Lucifer I think you are wrong, you are advocating cluttering up the frequency with unnecessary transmissions, might work at MAN but just try not reading back the precise R/W designator at somewhere like ORD or LAX, try getting a word in edge ways for that matter.
If the read back is correct in the first place then there is no need for clarification and to leave out the L, R or C, (Jeddah etc.) is very unprofessional and incorrect R/T.

Just for clarification, my comments relate specifically to operating into MAN and specifically the use of Rwy 24R.
"localiser established Rwy 24" leaves no room for ambiguity, confusion, human factors bumf, or non sensical alleged R/T bollockings for putting a "left" or "right" after the rwy number.
Simply, again:hmm: , there is only an ILS on rwy 24R at MAN.

All this navel gazing about left or right misses the point relating to this specific airport, and specific runway:=

Blimey! This is more depressing than any soap opera! :{

From UK Manual of Air Traffic Services Part 1 CAP493:
Appendix E
5.6.1 Pilots are required to read back in full messages containing any of the following items:
........Runway-in-use......
5.6.2 Controllers are to prompt a pilot if a read back is not immediately forthcoming.
5.6.3 Errors in a read back must be corrected by the controller until the pilot gives an accurate read back.

From CAP413 UK R/T Manual:
Chapter 4
1.7.8 When several runways are in use.........the runway number will be stated.

Monarch Man,

Altering standard phraseology to suit 'specific airports and specific runways' is dangerous. I can't understand how anyone could advocate it.

Just read 3 pages of utter tosh.
If you can't be arsed to say 24L or 24R then get a paper round.

Sorry Gonzo, standard phraseology and the "real" world are two entirely different things, as you well know.
Quoting chapter and verse out of CAP 413 smacks of a barrack room lawyer mentality.
standard phraseology is often trumpeted as the solution to everything from level busts, to runway incursion, in point of fact reading back and understanding a clearance are the salient points here and not, an issue of saying left or right.

Damn my years of incident free and clearly understood aviating have mounted to nothing:hmm:

Correct. Therefore reading back '24R' is required, if the ATCO has used '24R' in his clearance.

What an interesting phrase 'barrack room lawyer' is. Funnily enough, I'm quite interested in the etymology of words and phrases, so I looked this one up. It seems there are a few different meanings:
- A person who, although unqualified, insists on giving advice.
- A person that can get out of trouble by a thorough knowledge of the rules.
- A somewhat insubordinate nuisance, who usually has right on his side.

Perhaps you could clarify which particular meaning you were using in your post?

Knowing procedures and rules is an integral part of my job. But then you knew that. I'd imagine that it's an important part of your job too.

MAN runway layout is an accident waiting to happen. It's my impression that ATC are under very strict instructions to maintain perfect R/T.

They've always been a bit too fond of handing out bollockings though. Perhaps a few MOR's would change that culture.

Be the Big Man and just add the 14 millisecond phrase "right/left".

Then everyone is happy, non-stressed, concenrating on the job and WHOOPS saves the day by stopping doing something they aren't supposed to.

CRM invloves the man on the headset, the ATC and even the CAA. As you well know.

Cheers

WWW

Couldn't agree more, my point however is that blind adherence to standard phraseology is no garantee nor protection from an error. I find it amazing that people continue to buy into this process of following rules without ever really thinking and considering what they are doing.
We all rely on the redundancy of the systems, the safeguards that will hopefully stop all the holes a given day lining up, part of that is taking a practical approach to a situation, not blind obedience that does nothing to improve SA for a specific set of circumstances.

As for my Barrack room lawyer comment;

Yes it is true definitions vary, but my use of the comment is in the context of saying that you can quote the rules all you like however "there is the way it should be, and the way it is"

Monarch man. You are denigrating people for the use of standard phraseology.

An unusual position.

Can you perhaps defend it further?

