Sqwauking Indent
 

Will pilots please STOP sqwauking INDENT on making your initial call and first contact with LONDON ATC sectors! You may think it's all routine and that you're being helpful, but if you do so you will invalidate the sequence we are expected to follow to positively indentify new contacts. We have MANY ident pulses going off all over the radar screen from aircraft on different sectors and we must be sure that YOU are the one who has selected that code AND is sqwauking ident coming onto our frequency. Please wait to be asked to sqwauk INDENT. Many thanks.;)

Can't find the INDENT button on my ATC Transponder panel?;)

Hotdog - is that because it's pushed in ?

Finally somebody picking up on that.
Always thought: "wise guy, squawking w/o being asked"; must be so annoying.

also there's the guys who barge onto a new frequency w/o listening out first, trampling all over others. What's wrong with waiting a second or two, before you give your whole spiel?

I have no problems with pilots identing before I've asked.

I have a bigger problem with pilots who don't give me the passing altitude or who check in with only the callsign...

Probably because a few weeks ago a LATCC controller said on this forum, "don't worry if you can't get a word in when you arrive in my sector, just ident to let me know your still OK" or something to that effect.

Indent or Ident? Always thought it was ident, but London ATC are always sharp!

Oh you bunch of pedants !!!

(PS it's 'squawking' not 'sqwauking') :}


There are ways around that one. You let them level off and then once they have made that level check you clear them further and tell them if they'd given you all the info on first call then they could have had continuous climb/descent ;)

I am surprised to hear that pilots squawk anything new. least of all ident, without orders - sounds like a very bad and non - standard habit if it is really happening.

Maybe a visit to the ATC room is in order...

FC

Also when ATC ask you to squalk ident, do just that and don't read back "Squalk Ident" (CAP Fower Wun Tree):ok:

180 too fower,

The problem with that is :

1) It is an ATC SSR instruction and therefore should be read back.

2) If it doesn't work the controller doesn't know if you didn't hear the instruction or if the facility is not operating.

If people insist that the transmission must be acknowledged. Rather than the rather Verbose " Squawking Ident on 1234 " Hows about "Wilco"??

TIO

PPrune Radar, you are pure evil, but I like your style fella!!!:cool:

180 too fower, humour us and do the readback, please!:hmm:

If you are asked to ident just reading back "ident" is ok, no ? But who does it without being asked ? I have trouble remembering all the stuff i have to do let alone stuff i dont...

For what it is worth, if an aircraft tells me his callsign and idents and it is an aircraft I am expecting, then I am quite happy.
I believe that the main reason for the ident is so that the computer can find the aircraft and update all its bits and pieces.
If we say it it keeps SRG happy.
I think that if an aircraft uses a callsign that I see on the radar using code/callsign, then that is good enough for an ident.
No doubt lots of Controllers are now going to disagree with me.
Pilots, on first call please give your current altitude so that I can verify your mode 'C'

Point taken Mr Top of the stack...answer me this, why do your buddies in Scotland want every one to ident when checking in? ex on 123.77 etc.

Hi all,

Do you always want a passing altitude/level when we check in?
I believe there is this idea that you only give your passing level when youre checking in to a new area for the first time. eg London to Maastricht or vs. I just like this clarified.
Thanks

...and did you know that the 'ident' goes off when you release your finger off the button...not when it is initially pressed.
Have seen some pilots give ATC a really 'loooonnnnnnggggg' ident when in actual fact they have not given one at all because they are holding on to the button.

For a very long time...
 

...mentioning passing altitude when contacting a new sector controller has NOT been an ICAO requirement, and IF the new controller wants this information, the previous controller should have said so in the first place, when he issued a frequency change.

It would indeed appear that some ATC folks are not all that familiar with ICAO procedures....UK folks in particular.

In addition, the new controller can positively see the passing altitude now, as all transponders in use by large aircraft have this facility...Charlie mode.

So, ATC folks, get your knickers out of a twist.

Pilots have enough problems trying to read the newspaper without being bothered all the time...:p :p :E

PS:

Heard by yours truly many years ago, on the LAX ground control freq:

Clipper 56, contact ground 121.6
(as he was taxying northbound on runway 34...yes, I told you this was a looog time ago)

PA56: Hey ground, why do we have to change freqs so much, it interrupts our ah...reading Playboy.

Ground: You are a dirty old man.

PA56: Yes, we are all old enough up here, and she ain't bad looking either.

Ground: Ah...no comment, but can you bring it up to the tower so we can all have a look?

PA56: Positively NO.

From another acft:
Not only old, stingy as well.

Of course, the whole *point* of reporting your passing altitude/flight level is to *verify* that your Mode C information that the controller sees is correct! It would be a bit of a problem, expecially in these days of RVSM if it was complete garbage, wouldn't it? Not likely, I know, but it's doing the little things like this that could save our necks one day when the 'not likely' occurs.

180 to fower -

CAP413 instructs you to readback a "Squawk Ident" instruction, as well as obviously pressing the button.

Will read back from now on, I was always under the impression that we were not meant to. Can't find my old CAP 413 any more but I bow to your knowledge.:ok:

Squawking Ident.
 

>It would indeed appear that some ATC folks are not all that familiar with ICAO procedures....UK folks in particular.<

What is it with you, 411A ?
If you'd spent any appreciable time "over this side" , you would know that UK controllers are as good, if not better, than any in the world.

I've spent over 40 years talking to them, amongst many others, and I know who I would prefer to be talking to on a dark and stormy night!

Sleeve. :yuk:

CAP 413 can be found on the caa website.
http://www.caa.co.uk/publications/publications.asp

No offence intended, but if you were to look into it a bit more, you'd find that the Chicago Convention is based on the principle of State sovereignty. Sure, the idea is that all States would employ the same rules in their national laws, but the "ICAO" system, as you put it, is just basically standard international law. The only way it differs from "normal" international law is that a standard in an Annex becomes binding on a State unless that State has notified of a difference. In a way this means that signatories to the treaty have committed themselves to following future changes to any Annex unless they positively say they're not going to implement the change.

This is why we have national variations in the way of doing things, and that's why the AIP is ever so important as you have to comply with the rules of any State that you're flying in/over.

So as far as the UK is concerned, they could have a requirement to report altitude/level passing when reading back a heading instruction if they so chose.

I do a lot of long haul flyings and I believe London ATC is one of the most professional ATC in the world. Even when they are busy, they sound very calm and relaxed. Flying into the major airports like LAX, ORD, JFK in the US could be very stressful.

411A

Real MATS (manual of air traffic services) it tells you what you should and should not do. Many states have filed excemptions to ICAO.

Let´s not forget that other folks are trying to keep a picture of the traffic situation too - ie. other pilots.

Calling your FL / Alt when you check in immediately informs another pilot whether he might be affected by your flight.

Every little bit helps.

FC.

Would agree completely Cosmo, individual states do indeed have differencies/exemptions from ICAO.

Now, IF the UK does in this instance, perhaps you would like to give a reference to same, and a link if at all possible.

And, yes, I have probably spent much more time flying on the eastern side of the great devide...about thirty years worth.
My first ops to LHR were in 1974, in a B707.
And yes, they are indeed nice folks...but then again I have a personal preference for the ATC folks in AMS, and the Netherlands in general...which are certainly just as professional (if not better) than in the UK.

For the benefit of 411A and any other regular visitors to the UK's excellent ATC services, 'kishna' has kindly provided a link (a few boxes up) to CAP413 which defines UK SID procedures, and other filed exceptions/differences to ICAO, and from Chapter 6 (1) of which I quote:-

"1.1.2 Pilots of all aircraft flying Instrument Departures are to include the following information on first contact with approach control/departure radar:
a) Call sign;
b) SID Designator where appropriate;
c) Current or passing ALT/FL; PLUS
d) Cleared ALT/FL. For Standard Instrument Departures involving stepped climb profiles, state the initial ALT/FL to which the aircraft is climbing."

