I think that a reminder to all on the frequency (except perhaps at an ATC field) that you are commencing the take off run, can only be a good thing, Nothing naff about it at all.

Only in one country, as far as this discussion shows, and even there not at all aerodromes.

But it could also mean (to the unfamiliar, or student / inexperienced)

"I want to contact the one ahead"
"I want the one ahead to contact me"

Sounds ambiguous to me not to use at all! I also say "visual with number 1 / number 2" but only when I can see the other aircraft in the circuit ahead of me ; or "visual with traffic on short / "X" mile final"

That's what they've always told me. ATC will apply the necessary wait time and will give you your take-off clearance only when it's safe to go.

However, in practice, that's not how it works at my home base. As soon as the 737 is no longer in contact with the runway, we get our take-off clearance, with the addition 'regarding the wake turbulence of the 737 that just departed'. So wake turbulence separation is left to our own discretion.

And to be honest, I like that. There are regular occasions where I'm able to lift off sooner, and establish an initial angle of climb that keeps me well above the 737s take-off path. And if I make an early turn, there's no chance for me to get caught in his wake turbulence. So in those situations it wouldn't make sense to wait, say, three minutes.

A bit like "don't mention the war".

When referring to visual contact, don't mention contact.

CAP 413: If no visual contact is gained, a missed approach ...


Yes, I do know about that "take-off" in Tenerife.

'ROLLING'


I was never taught at an A/G field one should do anything other than check all is clear then call 'Ready for Departure' and then take-off. You should not need to say 'taking-off' or 'rolling' because you checked the final approach path right?

Reference to CAP 413 says for A/G one may call 'Airborne' Which to be frank if I'm coming down final is far more useful than 'rolling' which just tells me what I already know, someone is on the runway ahead and therefore it is a wasted call, it doesn't matter to me if they are rolling or not, what matters is they are not still on the runway when I get there, confirmed by 'airborne'.

I went to a busy fly-in at the weekend. As I turned base, an aircraft on final called G-.... Final, contact one on. As I turned final behind him I called G-...., Final, contact one on, one ahead. Letting the guy in front of me know that I was aware of him as well as the aircraft that had touched down. There's nothing ambiguous about it. It's good airmanship, has worked well for many years and is certainly standard procedure when A/g or safetycom is in use. I don't think it matters much whether you say Contact or Visual. You'll still be understood.

Very often an air/ground operator will only give you airfield information and it's up to the pilots to sort themselves out. That's where the value of such calls lies. Anyone who's confused by them needs help.

Pretty much what I'd do, and have done for years, also.

There may be mileage in using "visual" instead of "contact", to reduce confusion - but since many people have been using "contact" for decades, I don't honestly think the confusion issue is real.

A bit like saying you'll be arriving somewhere at "minute 45" which is how I learned it - reading CAP 413 the other day, I saw that it is now "time 45", meaning the same thing? Not sure when that changed, but I've still been using (and hearing others using) "minute 45" and never had a complaint or signs of confusion.

G

If you happen to visit Bagby we'd appreciate a 'Lining up 24 for immediate' call, as you can't be seen by anyone leaving the parking area to cross the runway to the taxyway. Then there's the small matter of aircraft using 24 for take-off and 06 for landing due to the slope.

I might just add that your 'Ready for departure' call is meaningless to an A/G operator. That's assuming the radio is manned. So 'lining up' and 'rolling' calls would be nice. Better than bent metal.

How about "Eyeballs Rolling" ...... "Eyeballs Locked-on" which was the response to traffic information given to one aircraft!

I think a 'Rolling' or 'Taking Off' call is useful. If I am making a crosswind join at the time that another aircraft is taking off there could be a potential conflict as I would be passing directly overhead the inactive threshold at circuit height. I would want to know if the aircraft on the runway is about to start its takeoff roll or whether it will hold its position until I am clear and have turned downwind.