WWW

WWW, no I'm not, and please don't make assumptions on my behalf:=

I am saying that in order to understand why we do, what we do, why certain errors, omissions, or incidents occur, we first have to understand the methodology and nature of our actions.
Standard phraseology has a place in this, but taken to the en-th degree does "fife" or "five" contribute to an improvement in flight safety?
The recent introduction of an additional "degrees" comment requirement onto radar heading read backs is another classic case of an additional layer of phraseology that serves no real purpose, after all, radar heading instructions are proceeded by the qualifier "fly heading xxx" or "turn left/right onto heading xxx" where does adding "degrees" improve flight safety or SA? All it does is add another layer that gets lost in the fog of 2 or 3 instructions:=
My argument relates to a practical standpoint, not as you may believe, a disagreement to the basic principles.

24L/R is neither here nor there, how can you be established on a non-existent ILS?

Monarch Man

I suggest you go back to the original post and re-read it.

It appears the poster was corrected for not reading back "cleared to LAND 24R" or "cleared for take off 24R", does not mention anywhere calling established on the localiser!!!!!

There is no excuse for lazyness and some people need to get more.:rolleyes:

Thread drift, I know, but...... until you establish a proper two-way conversation, use your full call sign every time.

Sigh!

Monarch Man

Your attitude shown towards basic R/T 'STANDARD' on this topic is quite disturbing. What's even more disturbing is your self belief that because of your untarnished safety record, you're vindicated in you decision to alter the rules to fit the 'real World'. The only 'World' that it appears to be in is your very own! You reveal a level of complacency and arrogance which has no place on the flight deck. Especially not a creditable operater like Monarch.

Many have quoted enough examples on here already in which fatal accidents have been caused by confusion and poor R/T discipline. This has nothing to do with Lawyers but everything to do with the fallibility and limitations as human beings. It's because OF the real world that we have these rules my friend! Accidents will always happen and that is unfortunate. But to have an accident and learn nothing from it is unforgiveable. As for complacency;


" When anyone asks me how I can best describe my experience of nearly 40 years at sea, I merely say - uneventful. Of course there have been winter gales and storms and fog and the like, but in all my experience I have never been involved in an accident of any sort worth speaking about. I have seen but one vessel in distress in all my years at sea. I never saw a wreck, nor have I been wrecked, nor was I in any predicament that threatened to end in disaster of any sort!"



























Capt E.J.Smith


Captain of the SS Titanic - during an interview in 1907. Captain Smith, along with 1500 innocent people remain with the ship today.

Monarch Man,
You wouldn't be the Monarch pilot that refuses to use his full callsign as well, would you? I had to put up with this all the way from MONTY to LAMAT and found it very disconcerting in a very busy session.

Standard RT is there for a reason. When I'm busy, I go back to that standard RT, no embellishments or shortcuts. I also slow down transmissions to aid thinking time etc. Having someone else cutting corners means that I really have to focus on their readback more than most.

Whilst I can see the arguement of you point, I would ask you, as a professional, to stick to the standard RT. It may seem to you to be OK to cut corners at MAN, but if you continue to amend your RT it could get you into trouble elsewhere.

Regards

CF

Thank you Gonzo, I always enjoy your posts!

Monarch Man. I am truly concerned by your attitude. You may not realise it but your posts come across as arrogant and stubborn. If you cannot see why adding "degrees" to a heading instruction ending in a zero i.e. 240 degrees , enhances flight safety then perhaps it's time you hung up your headset.

You insist you are right, you seem to think CRM is worthless. You come across as totally complacent with your "I've been all right for years" attitude. Your comment about "you cannot be established on 24L because it doesn't have an ILS" whilst technically correct is totally crass.

Deep down you know you're wrong - but just won't admit it. Loss of face.

UK airspace is getting busier and busier and it is beholden upon everyone to operate in a totally professional manner.

Out.

A4

Monarch Man,

Please tell me how using the runway designator does not add to SA, or how not using the designator does add to SA.

Are you advocation only using standard phraseology when it clearly increases SA?

That's difficult to quantify. However, I use 'fife' and that's never been misunderstood or mistaken for another numeral. Interestingly, that's the same argument that you're using for utilising non-standard R/T. Ironic really, isn't it?

