Phraseology 1.0
Only people I ever hear say "Over" are military and private aircraft.
Only time I ever hear "out" is again military and some Americans, when being transferred to another sector, effectively saying "goodbye".
Only time I ever hear "out" is again military and some Americans, when being transferred to another sector, effectively saying "goodbye".
My tuppence worth:
Many pilots seem to forget or don't realise that what they speak into their microphone is NOT what is heard by ATC and other traffic. The voice channels of airplane radios are frequency limited to about 300-3000 Hz, which is similar to that of a domestic telephone. Also, distortions caused by not using windshields, dirty microphones, faulty electronics, geography and atmospheric conditions, mean that what might sound perfectly clear to the person doing the speaking can actually be significantly distorted and garbled to the listener.
This is one reason why standard phrases were chosen - to be safely readable and recognisable through distortion and static etc.
When a frequency is quiet, I see nothing wrong with occasional banter - as long as it's kept brief. And 'good morning' and 'good bye' seem perfectly acceptable pleasantries - when there is time to do so.
In busy TMA, where lots of clearances and re-clearances are being fired off in machine gun fashion, that is NOT the time for anything other than standard ICAO phrases. Taking up RT airspace with non standard phrases that require re-transmissions and readbacks is not neccessary and could lead to dangerous situations.
When countries invent a non ICAO way of speaking between pilots and ATC; that may seem fine because everyone understands each other right? But it is a bad habit because then you might get a 'foreign' airliner or even a 'foreign' pilot in a domestic airliner, who might not get the gist and confusions could arise.
Speaking to a person whose first language is not English is another reason to stick to standard phraseology. While 'foreign' ATC will recognise and be able to converse in standard phraseology, there is absolutely no point talking fast and using colloquialisms to a non english speaker. I find that slowing down, speaking clearly and using standard phrases reduces read-backs to almost zero. It might seem slightly anal to do so, but in busy airspace it is the only way really.
Many pilots seem to forget or don't realise that what they speak into their microphone is NOT what is heard by ATC and other traffic. The voice channels of airplane radios are frequency limited to about 300-3000 Hz, which is similar to that of a domestic telephone. Also, distortions caused by not using windshields, dirty microphones, faulty electronics, geography and atmospheric conditions, mean that what might sound perfectly clear to the person doing the speaking can actually be significantly distorted and garbled to the listener.
This is one reason why standard phrases were chosen - to be safely readable and recognisable through distortion and static etc.
When a frequency is quiet, I see nothing wrong with occasional banter - as long as it's kept brief. And 'good morning' and 'good bye' seem perfectly acceptable pleasantries - when there is time to do so.
In busy TMA, where lots of clearances and re-clearances are being fired off in machine gun fashion, that is NOT the time for anything other than standard ICAO phrases. Taking up RT airspace with non standard phrases that require re-transmissions and readbacks is not neccessary and could lead to dangerous situations.
When countries invent a non ICAO way of speaking between pilots and ATC; that may seem fine because everyone understands each other right? But it is a bad habit because then you might get a 'foreign' airliner or even a 'foreign' pilot in a domestic airliner, who might not get the gist and confusions could arise.
Speaking to a person whose first language is not English is another reason to stick to standard phraseology. While 'foreign' ATC will recognise and be able to converse in standard phraseology, there is absolutely no point talking fast and using colloquialisms to a non english speaker. I find that slowing down, speaking clearly and using standard phrases reduces read-backs to almost zero. It might seem slightly anal to do so, but in busy airspace it is the only way really.
Last edited by Uplinker; 25th Aug 2015 at 13:40.
Originally Posted by Ledsled
HDRW, Don't be so quick to air your somewhat limited knowledge.
"Over and Out" is NOT part of contemporary ICAO R/T (perhaps when you were flying but not now)
Of course it bleeding well isn't, and hasn't been for gawd knows how long, approximately since VHF took over from HF as the primary voice communications --- but that's probably a bit before your time.
But--- the ICAO Docs. do explain the use of the aircraft call sign at the end of a transmission, and its derivation from 'Over" and "over and/out" --- and that, is the whole point of my comments, as any normal reader would understand.
You should try a bit of flying in the US, it might surprise you.
Aviation in Australia would be vastly better of if we emulated all the good things about aviation on the north American continent.
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Europe
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doc 9432 has complete list of what instructions should be read-back in full.
But what if I read-back in full instructions that can be answered just by WILCO? Is it going to be a mistake?
But what if I read-back in full instructions that can be answered just by WILCO? Is it going to be a mistake?
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my experience, military and civil, on VHF, 'Over' is passing information that will require some kind of acknowledgement, hardly used these days though but "Over" still widely used on HF."Over and Out" is for bad films only! 
In the late seventies I was flying with a lot of Australians, a mixture of recently ex military and long time civil. When with one of the recently ex military pilots he asked me why I always read back the pressure setting, I told him that was how it was done in Europe and was mandatory, "Well we don't do it here in Australia" was the reply!
Any thoughts, Lead Sled and others?
In the late seventies I was flying with a lot of Australians, a mixture of recently ex military and long time civil. When with one of the recently ex military pilots he asked me why I always read back the pressure setting, I told him that was how it was done in Europe and was mandatory, "Well we don't do it here in Australia" was the reply!
Any thoughts, Lead Sled and others?
