" request is a joining instruction from approach. In these circumstances, to call up "XXX Approach, G-ABCD request joining instructions" without giving other essential info such as current location is just going to cause the controller more work & lengthen the process.
At the very least I would then expect a withering "G-ABCD, pass the rest of your message"
There are a lot of knowledgeable folk posting on here (I do not include myself in this) so I would take their advice & experience at face value and accept that different situations require different responses.
Regards, enq.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems like some people say
An aircraft should request the service required on initial contact when freecalling a ground station... is OK
and others say
An aircraft should not request the service required on initial contact when freecalling a ground station...
But which is best?
There's only one way to find out...
FIGHT
An aircraft should request the service required on initial contact when freecalling a ground station... is OK
and others say
An aircraft should not request the service required on initial contact when freecalling a ground station...
But which is best?
There's only one way to find out...
FIGHT