Interesting. So all those instances of aircraft being instructed to fly heading xxx and actually climbing/descending to xxx instead were just coincidence?

I wish I could say the same... but that probably has much to to with the heaps that I fly.

My point was not intended to bring the r/t purists out of the woodwork but to make a valid point. Not one of us seems to have an issue with the recent r/t directives on requiring runway entry point readback when given lineup clearance. It started at MAN with the 'second readback' of the departure clearance just as you were lining up and finishing the pre-TO checks. I know one or two colleagues who MOR'ed that and the thankfully the daft procedure seems to have stopped. Then there was the dictat that the ATIS should increment an issue every time a single parameter changed. You copied ALPHA in descent only to hear FOXTROT current from the approach controller... who of course told you to copy the latest!

Controllers at LHR & LGW are probably the best in the world however they witness some quite appalling r/t from visiting a/c. They make corrections where required and where the possibility of misunderstanding might arise from an ambiguous readback they ask for a repeat... and I believe that level of intervention is spot-on. If they believed that there were persistent offenders I am sure they would not hesitate in passing the tapes to the CAA.

The issue at MAN is quite different they are tip-top at doing their own thing regardless of what happens in the rest of the world. OK so they designed a crap runway layout... I think we are all agreed on that, but that is by-the-by. The r/t cleansing crusade I witnessed the other day was well beyond what is acceptable because it was audibly winding pilots up and that is not good in a busy environment. The guy was taking so long bollocking people that he was then having to rush regular operating clearances.

There is no difference between MAN and any other medium sized airfield.... same difficulties & same dangers.... yet Manchester ATC seem content to live in a bubble fighting their particular crusades and pretend that they are the only airfield in the world.

Ahhh I do enjoy how precious you all become at times:8


It is rather refreshing, and yet rather pathetic, there must have been a sale at Argos this week for High Horses :D

Busy Bee,
Well said and if that were me I would not be happy at the thought of the Monarch jet perhaps on my tail.

MM,
1. However well you know MAN, you are only a visitor there. The local ATCO's will always know better than you what is required. It is good manners that when visiting somewhere you observe the customs of the house/country. When in Rome...
2. Your last post suggests you need an anger management course. Do you respond in the same way to opposing views in the cockpit?
3. When I hear "I'm too experienced to follow the rules" I worry a lot.

Sal

Monarch Man,

I do know this argument is about MAN 24L/R. But according your own words you feel its wasted airtime to mention established 24R. Because, again according to your own words, you can't be established on 24L as it has no ILS.

With that logic in mind can you explain to me which R/T procedure you use in LGW? Technically you can't be established on 26R as it has no ILS. But the last time i listened everybody used 'established 26L'. Even our own company aircraft.

If you feel its required in LGW, why do you think its not required in MAN?

SLF here.

"localiser establisherd rwy 24", to my mind, leaves lots of room for misunderstanding - simply because MAN doesn't have a runway 24!

It has a runway 24L. It has a runway 24R. It doesn't have a runway 24.

Please try to use the correct phrasing, it seems to me that it would help you avoid landing your aircraft on mine as I'm waiting to take-off.

Dear oh dear,
what a lot of bolox.
Time to get that Job palying a piano in a whorehouse...

Monarch man. if there is no need to make the small effort of repeating the full designator then there is also no need to put the definate article in front of your Moanarch callsign ,but you lot do. We just smile and think what
t0ssers. Or the monarch chap who asked for taxi while still tugged up. On being challenged by ourselves and atc the f/o was dashed rude. As a result of their collective experience and skill they proceeded to rush taxi to 24l forgeting the flaps. (757) They remembered them half way thru the line up, just as we were about to warn them. That wasnt you monarch man was it? Too experinced for regular afterstart /pre taxi checks as well as readbacks?Now monarch man do you represent this attitude in monarch or are you just letting your colleagues down? If it was you Id be happy to recieve a PM and we can forwrd the incident and your attitude to your chief pilot.