Lining up and starting the take off roll are two separate things. I know that ideally at an A/G field you will only line up when you are ready for take off and it is clear to do so i.e. nothing on final, however ive had a couple of occasions when I have already lined up and then I hear over the radio that an a/c is joining crosswind, in which case I would hold until it has passed. In this case, I advise over the radio that I will hold until the other aircraft has passed, then radio 'rolling/taking off' when I start the run.

At the end of the day at an A/G field, we the pilots are responsible for separation, so surely the more precise the information about our intentions the better. The 'Taking Off' phrase is specified in CAP413 after all.

Calling airbourne is useful too I agree e.g. G-CD airborne runway 21, climbing through xxxx for xxxx on xxxx, heading xxx.

Sounds like it was a Space cadet... something like the person who wrote:

"As military traffic is on 243, why should they give a f**K?"

This thread seems fixated on "contact one".
I think thats missing the point.
When joining a busy airfield at say mid day for a fly in it is not unusual to have 10 or more aircraft in the circuit.
At that point you don't want ums and arrhs in the transmitions or "hello fred how are you today".
So it was common practice to say " I am in visual contact with 1 (or 2/3 ) ahead when joining.This told the ATC that you had seen the other aircraft and you will take your place in the que and not cut anyone up. The reply was "you are number 2 (or 3/4)" and confirm your place in the que.

The point was if the controller realised you hadn't seen ALL the aircraft in front he would automatically reply with " you are no. 6" .

The whole thing was quite condensed, "contact one (or 2,3,4,5,6,) ahead"became the shorthand version.
It was implicit in this message that you had seen the aircraft ahead and fit in without cutting anyone up.

I still use it, as a strip flyer that frequents fly ins that are often A/G only it lets people know you have seen them and they can consentrate on landing without having to wonder if the bloke behind is going up their chuff.
I think its a great shame its now a wonder to so many people and am somewhat supprised by this thread.:ugh:

Absolutely spot on FM

Refer CAP 413, section 5.4.3 for use of 'Ready for departure' at an A/G field.

It's not meaningless at all even if it is not manned, if I'm on final at an A/G field and someone else calls 'ready for departure' that indicates clearly to me they have finished their take-off/power checks and intend to line up if the approach is clear. I'll be watching them and hopefully they will have seen me. It's a bit late when they say 'lining up', but if in doubt after a 'ready for departure' one can repeat 'G-XX Final' to remind them you are there. (Surely these things happen to others don't they?)


It's interesting discussing the topic, certainly seems that either, one can be use to operations at a particular field and assume the RT is the 'norm' without that being the case.

Or perhaps reading a lot of the replies it is the case at a lot of A/G fields and it is only those that rarely visit them that don't get 'contact 1 ahead' and then say 'rolling' when they take-off as they haven't really understood the environment much and perhaps feel they should warn everyone. (Just a little humor) :p

I seem to recall that it was the venerable Mr Heathrow Director, or possibly one of his equally venerable colleagues, who, in response to the call by a pilot "rolling" retorted with the phrase "Roger, report inverted".

Always a good one, but ultimately, standard phraseology is paramount, Stand up - Speak Up - Shut up.
Stick to that and you won't go far wrong wherever you go.

This can happen the other way around too. On downwind, for instance:

"G-ABCD make one 360 over left for separation, report back on downwind"
"One 360 over left, G-CD"
...half a second later...
"Back on downwind, G-CD"

How fast does your aircraft snaproll?

Torque Tonight

If you knew CAP413, you would know that phrase is not in there.

So why do you think it is in regular use in the airways?

Heathrow Director

Sense of humour failure, or Victor Meldrew tendencies developing with the hair growing out of the nose and ears? :}

Danscowpie

But whose standard phraseology?

Couldn't agree less. The old saw is "aviate, navigate, communicate". When (if) you must communicate, stick to standard phraseology, but, if there is a *need* to communicate, and you either don't know, or there isn't standard phraseology to do so, just get the message out in the most concise way you can think of.

