Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Standard of RT in USA

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Standard of RT in USA

Old 3rd Aug 2013, 13:05
  #321 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Not where I want to be
Age: 66
Posts: 248
Wouldn't that be double nickle, or 5558?
Ancient Mariner is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 14:25
  #322 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,292
Grounded 27:


Standard...

1wun

2too

3tree

4fower

5fife

6siks

7seven

8ait

9niner

0zeero

Has this been lost?
This is a page from the FAA's AIM:

aterpster is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 19:23
  #323 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Ceduna
Age: 67
Posts: 62
Back in the '80s some Flying Tiger aces planted a B747 into a hill at WMSA old Subang Kuala Lumpur international airport because they descended to 400ft instead of the cleared altitude of two thousand four hundred feet. After that ( and a lot of hoo haa, hand wringing and racist protestations ) ICAO recommended against using the phrase " cleared to " as the then KUL ATC had cleared those guys with the instructions" cleared two four zero zero feet " which was two thousand four hunderd feet, but the Flying Tigers crew misinterpreted that as "cleared to four zero zero feet ".

Well it was poor sitiation awareness as the charted initial approach altitude was 2400 feet and the misinterpreted four zero zero feet was too low an altitude to be an initial approach altitude...they were cleared ILS approach, certainly not a GCA approach. They had 3 crew members from the USA and yet the error chain was not broken! And we have numbskulls on the OZ214
crash thread wondering how that tragic accident could have happened!!!
Nobody then made the claim that American aviators were piss poor pilots.
Was this the REAL cause of the accident or a red herring to hide other possible
reasons like chronic fatigue, negligence or other errors? Just asking.....

Last edited by Tipsy Barossa; 3rd Aug 2013 at 19:25.
Tipsy Barossa is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 22:26
  #324 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the dark side of the moon
Posts: 951
They set 400 feet on the altitude selector, so no, it was not a red herring. Other factors such as ignoring repeated GPWS pull up warnings didn't help but had they set 2400 ft instead, they'd likely still be alive today.
J.O. is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 22:39
  #325 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: CYZV
Age: 73
Posts: 1,259
Not a single occurrence. In 1991 a G2 was given a clearance to 4000 feet on approach to Kota Kinabalu. Unfortunately the local terrain was 4100 feet.

Last edited by pigboat; 3rd Aug 2013 at 22:42.
pigboat is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 05:34
  #326 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Earth
Posts: 121
As an American pilot who conducts most of their flights outside the US, I agree, the phraseology standard of most of my colleagues is downright embarrassing. Indeed, it seems that many US pilots go out of their way to be non-standard and I find it absolutely maddening.

They do things like omit their flight number in readbacks, other times say only the flight number and omit the callsign, they add a possesive 's to the end of their callsin, say "checkin' on with ya" on intial callup, say "up to three four oh" when cleared to climb, say "down to two seven oh" when cleared to descend, and otherwise just break into random sentences of non-standard English when doing something as simple as asking for a weather deviation. It is very frustrating to be an unwilling accomplice to this behavior.

Unfortunately there is no way to address this issue without coming off as a complete . I've found that pilots take these types of criticisms personally, especially if they come from a relatively junior pilot such as myself. I have little choice but to keep my distaste internalized. All I can do is strive to be standard when it is my turn to key the mic.
RandomPerson8008 is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 09:11
  #327 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Here,there and everywhere
Posts: 35
RandomPerson8008 ..... my hats off to you Sir .... I would gladly board your plane anytime. Seeing that there are still some real professionals out there is encourageing and maybe there's still a hope for this industry...
Salute and best regards from a relatively "old farted" European ATC .

Last edited by 1999; 5th Aug 2013 at 09:12.
1999 is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 09:30
  #328 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,608
Hopefully RT isn't the deciding factor for you to put your family on someone's aircraft. I'm sure Sully's RT wasn't the greatest that day. Nor was Al Haines in Sioux City, nor David Cronin returning to HNL with number 3 and 4 toast and a large chunk of the fuselage missing.

I know where your going with it and I understand, but don't make any assumptions of ones flying skills based on RT. as much as I'm sure I'll be lambasted, I do believe that.
West Coast is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 09:49
  #329 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Are we to assume that most American pilots are constantly in the middle of a crisis then?
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 09:55
  #330 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Here,there and everywhere
Posts: 35
RT isn't the only deciding factor of course ... but based on my 47 year lifes experiance - the folks prone to cutting the corners in one "field" are most likely cutting them elsewhere ... but as I said, that's my experiance.
Examples of those pilots you mentioned were emergency and life threataning situations and as such maybe not the best reference to the topic ....
and to further elaborate my initial post ... the intention of my post was not bashing US pilots ... there are good and bad apples everywhere ... I just wanted to praise one voice who speaks out and goes against the "general" defensive attitude of (to) many ....
1999 is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 10:29
  #331 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: FL400
Posts: 398
Sullenberger's RT was far from standard, but it was brief and to the point and in a critical situation such as the one he was in, was highly appropriate.
I just got back from a long trip to the States and while I generally find the standard of RT not as bad as some people on this forum would have it, it can be very poor at times. I can think of at least 5 or 6 occasions on the sector home where clearances had to be repeated largely because of poor RT technique. A phenomenon which I am noticing more and more from US operators is the press the R/T switch and say nothing technique. Nobody seems to think before they start transmitting. As we are told that US R/T is non-standard because of the busy airspace, I wonder how much time is lost because of it?
I also heard someone pretty much arranging a date between a departure radar controller and the female pilot of a regional jet. Seriously?
Al Murdoch is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 12:15
  #332 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: us
Age: 34
Posts: 1
As said before it's not like they are banging in airliners all that often. In recent times I have heard even domestic Australian pilots breakout the US RT proceedures when frequencies get congested. Seems to work much better!
dailyazna is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 12:39
  #333 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ormond Beach
Age: 45
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by Randomperson8088

As an American pilot who conducts most of their flights outside the US, I agree, the phraseology standard of most of my colleagues is downright embarrassing. Indeed, it seems that many US pilots go out of their way to be non-standard and I find it absolutely maddening.

They do things like omit their flight number in readbacks, other times say only the flight number and omit the callsign, they add a possesive 's to the end of their callsin, say "checkin' on with ya" on intial callup, say "up to three four oh" when cleared to climb, say "down to two seven oh" when cleared to descend, and otherwise just break into random sentences of non-standard English when doing something as simple as asking for a weather deviation. It is very frustrating to be an unwilling accomplice to this behavior.

Unfortunately there is no way to address this issue without coming off as a complete . I've found that pilots take these types of criticisms personally, especially if they come from a relatively junior pilot such as myself. I have little choice but to keep my distaste internalized. All I can do is strive to be standard when it is my turn to key the mic.
What kind of starch do you use for your shirts? I've been using Faultless, but I'm being told real professionals only use Niagara. Is that true?
flyboyike is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 13:38
  #334 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Earth
Posts: 121
Originally Posted by flyboyike
What kind of starch do you use for your shirts? I've been using Faultless, but I'm being told real professionals only use Niagara. Is that true?
I use whatever the "Guppy Killer" "heavy RJ" drivers are using. They're undoubtedly the experts on all things concerning professional aviation, especially this topic, since they so often depart the confines of comfortable North America. Oh, wait a second.....

I'm sure "checkin on with ya three four oh lookin for a smooth ride, how ya'll doin down there?, over and out little buddy" works just fine all day long on that super desireable IND-CLT route. Sure, you sound like a tool, but it makes you feel like Luke Duke form the Dukes of Hazard so it's all worthwhile.
RandomPerson8008 is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 14:16
  #335 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ormond Beach
Age: 45
Posts: 0
That's just it, I've seen some of them use Faultess, some Niagara and some just sizing spray, so I'm all confused on that issue.
flyboyike is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 14:49
  #336 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the dark side of the moon
Posts: 951
None of us is faultless. How does that affect the fact that we all have a responsibility to raise our concerns when unsafe behaviours creep into the operation?
J.O. is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 15:37
  #337 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,561
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate. Notice which one has last priority?
bubbers44 is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 15:45
  #338 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,831
Absolutely, hence the concern when the communicate bit takes too much time because:

a. Other 'professional' pilots/controllers are using ten words when two will do.

b. You have to ask for repeats of instructions because they weren't given in a standard format first.

This whole thread (and the Asiana SFO) one is a great example of why we need to do CRM.
Cows getting bigger is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 16:22
  #339 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 57
Posts: 223
"Standard of RT in the USA"?

Well let's see, in the UK I've been told by numerous controllers to "Climb level four hundred", etc. In France when checking in with a speed restriction I've been told "Free speed", I could go on and on but I think the phrase that comes to mind here is "Be careful not to cast stones in glass houses".
Astra driver is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2013, 18:55
  #340 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Here
Age: 50
Posts: 50
Bubbers,

So because its the 3rd in line out of the 3 it just doesn't matter? Reassuring.

Astra Driver,

Firstly I've never heard that in my life and I'm guessing I fly in the UK far more than you do. And secondly if that's the best example of crap RT you can muster from outside of the US then I think that probably tells a story!?

Don't really know why this has turned into an intercontinental p1ssing contest, its about safety and nothing else. I'm not judging the standards of any country's ATC, but to defend US ATC units' and pilots use of totally non-standard RT by saying "hey it works just fine here/we know more than anyone as we invented flying etc etc" is laughable. The whole point of "standardised" RT is so people from all 4 corners of the aviation world (there is a rather large world beyond US borders) can understand and be understood. This must take into account the lowest common denominator whoever they may be.

Unfortunately US ATC aren't always easy to understand and that's to a native English speaker. If it works "just fine" for you then great, but why can't so many people see the fact that for non-natives its harder (and therefore potentially less safe) than using standard phrases. I'm not so anal as to expect any controller/pilot exchange to be anything close to word perfect anywhere in the world, but the whole point is that many US pilots/controllers don't even make an effort to sound professional or attempt to use any standard phrases. Why?

Because YOU know better and it works fine for YOU. What else matters!?
Daily Dalaman Dave is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.