Also it mOnArch with short vowels, not moanaaarch.

There is however one grumpy sod at man who last year pulled up a cadet on his first sector of rt. I called him on the phone and gave him short shrift. End of.

Certainly not pages of sanctimonious crap

This must be a wind up by MM.

Or, considering his unblemished career, he is like Jasper Carrot's mother in law.

"Been driving for 30 years and never had an accident, but she's SEEN hundreds!!":D

:D :D :D ;)

Soo many people on here get their knickers in a twist over a few "carefully" chosen phrases and word combinations.

Initial Calls, Runway Idents and Situational Awareness
 

Sorry for the late call chaps, only just come on frequency. You're not expecting me, so if I tell you who I am, where I am and what I am doing, then that must enhance your situational awareness, whether Pilot or ATCO, even if the latter is expecting me. So an initial call including c/s, ILS established, r/w including L,R,(C or whatever) and range sets the scene for everyone on the frequency. Anything that enhances situational awareness of those who may be affected has to be a safety plus, always assuming that they're listening. At Manchester, under normal circumstances, the only initial call using callsign onlyon a tower or approach frequency is on transfer from one of the two approach control positions to the final director, and that is only if specified. Yes, it can get busy with high r/t loadings, yes we can all get grumpy, yes we can have approaches to both runways simultaneously, yes we have had crews set up for the wrong runway. It's dead easy to get it wrong, and I like talks in the boss's office without biscuits as little as the next man or woman. It's also dead easy to do it right. Have read through some of the previous posts and can't really believe that we're all on the same side.

I'll probably get shot down.Again!
Anyway in Hong Kong when CLK opened on single runway it was called 25L/07R.The North runway was still under construction,but it had 25R/07L and big X painted on it.We used full runway designators because it was a new airport, strange for everyone and that was what the runway was called.Despite having red stop bars, and a closed runway it didn't stop Korean getting lost and taxiing on 25R:D .Golden Plonker Towbar Award.There was no ILS radiating on 25R/07L but a hell of a lot of dumper trucks.Nasty if you hit them.
Once the North Runway was opened we were allowed to do sideslips on to the other runway,if there was a problem.I don't know Manc but guess that option might be available.Then you'd have to get the L or R crystal clear.
(Heads):hmm:

This is getting ridiculous!
Before becoming an F/O based at MAN, I was a bobby who worked in a police communications and control room, sending people to burglarys, domestics, fights etc.
The golden rule of my time working inside was 'never p1$$ off your communicator, or the next ball of s&^t will be heading your way'. The maxim is true now as it ever has been. The ATCO's are there to do their job, and we are there to do ours. IMHO, if you annoy an ATCO, be prepared to spend some time in the hold or get sent the long way round! The ATCO is there to ensure safety, and whatever we, as pilots, can do to ensure they have the complete picture in terms of situational awareness and clarity, then I'll do, without question or sarcastic remarks.
We all do our different jobs, let's just do them to the best of ability, WITHOUT WINDING EACH OTHER UP!

In the ideal world there will be a calmness and equilbrium which all parties involved in the operation of the aircraft will endeavour to maintain at all times and under all circumstances and so preserve the safety much loved by everyone. Unfortunately this is the real world and it won't always be so calm or safe. Pilots and ATCOs effectively interact at many stages of the flight, however, this is only directly apparent in RT transmissions and interpretation of each others behaviours. No-one gets everything right all the time, and CRM, and TRM for ATCOs, includes ways of identifying and correcting inappropriate actions and behaviours in, ideally, a non-confontational way, however, one person's gentle reminder may be seen by the other as waggling a red rag in their face. Most of these techniques are considered within the context of the immediate workplace - the fightdeck, the tower or wherever. The fact that Pilots and ATCOs interact with each other from their own workplaces means that effectively they are a part of each others resources. Chastising or whatever on the RT is an emotive subject as we have seen. Perhaps a comment like "can we talk about this later" and the provision of a phone number would take the heat out of it. Alternatively I suppose "Pistols at dawn on PPRUNE?" As for punishment by extra holding or long routings? Not really. My life is difficult enough as it is. I just want the awkward squad off my frequency ASAP