There's more to flying than being word perfect on your R/T. Not to suggest one should be lax, but it is a long way down the scale from paramount. I'm currently minded of taxiing in from a flight listening to a guy at the pumps deliver a perfectly phrased spiel - then taxi forward into an iron re-bar which was holding up the red and white striped "don't go here" tape..

I might just add that your 'Ready for departure' call is meaningless to an A/G operator.
?)

I occasionally get 'Ready for departure' calls. My reply is usually 'Roger'.
I might pass them the wind speed and direction. I might pass them traffic information if I think it affects them. I'll often see them sit for several minutes waiting for an instruction that they're never going to get.

And that's exactly what I don't like about A/G or AFIS setups.

As a pilot, I want to use the radio to convey safety information to other pilots. Where I am in the circuit for instance, or what my intentions are.

I know the A/G or AFIS operator couldn't care less, but because he/she is the "owner" of the frequency, it seems as if all my calls have to be directed at him and he's got to respond somehow. And indeed, to 9 out of 10 calls, the proper response from this operator is "roger".

I have flown in the US where fields have a CTAF frequency. There is nobody on the ground monitoring this, so it's clear that any transmission on this frequency is directed at other traffic near the field. In fact, you address the recipients as "XXX traffic" and if necessary you engage in air-to-air communications with another aircraft directly. It's much clearer that way.

As said earlier, my "ready for departure" call at an A/G or AFIS field is not intended for the operator. It's a chance for an aircraft on final to call "final" once again, just in case I haven't seen him. And if I have seen him, I'll add a "traffic on final in sight" or "behind the traffic short final".

I wish at an A/G or AFIS field we could make two different types of calls. The first type would be "XXX radio, bla bla bla" or "XXX information, bla bla bla" which makes clear that I need information from the operator. Runway in use, QNH, QFE, circuit direction, wind, taxi instructions, whatever. And the second type would be "XXX traffic, bla bla bla" which makes clear that I want to convey information to others near the field. My position in the circuit and my intentions for instance. That last type of call would be a "blind" call, with no response expected from anyone, unless my intentions interfere with the intentions of another aircraft. In which case I expect him to tell me his position and intentions, so that we can work out a plan.

That's just stupidity on their part. Not your fault. And something that's not going to change even if I got my wish. You'll never going to get a take-off clearance at an uncontrolled field no matter how the radio procedures are changed.

Backpacker

As an A/G licence holder, it is not so much that I do not care, as I am not allowed to do anything other than pass on certain information. As Flyingmac says 'ready for departure' has no meaning, as I cannot clear them to enter the runway or to take off - I guess I could respond 'I have a spaniel dog', but the authorities would not like that ;)

IIRC an AFISO may give limited clearances, e.g. taxiing and depart at own discretion, so they need to know intentions.

I'm 100% with Backpacker on the reason for calls at an A/G field.

If I call Downwind, I'm not expecting the A/G operator to pass the information to others as known traffic - 'traffic is a PA-28 Downwind' I'm telling other pilots in the circuit that I'm Downwind.

I don't expect a reply from the A/G operator if calling 'ready for departure' - I'm telling those on base, final, behind me doing power checks, that I'm about to line up and take-off. It's well understood that is what it means at our field. One is ready for departure and intends after checking the approach path to do so.

If one hears 'G-YY' Ready for Departure' and is well down the final approach, a repeat call of 'G-XX Final' has on several occasions been met by 'G-YY Holding' which saves me a go around.


The problems come from visiting aircraft who are not use to operating in the A/G environment, if they are waiting for instructions from an A/G operator they really need to go back to the basics for a bit of revision.

A/G fields are about pilots communicating with each other, that is my experience, our operators can't even see the circuit or most of the runway, so I'm not expecting them to inform me of traffic or much else other than the runway in use, circuit direction, QFE/QNH and perhaps the surface wind if required.

Surely the point of the "Roger" from the A/G operator is to confirm that everyone on the frequency did actually here your "blind" transmission of ready for departure/downwind/finals - ie that you did press PTT, that the mic, radio, aerial did work?