Would agree, BOAC, and indeed thus is indicated on additional Jep pages in the LHR section....for the FIRST call only.

But it says nothing about descending aircraft reporting passing altitudes, nor does it address climbing aircraft once they have left the standard instrument departure (DP in the USA), so I would maintain that mentioning passing altitudes/flight levels is otherwise not required (unless specifically requested to do so) and further, adds to frequency congestion.

411A,

Sorry, I don't know about the specific practices in the UK as I don't fly there.
I just thought I'd present the strict legal side of things, but I now see that that was somewhat superfluous as it wasn't news to you. :ok:

On the en-route radar side of ATC in the UK.

When being transferred to a London ATC radar control service from another radar control service be it inside or outside the UK FIR then all we need reporting is the cleared or cruising flight level.

If you are transferred to London from any other service (ie still outside CAS) then you will need to be verified as well as validated, therefore the passing FL will also be needed on first contact. The only exception I know to this rule is when transferred from many of the military units to London radar as the military units are deemed capable of validating and verifying Mode A/C.


Please acknowledge the instruction to Squalk Ident when requested even if its just a 'roger'. If we know you have acknowledged then we can be confident the ident we see is you and then the ident has been successful.

My understanding is that you do not report passing Altitudes/Flight levels, unless requested. The only exception to this is when making first contact once airborne, at which point you should give the details posted by BOAC earlier.

Something that I often find strange is a controller telling you to contact the next frequency with your heading. It is my understanding that you should always give cleared altitude and assigned heading when checking in, so why the need for the instruction?

Because we often forget to tell them we're on a heading!

My understanding was the other way round - you should always give level information on first call on a new freq.

Seems to be borne out by this bit in the last few pages of my old home copy of Aerad Europe & Mid East Supplement, Air Traffic Control, United Kingdom, para 8.1.2

When changing frequency between any London or Manchester Sector pilots are required to give callsign and Flight Level (when not in level flight, the level through which the aircraft is passing and the level to which cleared)

"required" ...

Hope that helps, 411A and GS-Alpha.

Cheers

will enhanced mode s transponders put an end to all this?

Blimey, I appear to have stirred up a right old fight here....:O

When I said that I was more concerned about people not reporting there passing altitude I was alluding to departure procedures, as that was the point of the discussion on the Ident feature.

With regards to first call on a new frequency I have no problems if you do or you don't report your passing altitude, just as long as you report your cleared altitude and any headings and speeds that have been assigned.

Now, if we can all calm down and relax maybe people will be able to get things right.... :ok:

Not sure why Pilots need to depart from the regulations laid down by the authorities. I guess the Pilots know better!!! I heard a comment the other day from a student come 500 hour Jet First Officer that the books were written years ago and we have moved on since then! Oh dear.

If we fly by the book no-one can touch us when there's a mess-up. Besides that, the procedures laid out have been tried and tested for years and THEY WORK. If you have a problem with them get them changed.

What were we talking about? Oh yes. Ident should NEVER be given unless asked by ATC. 24 - 7. The correct response is Willco followed by the FULL CALLSIGN. Not just the number.

As for alltitude reporting, if the passing level is not given in the initial contact then you DO NOT HAVE A RADAR SERVICE. The transponder is NOT verified and in a court of law you wouldn't stand a chance.

No more passing levels are required unless asked for.

When changing frequencies, the level you are climbing too should be passed along with either your heading or routing and FULL CALLSIGN.

Is that really too difficult?

Oh and just one more thing, Stop calling your mates name between transmissions. And thats not me being a stick in the mud although I do find it very unproffesional. The CAA are considering tracking down the culprits which will result in a written warning from your company. Now that's sure to stir things up!!

Hudson Bay - I agree 100%.

If this is a PROFESSIONAL Pilots Forum why should anyone be questioning whether or not Transponder operating instructions should be read back when this is clearly spelt out in CAP 413?