PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rumours & News (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news-13/)
-   -   Standard of RT in USA (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/518923-standard-rt-usa.html)

West Coast 1st Aug 2013 21:23

Rhetoric is cheap. I expect little to no change.

jandakotcruiser 2nd Aug 2013 03:46

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.:ugh:

galaxy flyer 2nd Aug 2013 03:49

And that would be because......there were no Internet thingy then. :E

N90-EWR 2nd Aug 2013 05:32

Some fun read in this thread. I particularly loved the Heathrow controller saying none of us could manage it. :D

In my 23 years working at New York Approach, I've heard just about every accent, or slang there is. The worst ones to communicate with have always been Asian carriers, though some South American carriers have been just as bad. Rarely do I have any issues with European carriers, with probably the Polish, and Russians being the notable exceptions.

Cows getting bigger 2nd Aug 2013 05:34

Said by a New Yorker. Priceless. :D Surely the point is that phraseology needs to be standard because of the various accents?

(PS. my SW Irish accent is just perfect!) :)

N90-EWR 2nd Aug 2013 05:39

I'm not a native New Yorker! ;)

White None 2nd Aug 2013 11:35

Standard vs Standardisation
 
Personally I think (understandably) some US guys here are reacting as they feel their STANDARD of R/T and hence Op's is being criticised. Personally, that is not MY point which is just that WORLDWIDE STANDARDISATION should be enforced for all the good reasons. Everyone the same, every call made meeting the receivers expected list of possibles in their circumstances with a solid confirmation of clearances, no room for misinterpretation.

"Bad Standards" is an accusation any professional would get annoyed about.

"Lets STANDARDISE" should be more palatable or even (arguably) an unarguable step to take.

West Coast 2nd Aug 2013 14:46

Even the ICAO doesn't aspire to that goal of 100% worldwide compliance. How many variances (the proper term escapes me-kinda ironic) do individual countries enjoy, each of which divurges from the goal.

I recognize that many of the changes are necessary for local needs.

N90-EWR 3rd Aug 2013 04:01

I rarely have any issues with foreign crews about communication. If anything, my biggest complain with certain foreign airlines is slowing down below 250 knots 40 to 50 miles from the airport without telling me, and also not maintaining assigned airspeeds on final. If you're not able to maintain 170 knots to the final approach fix, then tell me, so that I can plan adequate spacing behind.:ugh:

grounded27 3rd Aug 2013 05:46


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.:ugh:
It is clearly understood as a mis-communication and a moron agreement to recieve clearance "to 400", yeah they paid the ultimate price for one of many global dumbass moves. Two Four Zero would have saved this flight, agree a damnb tired crew hearing "to 400" was complacent. None the less it is no excuse for the lack of global adhereance to a common form of communication, thus cpdlc etc. God save the tired and retarded....

4runner 3rd Aug 2013 05:49

I haven't flown with a Yank in over two years. I have been flying with Euro "level 6" guys. Most can hardly order a beer in an english speaking country and basic communications inside and outside the cockpit are strained. The problem is the corrupt EASA system where people can basically buy icao level 6 in SPAIN???? SPAIN!!!! Actually, as far as im concerned, the whole euro aviation system is corrupted. There is no system to develop and weed out lesser candidates. The one who pays the Euro gets the job, not the most suitable candidate. Now, products of this same convoluted, ineffective and over-regulated mess is lashing out at the country that invented flying in a pathetic attempt to mask their own faults and failures. Next time you need American help, make sure you stop all the B-17 crews before their daylight bombing raids and give them some lessons in RT from ur handbook you keep in your flight case. The language is English, not German and you're welcome.
Even the Brits have a hard time with their own accents at smaller northern airports. But hey, Americans invented aviation but the Brits perfected it right?

grounded27 3rd Aug 2013 06:09

Standard...

1 wun

2 too

3 tree

4 fower

5 fife

6 siks

7 seven

8 ait

9 niner

0 zeero

Has this been lost?

Cows getting bigger 3rd Aug 2013 06:46

4Runner
 
4Runner - oh, dear. Did we have a bad day? :eek:

stratofactor 3rd Aug 2013 09:28


Originally Posted by 4runner (Post 7974180)
Next time you need American help, make sure you stop all the B-17 crews before their daylight bombing raids and give them some lessons in RT from ur handbook you keep in your flight case. The language is English, not German and you're welcome.

That is some funny stuff, I just spit my morning coffee on my keyboard!

silverstrata 3rd Aug 2013 11:52


Next time you need American help, make sure you stop all the B-17 crews before their daylight bombing raids and give them some lessons in RT from ur handbook you keep in your flight case.
Funnily enough I was listening to the (KC-135s?) coming back from missions in Iraq, through into the Eastern Med. Mission in enemy airspace went fine, but boy were they in a tizz with ATC transmissions. Everything was given and re-given four times, and still they did not get it.

Never mind the SAM evasion course, how about a course in standard RT phraseology and a guide book to Eastern Mediterranean accents?? "Aaarrrrr - Reach 3-4, say that again sloowwwly...."

Metro man 3rd Aug 2013 13:46

"This is triple nickle, eight ball, five in the slot, boots on and laced, ready to bounce and blow"

Translation: "This is (call sign) 558, five miles out, established ILS, request touch and go"

Ancient Mariner 3rd Aug 2013 14:05

Wouldn't that be double nickle, or 5558?

aterpster 3rd Aug 2013 15:25

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:

http://i201.photobucket.com/albums/a...psc29dd633.jpg

Tipsy Barossa 3rd Aug 2013 20:23


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.....

J.O. 3rd Aug 2013 23:26

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.


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:57.


Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.