Is it really a big deal if the A/G operator replies "Roger"? - it takes less than a half second and can be ignored if it bothers you, but why should it?

Roger from A/G doesn't bother me, sometimes they reply with two 'clicks' the issue is that 'ready for departure' might not mean anything to the A/G operators contributing to this thread, it sure means something to me as a pilot on final.

The point being other than an initial call to A/G for radio check and airfield information all subsequent calls of, taxi, ready for departure, downwind, final are for the benefit of other pilots at an A/G field, not the A/G operator.

If A/G say 'roger' yes it is reassuring that one is actually transmitting. If they reply 'I have a spaniel dog' though it might be somewhat amusing it really misses the point that the objective of the calls is to other pilots. At an A/G field we as pilots have the responsibility of not bumping into each other and the radio calls are generally for that purpose not the benefit of the A/G operator. (Who may well be in the loo, on the phone, dealing with a customer etc etc)

At a place I visit, the reply from A/G to "Ready for departure" is usually "At your discretion".

tut tut, that should be reserved for AFIS and a FISO not an A/G operator.

Refer CAP 413 5.4.2

NOTE: Air ground operators must not use the expression ‘at your discretion’ as this is associated with the service provided by FISOs and is likely to cause
confusion to pilots.

Conventional Gear

I think you might have slightly missed my point.

The word 'roger' only means I heard something on the r/t, not that I understood it.

One should not rely on it as confirming that your transmission was understood.

e.g. if you transmit 'G-ABCD radio check' and I reply 'roger', what does that mean?

If I reply 'G-ABCD, receiving you five', then it is rather more meaningful.

Saying I have a spaniel means as little as saying 'roger.' In the case of ready for departure, I cannot do any more than use words that acknowledge your transmission, I'm not allowed to.

I do understand your point about using the A/G service to alert other aircraft to your intentions and it is well made.

I don't think I'm missing the point. I just take 'roger' from A/G as reassurance that my call was transmitted on frequency. It is a reply I might expect (if any) to 'ready for departure'

For Example:

Example Radio, 123.450, G-XXXX, radio check and airfield information for departure

G-XX reading you five, runway in use 07, right hand circuit, QNH 1001

reading you five also, 07 right hand circuit, QNH 1001

The above is a direct communication to the A/G operator, I expect certain information as the reply.

Next call:

G-XX taxi to hold 07

Here I might expect no reply from A/G, it's information to other pilots that I'm going to taxi to hold for runway 07. The A/G may reply 'Roger' I simply take that as meaning 'we heard and understood your last transmission'. Hopefully then so did everyone else on frequency.

I arrive at the holding area, carry out my power checks and pre-take off checks. At this time pilots on final can see me, they might be wondering is that aircraft about to line up?

At the end of the checks I scan the approach path and call:

G-XX Ready for Departure

The pilot on final who I didn't see now knows I'm ready to depart and is warned.

A/G may or may not respond 'roger' which means nothing more to me than the A/G Operator heard and understood my transmission. It was not actually for their benefit in any case, but hey I like our A/G operators so they can say 'roger' if they like. If they don't it doesn't matter much.

If they reply 'I have a spaniel dog' it conveys exactly the same information, but 'roger' is shorter and better R/T ;)

I have known airfields use "Roger, take-off at your discretion" - making it clear that it's okay with the A/G operator, but ultimately entirely up to the pilot.

I've also known airfields where seeing what's on final approach from any sensible position to line up from, is very hard.

So, for example:

"Popham radio, G-ABCD, ready for departure on 26"
"G-ABCD, take off at your discretion, but recommend you wait for the Cessna on finals"

Is pro-safety, surely?

G

Conventional Gear
I'm not being pedantic (well I guess I am, but only because it is important information) but 'roger' does not mean understood, only heard.

Anyway, not trying to start an argument :O

Ghengis

I've heard A/G operators use the 'D' word, too, but they shouldn't, as it is a type of clearance to be given by AFISO's.

