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)

Airbubba 15th Jul 2013 00:51

I use standard RT except for the occasional "FL 21.3 climbing to FL330".
I've commented here previously that we Americans (not 'North Americans' :) ) couldn't call flight levels correctly if our lives depended on it.

FL 21.3 is 2130 feet on QNE right?

aviatorhi 15th Jul 2013 02:20

I'd love to see any ATC in the USA try and manage Heathrow for an hour...
Well, considering that 8 of the 10 busiest airports in the world by aircraft movements are located in the US, I don't think it would be too much of a stretch. Heathrow is 12th.

Pucka 15th Jul 2013 03:04

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???

Defruiter 15th Jul 2013 03:39

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.

Hotel Tango 15th Jul 2013 06:36

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.

Surferboy 15th Jul 2013 08:05

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. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...ies/thumbs.gif

(And before any dutch start rambling about ATC in AMS which is good, sorry but a bit to gash generally !! http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...s/badteeth.gif )
Indeed, always a pleasure to have British crews also tell me the QNH, the ATIS letter, Aircraft-type and the arrival they are expecting.:} Luckily most of the time they don't do it when the freq. is busy!

I'll try to be less gash next time! :E

Flying Wild 15th Jul 2013 09:10

Originally Posted by Pucka (Post 7941336)
... I know of no other airport where I have to call DIRECTOR with call sign only...

Not flown into Amsterdam Schipol then?

His dudeness 15th Jul 2013 09:15

which SID, pass alt, cleared level
Thats how we do it as well.

I´m German, from the formerly (or still?) US occupied part.

Although overweight, I refrain from calling myself 'heavy'...

Sorry if thats wrong.

aviatorhi 15th Jul 2013 09:32

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.

Lord Spandex Masher 15th Jul 2013 09:43

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.

Pucka 15th Jul 2013 11:02

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!!!

Surferboy 15th Jul 2013 14:21

IIRC it's in the charts to check in with AMS Approach with c/s only. ;)

West Coast 15th Jul 2013 16:10

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.

Lonewolf_50 15th Jul 2013 17:51

6. Do the Americans actually go on a course of instruction to adopt that lazy comfortable southern drawl
We can't tell you, or we'd have to kill you. ;) PS: the folks at LaGuardia sure as hell don't speak with a drawl.

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
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." ;):cool::E I had a flight student do a double take when I slipped that one in ... we had a good laugh over it.


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
An actual Texan drawl/twang if delivered in rapid rhythm isn't really a drawl.
The person well above you who spoke about a "high speed drawl" may have misunderstood what a drawl is ...


So I presume that the US Armed Forces Air Traffic Controllers go along with the abbreviated terminology of their civil cousins ?
Why do you presume that? Brevity has its own virtues, and traps, in military comms.

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.
Of course it is. Brevity and clarity in communication was also the original point of using terms like "roger" to indicate something, and "out" to indicate something else, and "over" to indicate end of a transmission that expected a reply.

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. :mad:

misd-agin 15th Jul 2013 21:25

British ATC is falling apart. Last trip the controllers said "have a nice day". At least twice. Pleasant chaps. Maybe they're married to U.S. women.

Callsign Kilo 15th Jul 2013 21:48

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.

pigboat 15th Jul 2013 23:08

I'd love to see any ATC in the USA try and manage Heathrow for an hour...
Is that with or without a snowstorm? ;)

galaxy flyer 15th Jul 2013 23:35

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. :}

West Coast 16th Jul 2013 00:37

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.

Linktrained 16th Jul 2013 00:45

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...".

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:30.

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