Get over yourself, and while you are at it, learn to construct a sentence with the correct spelling.

Max is merely stating the bloody obvious, this HAS nothing to do with laziness, or a slack procedures. Quite simply you CANNOT be established for an ILS on 24L, hence procedurally it is an IMPOSSIBILITY:hmm:

Interesting to see this thread has started. I got a tetchy reply for checking in with callsign only recently at Manchester. I was told it is traditional/customary to check in with something like a dme distance and runway. It may be traditional but not in accordance with CAP413.

Precise Read-back
 

Using -R, -L suffix is no guarantee.
Years ago, flying into a very busy gen. av. airport in S. Florida, with a lot of static and congestion on frequency, I believe I was cleared for a vis. app.
to -R runway. I read back "-R runway" at least 5 times, assuming controller would correct me if I'd got it wrong. He was overloaded and it just didn't register. Finally he said: "Where are you; I just don't see you?"
"I'm on short final, -R runway, clear of traffic."
"-R runway? You're supposed to be on -L runway!"
" I read back -R runway at least 5 times."
"Oh well. Cleared to land."

Lesson learned: Eternal vigilance. No assumptions.

Dear oh dear, so much bickering between two sets of new generation professionals (cockpit & ATC). Is this a sign of the times post 911? I remember the days when ATC staff were welcomed to the FD (not just on fam flights but on ANY flight), which offered ample opportunity to discuss professional issues. More often than not we'd get together in the pub afterwards too. Great social occasions, but very educational (for both sides)too. Gone are the days of great airline/atc co-operation as we experienced with the likes of Dan-Air, Air Europe and British Caledonian to name just a few. Some of the comments and attitudes above sadden me. :(

Although there's only one ILS on the 24 end, don't forget the runways are only laterally displaced by 390 metres, and so it wouldn't take a huge deviation to the left to be looking straight down 24L. Runway misidentifications have happened all round the world many times over, and will continue to happen no doubt. Manchester seems to be taking a lead in pro-active work to reduce runway incursions, that means trying to catch more before they happen. If that means some pedantic sounding repetition of hold short instructions but saves a single incursion then it'll have proved itself.

That said, there shouldn't be any need for any more than callsign to tower on first contact; the tower controller has flight progress strips and a radar display so they should be expecting your call. I absolutely hate to hear anybody having a 'pop' on the r/t at somebody else, it's unprofessional and there's no need to antagonise crews and cause them a distraction at any phase of flight.

ATC are welcome in my FD and I have been made very welcome many times at ATCCs in the UK and in Europe. Just because a few can't see the wood for the trees is not necessarily cause for despair!

I agree Avman.....we should all work together....

I dont bollock ATC for giving me duff gen and likewise....

Thank you, Monarch Man - I was referring specifically to MAN.
Up and Down Operator - before you start questionning contributors' experience, qualifications and professionalism - be very careful. I probably have more time on both sides of the fence than you have probably been eating hot dinners - and I've been around long enough to recognise the difference between matters vital to flight safety and good practise and bollocks. Having been vectored onto the 24R ILS, having flown down the 24R ILS, having now been cleared by the meticulous MAN tower controller to land on 24R, I am going to land on the runway ahead of me - yes 24 RIGHT - the repetition of which is nugatory. You're apparent unthinking adherence to 'procedure' is as much a danger as blatent disregard of procedure.
Confirming you are going to land on the runway a mile ahead of you is stating the bleedin obvious!

Had a few beers thanks to Dan Air in the past.:D
Anyway I think back to Singapore Airlines at Taiwan who took off on the wrong runway (R instead of L)and a lot of people died.There is a lot out about runway incursions from CAA/SRG and one of the guidelines is that parallel runways should always be given their full designator.I think the controller is correct on insisting that readbacks be correct.Isn't it easier to just readback what the controller is saying than try to take short cuts.There is a fine line that sounds like being narky,but the controller is only using correct phraseology.

Maxreheat ( and to a lesser extend Magplug ) you both show very little understanding of Human factor issues. If you think striclty applying procedures is bullying then , indeed you are perhaps in the wrong job, no matter how much experience you have, or you claim to have. But perhaps also because of that experience, you think you have seen it all and can do without some of the fences.
Because the fences are there to protect you, not to bother you.

