Standard of RT in USA
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: A tropical island.
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd love to see any ATC in the USA try and manage Heathrow for an hour...
Last edited by aviatorhi; 15th Jul 2013 at 02:21.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Avia..please define "busy". LHR has 2 runways. It has some pretty savage noise abate protocols that ATC have to feed traffic around, particularly on the 27's. I know of no other airport where I have to call DIRECTOR with call sign only. The approach separation distances are absolute minimums and rely almost exclusively on the most prompt of runway exits. I think 'Busy" is a tadge different from traffic density, given the paucity of runways at LHR compared to the other 11.
...and BTW can someone explain again to me why LHR insist on the ATIS readback to include QNH still...and for that matter, why do they need a confirmation of a/c type??..I thought that was on the flight plan, which after all defines the weight of the aerplane and thus the levy of charges??..or am I still in the 80's???
...and BTW can someone explain again to me why LHR insist on the ATIS readback to include QNH still...and for that matter, why do they need a confirmation of a/c type??..I thought that was on the flight plan, which after all defines the weight of the aerplane and thus the levy of charges??..or am I still in the 80's???
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: .
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircraft type filed on the plan is not always the actual type that is being used. When doing final approach spacing down to the minimums, we need to be sure that the aircraft is the type we are expecting. Happens more often than you would think.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many years ago I spent some time as an ATC simulator pilot for trainee controllers. I used a whole spectrum of accents and phraseology standards with my “pilot” r/t. Instructors and trainees were amused. I told them that in fact my intention wasn’t to be amusing but simply trying to introduce them to the real world of ATC r/t. Many trainees later came back to me after their first live r/t experiences stating that my r/t “acting” had come in useful.
I like both the British and American phraseology. It really doesn’t bother me at all. Although it is generally getting better these days, the only criticism I have is that some US controllers still need to slow down their delivery rate a little when speaking to certain nationalities.
I like both the British and American phraseology. It really doesn’t bother me at all. Although it is generally getting better these days, the only criticism I have is that some US controllers still need to slow down their delivery rate a little when speaking to certain nationalities.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: EHAA
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The americans say "xxx Heavy" everywhere, and the brits feel obliged to tell departure on which SID, pass alt, cleared level they are to everyone,
eventhough nobody seem to care outside the UK.
(And before any dutch start rambling about ATC in AMS which is good, sorry but a bit to gash generally !! )
eventhough nobody seem to care outside the UK.
(And before any dutch start rambling about ATC in AMS which is good, sorry but a bit to gash generally !! )
I'll try to be less gash next time!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
which SID, pass alt, cleared level
I´m German, from the formerly (or still?) US occupied part.
Although overweight, I refrain from calling myself 'heavy'...
Sorry if thats wrong.
Last edited by His dudeness; 15th Jul 2013 at 09:18.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: A tropical island.
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pucka, every airport has it's unique elements, but to say that a US controller would have difficulty adjusting to how busy Heathrow is, well that's just something I don't buy.
As I said this is by aircraft movements.
CLT was comparable until they added the third runway in 2010 it has an additional long parallel runway. LAS is also comparable. The busier airports like ATL, ORD, JFK, etc. all have more runways simply because they need them to handle the volume of traffic. LHR would need to almost double it's traffic to approach ATL.
I also don't think LHR controllers would have much difficulty going the other way.
As I said this is by aircraft movements.
CLT was comparable until they added the third runway in 2010 it has an additional long parallel runway. LAS is also comparable. The busier airports like ATL, ORD, JFK, etc. all have more runways simply because they need them to handle the volume of traffic. LHR would need to almost double it's traffic to approach ATL.
I also don't think LHR controllers would have much difficulty going the other way.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this talk of ours is busier than yours that's why we are gash is nonsense.
The busier an airport the more important it is to get the message across clearly (and yes that includes to foreigners who haven't got English as a first language), the first time. That's why we have standards and standard phraseology etc.
The busier an airport the more important it is to get the message across clearly (and yes that includes to foreigners who haven't got English as a first language), the first time. That's why we have standards and standard phraseology etc.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Avia, Paola if I implied US airports wouldn't hack it at LHR..I certainly didn't mean that in the slightest..it was just to get the definition of BUSY ATC sorted in the aviation context. I am certain that given role exchanges twist LHR and US ATC, the world would be a little more colorful, a tadge less stuck up and a bit less arrogant!