You win, you are correct in being pedantic, I should not have said 'understood'

ROGER I have received all your last transmission.
Note: Under no circumstances to be used in reply to a question
requiring a direct answer in the affirmative (AFFIRM) or
negative (NEGATIVE).

But it doesn't change the general drift of the topic in terms of the role of an A/G operator and the purpose of calls such as 'ready for departure' at an A/G field, which are certainly not meaningless to pilots.

And while being pedantic


Are you really sure the 'D' word is a 'clearance' :p

Or for that matter that a AFIS can issue a clearance other than one passed to them by an ATU which must be clearly stated as such. :E

As I understand it (and I am a layman) an AFISO shall not inform an aircraft that the runway is clear, until after ATC has cleared it for take off, assuming a clearance is required.

If a clearance is not required, then the AFISO may inform the aircraft that the runway is clear, by issuing the 'take off at your discretion' phrase.

I also believe that AFISOs control aircraft on the ground, so as I understand it, 'take off at your discretion' is a clearance to enter the runway, but I am happy to be corrected, as I am not an AFISO, only licensed to do A/G.

It's in the definition of 'clearance' a clearance must always be read back btw.

Take off at your discretion

Is not a 'clearance'


It is distinct from an ATCO saying 'Cleared to take-off 07' which is a 'clearance'


CLEARED ‡ Authorised to proceed under the conditions specified



A FISO cannot do that, they can only say 'Take off at your discretion'

Take off at your discretion certainly doesn't say you are 'cleared to take off', it says take off WHEN YOU have confirmed it is clear and safe to do so. Remember a FISO cannot issue instructions only information most of the time:

CAP 413 2.2.2

Whilst the RTF procedures used by air traffic controllers form the main content of this
publication it should be noted that the phraseology used by FISOs at aerodromes is
different from that used by controllers. A FISO at an aerodrome provides a service to
give information useful for the safe and efficient conduct of flights in the Aerodrome
Traffic Zone. From the information received pilots will be able to decide the
appropriate course of action to be taken to ensure the safety of flight. Generally, the
FISO is not permitted to issue instructions or advice to pilots of his own volition.
However, in granting or refusing permission under Rule 40 and 41 of the Rules of the
Air, FISOs at aerodromes are permitted to pass instructions to vehicles and personnel
operating on the manoeuvring area and information and instructions to aircraft moving
on the apron and specific parts of the manoeuvring area. Elsewhere on the
manoeuvring area and at all times in the air, information only shall be passed to pilots.
Further details on the passing of instructions by FISOs at aerodromes are contained
in CAP 410 Manual of Flight Information Services - Part B Aerodrome.


I cannot find any reference to a FISO being able to use the term 'cleared' i.e. to issue a 'clearance' in CAP 413 - but I'm more than happy to be corrected too, the point of the exercise is to learn after all, not prove one is always right. :ok:

Conventional Gear.

When you've worn out your copy of CAP 413, (shouldn't be long now), I've got an unopened one you can have. Unless we run out of loo roll.

No need, I have the PDF and can print off lots of copies for myself :)

"Visual one ahead/on." Is, IMHO, unambiguos. It means "I can see the guy ahead". "Contact" means two things, "Call xxx they have your details" or "I am about to make physical contact with the propellor with the intention of hand starting the engine, I understand the magnetos are live".
I am & always will be under the impression that "Roger" means "Your message received & understood". If it wern't understood it should be "station calling xxx say again" or perhaps "G-XX say again, over". At least it was in the Mil 40 yrs ago!
And "Secure" in the Navy meant, End of working time (1600 I seem to remember).

I agree that it would be completely perverse to say "Roger" in response to a message which one had not understood.

Well I must admit I did think 'roger' meant received and understood too.

I thought the distinction was that it doesn't imply the pilot will actually conform with an instruction, hence why a simple 'roger' isn't always an appropriate response.