Be kind to the other side, even if he states the obvious. Basic CRM no ?

I remember reading the Flying tigers 747 crash in KL years ago,that if the controller had used FL 280 instead of 280, he might have saved lives that day.

And the controller that never ommitted the " FL" in his instructions before that accident can throw the first stone.

Chug a lug to all , on both side of the R/T fence.

Not much to argue about here - a bollocking on frequency is unprofessional.

Sounds like the chap in question needs a holiday. If it is crucial information, his colleague can specify information required on handover, or he can repeat his instruction where he is unclear that the crew has understood/read back sufficient information.

Tower: "xxx hold short 24R"

xxx "hold short"

Tower: "I repeat, xxx hold short 24R"

xxx "hold short 24R"

Simple - no bollocking needed, delivered in a relax and professional manner, and gets the clarification required.

Bad hair day.

24L doesn't have an ILS but don't both runways have VOR?? A couple of times last summer I remember the ILS being down and the VOR/DME procedure in use.....fair enough those of us who fly into MAN regularly would know to use 24R but I'd much rather read back the 'R' than make a very embarassing mistake of heading for the wrong runway!!! :O

I can't believe reading the R or L back is an issue - surely this is the standard RT phraseology drilled into us right at the start of our training! :8

It's a sad day when fellow 'professionals' start trotting out this sort of rubbish. (Probably 'learnt' it on a CRM course...)

:( :( :( :( :( :( :(

Excuse me. Do you mind if I butt in for a second?
I'm just SLF. So far I've had the same number of landings as take-offs. So I'm pleased. If a tiny amount of effort to do a "proper" readback helps to keep my stats looking good I'll be very grateful to you all. Thanks.

Funny thread, this....I was the Air Assistant at MAN yesterday, between 1645 and 1800, and the Air ONE ATCO [24R] is a very laid back chap, and the Air TWO ATCO [24L] is almost as laid back. I certainly didn't hear any "B0llockings" on freq, a confirm, or two, but that was it.
BTW, it is SOP for you [the Pilot] to be given landing/departure clearance on a "Specific" Runway, by the ATCO, eg "Cleared to land 24R". I know that most replies have concentrated on 24, but don't forget 06L/R Has an ILS for BOTH Runways, so specifying the landing r/w on a 06 approach is less pedantic?
watp,iktch

Don't flap madly! If you are at all nervous stay away from prune It's for entertainment only!

We're all talking about 24 here. 06 has ILS on both ends and both are used for landing depending on the time of day. Do the protagonists who feel the use of L or R in readbacks as "optional" not see the glaring danger here?

Many moons ago I approached MAN expecting 06 L (as on ATIS), but the runway switched to 06R. It was only when cleared to establish on 06R that the change became apparent. ATIS had not been listened to in descent (SOP)and the runway change was not broadcast.

Potentially embarrassing at the least. It was CAVOK which actually had the potential to make things worse if I'd elected to go visual for just "06" ...... and landed on the wrong runway.

Some disturbing and entrenched attitudes have been shown in this thread. I think some people need to take a step back and think. What kind of example are you setting to the younger guys (and gals)?

Remember your read backs help to develop everybody elses "mental model" as to who is where and doing what. Or perhaps some think that's just CRM c**p as well :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Keep it professional and keep it safe.

A4

Chiglet - you posted as I was typing ...... :)

Quite often during the day there are parallel approaches to 24L by light aircraft as well as airliners on 24R and I`m sure that it would make the controllers feel a lot happier to have it confirmed which runway is being used by each aicraft

Ian

My opinion (worth sod all) is this:

Parallel runway airports ALWAYS say Left or Right on every transmission every time.

UK ATC bollock you then you either deserved it - or - he's having a bad day and CRM strongly suggests you take it because next week you'll be having a bad day and make the same mistake AND you'll regret it on the drive home.

Final point, ATCOs and Pilots always enjoy each others company at the bar - fourth law of flying.

Cheers

WWW