Yes..AMS and this DIRECTOR thingy..strangely after operating in there for a pretty long time..since 1980 ish..I can't recall.."call director call sign only".. Must either be early onset...or I am so gash they don't trust me!!!
Yes..AMS and this DIRECTOR thingy..strangely after operating in there for a pretty long time..since 1980 ish..I can't recall.."call director call sign only".. Must either be early onset...or I am so gash they don't trust me!!!
I find myself in the odd position of agreeing with spandex, standard phraseology is good. That standard RT needs to change in the future to a less verbose standard however.
6. Do the Americans actually go on a course of instruction to adopt that lazy comfortable southern drawl
Eclan:
your post full of whinging is noted.
I like clear concise R/T comms, but that may be due to having been an instructor for years and harping on
Who
Where
What
radio call formats to teach newbies why we say things the way we do over the radio, in the order we say them. (PTAPTP ... oh, wait, we are all radar covered now, right? )
"Sir, why do we say niner"
"Because nine and five sould too much alike when the radio is a bit scratchy"
"Sir, why do we say zero instead of oh?"
"Because clarity is important in communication"
"Why do we say .Pan Pan Pan" (Or, as I was once informed, "pan pan, pan pan, pan pan" )
"Because it's Spanish for bread, and when it's in the pan your goose is cooked." I had a flight student do a double take when I slipped that one in ... we had a good laugh over it.
Keke
For goodness sake, some version of 'English' is understood by 99% of all pilots and controllers, as long as it's broadcast at the rate of a Texan drawl to those who are not native 'English' speakers
The person well above you who spoke about a "high speed drawl" may have misunderstood what a drawl is ...
Phil
So I presume that the US Armed Forces Air Traffic Controllers go along with the abbreviated terminology of their civil cousins ?
The busier an airport the more important it is to get the message across clearly (and yes that includes to foreigners who haven't got English as a first language), the first time.
And so on.
Pet Peeve:
Readback of clearance strikes me as a place where there is NO room for paraphrasing instructions. Clearance is a critical part of the pilot/controller interface in terms of safety and 'getting it right' together., whether one is on the ground or inflight.
This includes taxi instructions.
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 15th Jul 2013 at 17:58.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leave off the Yanks, they might be "non-standard" but they're not unsafe.
What's unsafe is how controllers and pilots across many major TMAs and international airports insist on speaking in their native tongue which degrades situational awareness and adds to workload. It's killed before and I'm positive it will do so again. This isn't a business for second guessing.
And I'm not one of these "I speak English so everybody bloody should" types. There's a time and a place.
What's unsafe is how controllers and pilots across many major TMAs and international airports insist on speaking in their native tongue which degrades situational awareness and adds to workload. It's killed before and I'm positive it will do so again. This isn't a business for second guessing.
And I'm not one of these "I speak English so everybody bloody should" types. There's a time and a place.
Last edited by Callsign Kilo; 15th Jul 2013 at 21:49.
Heathrow has no problem with a snowstorm--airport closed, no planes, no problem. Mind you, it would a snow storm you can see the blades of grass through the snow cover.
The folks at DFW, airlines, ATC and airport ops pretty much do the same at the first sigh of an ice storm. Guess its cheaper overall to park 'em for the one a year storm than keep all the equipment in place.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Devonshire
Age: 96
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some may recall that in the late 1940s that there was a proposal made to PICAO ( Provisional ICAO, I think) that Spanish should be the "Language of the Air". I cannot recall which countries made this proposal.
The U.S.A. said ... "NO"
Thank heavens !
An alternative, then, might have been an expanded Q-Code, to be done in Morse Code, just to make it " International...".
The U.S.A. said ... "NO"
Thank heavens !
An alternative, then, might have been an expanded Q-Code, to be done in Morse Code, just to make it " International...".
Last edited by Linktrained; 16th Jul 2013 at 00:48.
Why would Spanish possibly been considered? They weren't one of the four powers that won the war, even the Russians only grudgingly participated in the Chicago Convention. Everything ICAO is in the powers' languages.
GF
GF
Last edited by galaxy flyer; 16th Jul 2013 at 01:08.