AFIS R/T Clarification please..
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by chevvron
This was long before FISOs were required to take formal exams for a licence, which only started in the 80s.
Originally Posted by Qwikstop
Eurocontrol have produced a "Guide to Phraseology" that is very similar to the CAA version, but with a few interesting differences.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vee-tail-1
does my Flight Radio-Telephony Operators Licence allow me to operate the airfield radio to let the FISO have a tea break?
See CAP427 Chap 2 Para 4 for Exemptions.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Sussexshire
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only recently found this thread, after being pointed to it from another post, so please excuse the 'resurrection' from just under a month ago.
I thought this topic may, if only slightly, benefit from the input of someone who is currently a FISO at a fairly busy Airfield in the UK (Although I don't believe the one mentioned in the opening post).
A couple of points:
Unofficial Phraseology in this form, at least in my mind, stems from the idea that with a full ATC service within the UK, takeoff/landing clearance if the runway is not given unless the ATCO is satisfied that the runway is clear and available for landing (disregarding the new-ish implementation of land-after at some larger fields). While not comparing an AFIS service to that of full ATC, both share many of the basic foundations.
At my unit, we try to limit the amount of aircraft with 'discretionary advice' to one, ie. A landing aircraft won't usually be told 'Land at your discretion' until the preceding aircraft is either airborne or vacated. With that in mind, and speaking only from personal experience; I would assume that the distance between the landing aircraft and the threshold was such, that the FISO thought the pilot may not be comfortable with starting his takeoff roll, and as a result, gave the pilot the choice between commencing his takeoff within the space, or waiting until the landing aircraft had vacated the runway.
For Example;
"G-AB, Traffic is a Cessna 172 last reported Final, report lining up"
(If the pilot was comfortable with the spacing preceding the landing aircraft)
"Lining up, G-AB"
"G-AB Roger, Takeoff at your discretion, Surface wind XXX/XX"
"Taking off, G-AB"
As opposed to;
"G-AB, Traffic is a Cessna 172 last reported Final, report lining up"
(Pilot isn't comfortable with spacing preceding the landing aircraft)
"Holding Position G-AB" (Or sufficient time has passed at the holding point for the FISO to assume the aircraft is holding position)
"(Landing aircraft), Land your discretion, Surface wind XXX/XX"
So effectively, it's the FISO saying "The Traffic is here, you decide" while trying to ensure that only one aircraft 'has the runway' at any one time. Perhaps a slightly manipulated version of the official RT, however, it can make a large difference to how expeditiously traffic can be moved within the constraints of not being able to issue any direct clearances when on Runways.
We cost a lot less, can work longer hours and are much easier to validate/train than ATCO's! The field where I work used to have Full ATC pre SRATCOH, where upon introduction of which we switched to FISO, I would much prefer Full ATC when flying in and out of the field, but such is life!
Each to his own 
Hope it helped, although probably didn't!
The Escapist
I thought this topic may, if only slightly, benefit from the input of someone who is currently a FISO at a fairly busy Airfield in the UK (Although I don't believe the one mentioned in the opening post).
A couple of points:
I reported my ground position and was told to "report lining up" (????) CAP 427 (If I recall) confirms this instruction as applicable to an aircraft requesting back track of the active runway...which was not a request I made. I therefore held position and allowed arriving traffic to establish on final and land. I have to admit I was slightly unsure what to do next upon receipt of the above instruction.
At my unit, we try to limit the amount of aircraft with 'discretionary advice' to one, ie. A landing aircraft won't usually be told 'Land at your discretion' until the preceding aircraft is either airborne or vacated. With that in mind, and speaking only from personal experience; I would assume that the distance between the landing aircraft and the threshold was such, that the FISO thought the pilot may not be comfortable with starting his takeoff roll, and as a result, gave the pilot the choice between commencing his takeoff within the space, or waiting until the landing aircraft had vacated the runway.
For Example;
"G-AB, Traffic is a Cessna 172 last reported Final, report lining up"
(If the pilot was comfortable with the spacing preceding the landing aircraft)
"Lining up, G-AB"
"G-AB Roger, Takeoff at your discretion, Surface wind XXX/XX"
"Taking off, G-AB"
As opposed to;
"G-AB, Traffic is a Cessna 172 last reported Final, report lining up"
(Pilot isn't comfortable with spacing preceding the landing aircraft)
"Holding Position G-AB" (Or sufficient time has passed at the holding point for the FISO to assume the aircraft is holding position)
"(Landing aircraft), Land your discretion, Surface wind XXX/XX"
So effectively, it's the FISO saying "The Traffic is here, you decide" while trying to ensure that only one aircraft 'has the runway' at any one time. Perhaps a slightly manipulated version of the official RT, however, it can make a large difference to how expeditiously traffic can be moved within the constraints of not being able to issue any direct clearances when on Runways.
I don't understand the point of having AFIS.
Why not have ATC?
Why not have ATC?
I think the idea of a FISO is silly. I think we should either have ATC or Unicom
Hope it helped, although probably didn't!
The Escapist