Some interesting observations here. One could say that standard phrases should be the same the (aviating) World around. Things like "Clear to land RWY 25R" etc should be pretty straight forward. However different places concoct their own idiosyncracy's because of local issues. Here in Hong Kong we say "Descend to 6000 FEET" which some people that never come here might find strange, but then in the next breath we may be clearing an aircraft to climb to "Flight Level 6900 METRES ". I feel a bit sorry for the thread starter and some of his/her supporters, as some Controllers can be a bit high handed at times. It would be interesting to see a PPLune (sic) thread in Mandarin that some of the Chinese pilots that fly into here would subscribe to, with some of the "bollockings" that they have to put up with from some of my colleagues.

MM......Muffin the Mule?
I remember the days when that didn't carry a 10 year suspended sentence!
Now if you really want to bring up a potential safety issue what about the seemingly universal tendency for both controllers and us (not US)pilots to omitt the words flight level and add the word "to" or was it 2!:hmm: :hmm: :hmm:
MM, very dry. :ok:

Bet all the ATCOs in MAN are eagerly waiting for the next Monarch flight that forgets about the Left/Right bit :}

there are some very good ATC controllers at man and some that have a bit of a short fuse. there is one ATCO that is cool as a cucumber no mater what even if it is very busy and some fog thrown in for the fun of it he remains so cool his voice never changes.

yet there is one lady ATCO who can lose the plot at time's she is known to some of us as the ice maiden god she can rip a strip of you at the best of times even when its quiet and sunny

you all do a great job and i tip my hat to you all

rampman:ok:

You mean Katie chaos she's great fun :}

I was doing approach on the afternoon in question and didn't bo**ock anyone... Should I turn myself in for re-education? :p

OK. I have the solution. Can MAPLC please arrange the installation of an ILS on the Southern runway at Manch. Then Monarch Mate will be happy to oblige calling the Northern runway 24R at all times.
Problem Solved. :D

http://www.faa.gov/runwaysafety/images/fan2.jpg

Say's it all.

On a more serious note, the useage of phraseology Left and Right didn't and won't stop me and my colleague accidentally setting up the aircraft for 06L at Manchester while 06R was/is in use. (Following a very nice brief - all be it from "the wrong plate"! Doh.) In the event, we didn't get a LOC signal from 06L - but what if...?

Although we figured it out on base leg, I never mind being VERY clear about which runway we're using because we all need extra safety nets from time to time(Especially after four consecutive 5a.m. starts!!).

Not meaning to annoy any Man controllers, nor do I condone slack RT used by many at our daily destinations, but I hope this might help you understand the human side...

When we operate in the rest of the world where a whole variety of RT practices achieves a routine result, then returning to textbook RT practices at Manchester after 10 hours away from it can be a little trying. Especially when we pilots are tired and emotional.

So ATC'ers, this doesn't excuse the poor RT, but might help shed some light on what may be in the minds of some of those on the other end of your radio.
I can say for myself that I often appreciate a gentle contoller request for a readback to clarify something I may have been ambiguous about.
BUT with just a little too much conviction from the controller it can set off a feeling of mild anger that I would like to think I'd never feel - but it sometimes happens me too. Now there's human factors for ya!! But to this day, I haven't let it spill out to the airwaves. What's said to my colleague on the flight deck :mad: might be different, hee hee :)

Oh well, just a bit more fuel on the fire from me.

Well, your all wrong!!! (Well you will be).

"As of 7th July 2007, Manchester Airport's runway assignments will be changed in relation to the Magnetic Compass bearings. The current headings for the runways are 054° and 234° with assignments 06L/24R and 06R/24L respectively (11/1/07). The new runway changes will mean the new assignments will be 05L/23R and 05R/23L respectively. ":confused: