R/T status in KL FIR
Join Date: May 2005
Location: PKR Party
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by lesenterbang
Is there really a need to upgrade the runways for the A380?
Typical Malaysian style!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Veloo,
Maybe what we need in this situation is a "zinged up" clearance dilivery.
What I mean by that is:
The main problem here is planes in a long queue, both on the ground and in the air. Delays come with cost and I applaud ATC for showing more interest in this cost factor than the payee.
Thank you.
If all departures left the gates smack on the dot, then it would be easier to slot things in. As it is nowadays when there is single runway ops, it is actually not so bad at all, except during Wx and traffic peaks.
So Maybe all we need is open and continuous communication between ATC and pilots during this down time at KLIA. We have to play by ear here as well because we have operational delays as well. I think what happens when we have really bad weather in KUL and ATC advises us on how many planes are at the holding point and our sequence, works fairly well.
Maybe we could look at setting up a " flow control " as a transition between delivery and ground. This " chap " will coordinate between the 2 and the pilot, so that delivery can concentrate on clearances, ground can work on the planes on the ground and "flow" can be the in between, giving modified clearances and broadcasting congestion information. Gee.... that sounds tiring already
Maybe what we need in this situation is a "zinged up" clearance dilivery.
What I mean by that is:
The main problem here is planes in a long queue, both on the ground and in the air. Delays come with cost and I applaud ATC for showing more interest in this cost factor than the payee.
Thank you.If all departures left the gates smack on the dot, then it would be easier to slot things in. As it is nowadays when there is single runway ops, it is actually not so bad at all, except during Wx and traffic peaks.
So Maybe all we need is open and continuous communication between ATC and pilots during this down time at KLIA. We have to play by ear here as well because we have operational delays as well. I think what happens when we have really bad weather in KUL and ATC advises us on how many planes are at the holding point and our sequence, works fairly well.
Maybe we could look at setting up a " flow control " as a transition between delivery and ground. This " chap " will coordinate between the 2 and the pilot, so that delivery can concentrate on clearances, ground can work on the planes on the ground and "flow" can be the in between, giving modified clearances and broadcasting congestion information. Gee.... that sounds tiring already
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rwy Upgrading at KLIA
Hi Brian..sounds good. The go between chap seems to be a good idea. Don't know yet what KLIA Ground has in mind but there are some good ATCers up in the Tower whom I personally know can achieve something good. Have to wait n see. Keep u guys posted.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KLIA RWY Upgrading
Hi guys..although about 2500m will be available for t/off which may be ideal for a320 n below, things still don't look so rosy. KLIA may come up with some methods to expedite taxying to the limited rwy BUT there is still going to be further delays at the holding point.News is that the B737s may be parked closer to the 2nd rwy.This solution may reduce taxying time to 32l . However delays will be still around due to the fact that KLIA Tower now has to ask for apvl from 124.2 b4 allowing a radar dep from 32l. If for any reason, the 1242 guy is busy(he should be),the apvl may not come in as expected. The present trend is autolaunch for 32r which means there is no need to ask for apvl from 1242. With the adequate wake turbulence minima in mind, KLIA will dep traffic without any coordination with ATCC at SZB. However, if there is going to be a dep from 32l at the same time, it will have to be approved by the 1242 guy. Anticipate further delays. On another note we will be reducing the minima on apch from 5nm to 3nm. It will be enforced as soon as the simulator practices are completed which may be within the next 4-5months.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Alderaan
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Velloo old boy, how in the devil have u been?
Couple of questions?
1. You mentioned that there's a relay station for lumpur atis somewhere on the east coast, but unfortunately we dont get very good range out of it. Since kuantan has an atis and they being a military station and with not very many civil flights into there, any chance they could transmit lumpur wx alternately on their freq. It would also help guys flying out of there to kul to know the latest before hand.
2. Knowing well the kind of met reporting we get from our met people and with our primary alt being SBZ. Would atc know if i tell them "negative alternate" would they know what that would mean. Since if the wx in kul is screwed likely sbz would be the same and i would rather hold if knowing kul will improve. In that case how soon can kul offer me an alternate rwy for landing? maybe from 14L to 14R or even 32L? It would safe us lots of money and time from diverting to SBZ.
Couple of questions?
1. You mentioned that there's a relay station for lumpur atis somewhere on the east coast, but unfortunately we dont get very good range out of it. Since kuantan has an atis and they being a military station and with not very many civil flights into there, any chance they could transmit lumpur wx alternately on their freq. It would also help guys flying out of there to kul to know the latest before hand.
2. Knowing well the kind of met reporting we get from our met people and with our primary alt being SBZ. Would atc know if i tell them "negative alternate" would they know what that would mean. Since if the wx in kul is screwed likely sbz would be the same and i would rather hold if knowing kul will improve. In that case how soon can kul offer me an alternate rwy for landing? maybe from 14L to 14R or even 32L? It would safe us lots of money and time from diverting to SBZ.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KUL ATIS
Hi Rage...first of all...greetings to all from ATC. The onward relay transmitter mentioned earlier was for 132.6 and NOT the ATIS tx which is at KLIA itself. The one at Kuantan is at a place called Bukit Pelindong.
Shameful as it sounds, there is no way Kuantan is going to tx the KUL weather from their station. Why should they. It is not their problem. Maybe we should tx on the SZB ATIS. That might help. I need to know the point at which u guys can pick SZB ATIS if u coming in from the EAST. Let me know please.
Secondly ATC would not know what u mean by "Negative Alternate".
Thirdly...swithching runways depends entirely on KLIA Tower. It may be ok if a request is made from 14L to 14R.(if duty Rwy is 14) But if u are requesting 32 then goodluck to u.
fourthly....I am not related to the devil in any way and I don't intend to.
Shameful as it sounds, there is no way Kuantan is going to tx the KUL weather from their station. Why should they. It is not their problem. Maybe we should tx on the SZB ATIS. That might help. I need to know the point at which u guys can pick SZB ATIS if u coming in from the EAST. Let me know please.
Secondly ATC would not know what u mean by "Negative Alternate".
Thirdly...swithching runways depends entirely on KLIA Tower. It may be ok if a request is made from 14L to 14R.(if duty Rwy is 14) But if u are requesting 32 then goodluck to u.
fourthly....I am not related to the devil in any way and I don't intend to.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KUL ATIS DECODED
Background - the TX site in KUL, the range performance were tested and accepted as according to specs when it was commissioned way back in 1997’ and of-course with ‘aussy’ consultancy (competency is for you to interpret). During the KLIA pre-opening dialogues with MAS management flyers, its range was an issue with you guys brought up, but when told it was conformed to specs, your enthusiasm fizzled out. Maybe you should have kept pushing to impress on DCA for an upgrade, then maybe by now we would have had a couple repeaters strategically located to maximize and improve coverage.
But it is never too late. Is DCA convinced of its necessity? Is it your luxury wish list? Is there a safety implication here? What is the return on investment for the country? These are some of the questions hanging in the air. I have not heard specifically of any ATIS upgrade in the 9MP. This is Pprune, it good for it only. You have to officially present your case and justify the needs. This is the best route for any movement on a subject (radio transmission/reception and ATIS) that have that has a subject of comparison with Singapore since 30 years ago. Mid-term review of 9MP and prioritization may make your dream come true if it is a VVIP (very, very important piece) for safety. I do not think DCA is convinced on its status as a VVIP at the moment (they too have flyers) although you may have pockets of DCA sympathizers, I included.
Do you flyers use ACARS (at least the types equipped) to get wx reports from your dispatch/flight ops. Does ARINC or SITA billing structure involve costs every time you send/receive a packet of data?
Next: DECODED:KLIA departure jams at the at the holding point
Busy for now.
CHEERS TO ALL YOU GUYS OUT THERE WHO HAVE A CONSCIENCE IN DOING YOUR JOBS RIGHT!
But it is never too late. Is DCA convinced of its necessity? Is it your luxury wish list? Is there a safety implication here? What is the return on investment for the country? These are some of the questions hanging in the air. I have not heard specifically of any ATIS upgrade in the 9MP. This is Pprune, it good for it only. You have to officially present your case and justify the needs. This is the best route for any movement on a subject (radio transmission/reception and ATIS) that have that has a subject of comparison with Singapore since 30 years ago. Mid-term review of 9MP and prioritization may make your dream come true if it is a VVIP (very, very important piece) for safety. I do not think DCA is convinced on its status as a VVIP at the moment (they too have flyers) although you may have pockets of DCA sympathizers, I included.
Do you flyers use ACARS (at least the types equipped) to get wx reports from your dispatch/flight ops. Does ARINC or SITA billing structure involve costs every time you send/receive a packet of data?
Next: DECODED:KLIA departure jams at the at the holding point
Busy for now.
CHEERS TO ALL YOU GUYS OUT THERE WHO HAVE A CONSCIENCE IN DOING YOUR JOBS RIGHT!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Alderaan
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Veloo, old boy, just got back. Anyway im only able to pick up the atis around 60nm out of PK and that at FL310. I think the wx in between has something to do with the range as well. Will check SZB on my next flt.
Yes, we do have ACARS, and we do get the wx of it as well, its usually a METAR or TAF. I believe the charges are fixed for as many wx reports we req, but it changes from year to year based on the number of request.
But honestly to think about it, when on the wide body into london, we only could get the atis something like 60-80 miles prior to top of decent, and mind u we were cruising in at FL380/400. So the atis range that was promised sounds about right, but in our enviroment maybe a litlle bit degraded, but for me personally its no big deal.
P.s, Never Call an ATCer the Devil.!
Liked the guy doing controlling on app on sat eve at 8. Was very good!
Yes, we do have ACARS, and we do get the wx of it as well, its usually a METAR or TAF. I believe the charges are fixed for as many wx reports we req, but it changes from year to year based on the number of request.
But honestly to think about it, when on the wide body into london, we only could get the atis something like 60-80 miles prior to top of decent, and mind u we were cruising in at FL380/400. So the atis range that was promised sounds about right, but in our enviroment maybe a litlle bit degraded, but for me personally its no big deal.
P.s, Never Call an ATCer the Devil.!
Liked the guy doing controlling on app on sat eve at 8. Was very good!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KUL ATIS
Hi Rage....tks 4 der input. I m still awaiting for reports from flyers about the SZB ATIS (127.6). It might help us to decide on the next course of action.
Your credit to the App Ctler is most welcome. I will pass on this praise to the guys working on sat 8pm. It's the "D" shift which also happens to be my shift .
The point is, if HKG and SIN can provide good ATIS services, then we should be able too. It is a sickening feeling when pilots request for RWY in use at KLIA through SIN when u could already see them on your radar ( approx 50-60NM East of PK).Perhaps as what imdragon mentioned, u guys can help us in the field by highlighting this issue officially to DCA through MAPA. Maybe MAPA can also help to bring along one or two decision makers( from the DCA's Safety Management System chaps) to see and hear for themselves what u guys are talking about. At least this will get the ball rolling. Oh yeah...the only devil i m interested in is the Red Devil.
Your credit to the App Ctler is most welcome. I will pass on this praise to the guys working on sat 8pm. It's the "D" shift which also happens to be my shift
.The point is, if HKG and SIN can provide good ATIS services, then we should be able too. It is a sickening feeling when pilots request for RWY in use at KLIA through SIN when u could already see them on your radar ( approx 50-60NM East of PK).Perhaps as what imdragon mentioned, u guys can help us in the field by highlighting this issue officially to DCA through MAPA. Maybe MAPA can also help to bring along one or two decision makers( from the DCA's Safety Management System chaps) to see and hear for themselves what u guys are talking about. At least this will get the ball rolling. Oh yeah...the only devil i m interested in is the Red Devil.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any shortcomings with Kinabalu ATC?
Hi flyers...a colleague of mine will be visiting WBKK soon to enhance safety culture values among ATClers over there. Constructive criticisms are welcome.Help us to improve and provide better ATC services.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: other side of the world
Age: 58
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kinabalu tower needs to buck up
Since you're asking about WBKK there are some issues about Kinabalu tower. Their controlling in the air is okay but is is on the ground that they need to buck up.
Landing on 02, F is too short for 737 so we normally roll to the end or stop by A. But A and B is on the opposite site of the runway so there is a need to cross the runway to get to terminal 1.You need about 1 minute to enter the runway at B and exit at G. A lot of times tower gives landing clearance even at 10 miles, while someone is holding at B. If tower can hold back the clearance to about 4 miles as done in KUL, you can cross the runway and be almost at the terminal before the 2nd aircraft lands.
Of course all this can be solved easily if the authority can build a full length parallel taxiway.
Landing on 02, F is too short for 737 so we normally roll to the end or stop by A. But A and B is on the opposite site of the runway so there is a need to cross the runway to get to terminal 1.You need about 1 minute to enter the runway at B and exit at G. A lot of times tower gives landing clearance even at 10 miles, while someone is holding at B. If tower can hold back the clearance to about 4 miles as done in KUL, you can cross the runway and be almost at the terminal before the 2nd aircraft lands.
Of course all this can be solved easily if the authority can build a full length parallel taxiway.
Last edited by lesenterbang; 26th Jun 2006 at 14:35.
I found the main problem is the communication problem between tower director. The tower always has to hold departing a/c on the runway to get director approval to launch another a/c into the air even if they are going to different directions. Director has no sense of urgency to vector a/c clear of takeoff path as he don't know there is another a/c waiting for take off because the control is 2KM from the tower and probably has no window looking out to the runway! The tower on the other hand has to wait till arriving a/c call on 118.3 before lining up an a/c at holding point. Why wait? If arriving a/c hasn't call,he must be far out still and if no visual(normally tower can see more than 10nm),I see no reason why departing a/c must hold short the runway. Moreover,the radar screen at the tower shows where the a/c is.
On surface movement control: Just yesterday I was rather dissapointed with a woman controller.Dragon air missed twy B,had to roll to the end to back track.As Dragon enter B,the 737 ahead of me took off. As she clear us line up rwy 02,she let a Dragon enter twy A to back track and vacate via G. That was the slowest Dragon I ever seen.The 2 stages back tracking was exceptionally slow and the lady controller did ask it to expedite but once acknowledge and once ignored.She did not repeat herself when ignored which to me it is not acceptable.Even though it is not entirely her fault,but why let a departing a/c wait for an arriving a/c to cross the runway? Shouldn't departing a/c has more urgency to depart?
Departing a/c from LCCT should not be allowed to back track on the runway is other a/c is pushing back from main apron.Many times the back tracking a/c from LCCT did that to 'jump' queue getting ahead and resulting in getting higher level back to KUL.And the a/c from main apron actually had to sit at holding point for it to back track.Seems a little unfair.
On surface movement control: Just yesterday I was rather dissapointed with a woman controller.Dragon air missed twy B,had to roll to the end to back track.As Dragon enter B,the 737 ahead of me took off. As she clear us line up rwy 02,she let a Dragon enter twy A to back track and vacate via G. That was the slowest Dragon I ever seen.The 2 stages back tracking was exceptionally slow and the lady controller did ask it to expedite but once acknowledge and once ignored.She did not repeat herself when ignored which to me it is not acceptable.Even though it is not entirely her fault,but why let a departing a/c wait for an arriving a/c to cross the runway? Shouldn't departing a/c has more urgency to depart?
Departing a/c from LCCT should not be allowed to back track on the runway is other a/c is pushing back from main apron.Many times the back tracking a/c from LCCT did that to 'jump' queue getting ahead and resulting in getting higher level back to KUL.And the a/c from main apron actually had to sit at holding point for it to back track.Seems a little unfair.
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Europe
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
flightleader, the BKI Air Asia aircraft from Terminal 2 are never requesting a backtrack. Clearance is always Hold at A and contact tower. It is totally up to the tower what happens next. We just follow. Sometimes backtrack and sometimes enter and vacate G, and taxi to J. If you see this as cutting que, then just tell the tower your objection or switch to tower frequency earlier. Not the LCC's fault. Anyway, most of the flights are now going to KUL at FL390 so should be more room for everybody.
P.S. On an ATC side note, could the controller at KUL let aircraft know if they want a speed restriction on decent before aircraft has started decent. So we can plan our decent profile with the speed. Giving a restriction once we already started decent doesn't help. Thanks.
Happy landings and happy controlling.
P.S. On an ATC side note, could the controller at KUL let aircraft know if they want a speed restriction on decent before aircraft has started decent. So we can plan our decent profile with the speed. Giving a restriction once we already started decent doesn't help. Thanks.
Happy landings and happy controlling.
QNH1013,
Perhaps you are not those who cut the queue and I'm not saying all do that but it happens often enough to have caught my attention. Glad AAsia A320 is doing BKI and KCH most. come 1st Aug,there will be more relief on MH side.
Speed restriction for descend should be planned to all major airport. Most of them published this requirement in thier AIP.Chief pilot should have included this in SOP. Nevertheless, I agree with you that speed control/sequencing in KL FIR is an rather frustrating daily affair.
Perhaps you are not those who cut the queue and I'm not saying all do that but it happens often enough to have caught my attention. Glad AAsia A320 is doing BKI and KCH most. come 1st Aug,there will be more relief on MH side.
Speed restriction for descend should be planned to all major airport. Most of them published this requirement in thier AIP.Chief pilot should have included this in SOP. Nevertheless, I agree with you that speed control/sequencing in KL FIR is an rather frustrating daily affair.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: thunderStormPeninsula
Age: 52
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dear qnh1013
i am only assuming you fly for air asia, and if you are, i would like to ask for a big favour......that is to start telling the guys NOT to hold the tip of the boom mike while they transmit.
not only is it illegible to the controllers, but it is also deaffening to the other aircrafts on the same frequency. some mh guys do it too, however from my PERSONAL observation, i find that more than half of aa transmitions seem to have this effect. of course i could be absolutely wrong....
i have however, found a very nice way of demonstrating the effect of holding /toucing the tip of the boom mike,.......i demonstrate it to the other guy on the flight intercom......while i transmit with and without holding the tip of the boom mike, and the difference is just too obvious for the other party to ignore..........
just something that i was taught earlier by my captains that i'd like to share..........actually i'm sure you know how a lot of times we need to turn up the volume when with lumpur cntrol.....and that.s when it really hurts my nice little precious ear drums, when some guy transmits like that.....and then the controller cannot comprehend......and then it goes on and on and on.....
hope you'll help spread the word a little.....got to save the ears a little for the disco too ya.......
i am only assuming you fly for air asia, and if you are, i would like to ask for a big favour......that is to start telling the guys NOT to hold the tip of the boom mike while they transmit.
not only is it illegible to the controllers, but it is also deaffening to the other aircrafts on the same frequency. some mh guys do it too, however from my PERSONAL observation, i find that more than half of aa transmitions seem to have this effect. of course i could be absolutely wrong....
i have however, found a very nice way of demonstrating the effect of holding /toucing the tip of the boom mike,.......i demonstrate it to the other guy on the flight intercom......while i transmit with and without holding the tip of the boom mike, and the difference is just too obvious for the other party to ignore..........
just something that i was taught earlier by my captains that i'd like to share..........actually i'm sure you know how a lot of times we need to turn up the volume when with lumpur cntrol.....and that.s when it really hurts my nice little precious ear drums, when some guy transmits like that.....and then the controller cannot comprehend......and then it goes on and on and on.....
hope you'll help spread the word a little.....got to save the ears a little for the disco too ya.......
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Europe
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will spread the word jetrat,
We've had complaints and actually along with improper technique like you say, some of the problem comes with many of the VHF COM boxes itself in the aircraft which along with the whole airframe are rather (too) Old and have problem with gain, static and volume...hence talking too close to the mic cos they cant even hear themselves. Fortunately the older aircraft are being phased out first.
Hope it gets easier on all your ears.
We've had complaints and actually along with improper technique like you say, some of the problem comes with many of the VHF COM boxes itself in the aircraft which along with the whole airframe are rather (too) Old and have problem with gain, static and volume...hence talking too close to the mic cos they cant even hear themselves. Fortunately the older aircraft are being phased out first.
Hope it gets easier on all your ears.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Alderaan
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People,
Excellent to see more people here talking about the betterment of the aviation in the country, be it MAS, AA or anyone else flying into the country anywhere.
Vello old boy, had a look at the atis thing and i actually got sbz atis about 135nm out of PK at FL310, which was very good compared to KLIA which i only started getting around 70-80nm. Maybe this would help in away on whats next!
I tend to be a little particular about R/T, and a very bad habbit that ive realised is guys not listening out before transmitting and it gets very irritating. Please gentlemen, correct the guys if u see this happenin on your flight. Secondly, we should stop the useage of using "confirm" after every transmission, its become a "bad" habbit. It has become a norm and the poor controllers end up repeating the whole dam clearence again!
Excellent to see more people here talking about the betterment of the aviation in the country, be it MAS, AA or anyone else flying into the country anywhere.
Vello old boy, had a look at the atis thing and i actually got sbz atis about 135nm out of PK at FL310, which was very good compared to KLIA which i only started getting around 70-80nm. Maybe this would help in away on whats next!
I tend to be a little particular about R/T, and a very bad habbit that ive realised is guys not listening out before transmitting and it gets very irritating. Please gentlemen, correct the guys if u see this happenin on your flight. Secondly, we should stop the useage of using "confirm" after every transmission, its become a "bad" habbit. It has become a norm and the poor controllers end up repeating the whole dam clearence again!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: malaysia
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R/T Shortcomings/Taxy Delays
Hi Flyers..tq for your inputs. Points noted.
BKI Tower/Ground issues will be discussed on the 26th onwards. Couple of Safety Mgmnt Sys(SMS) chaps are going over there. One of my colleagues will be on board MH2616 on the 26th of June. His name is Suresh, from KLIA Twr. This will be probably a meeting to discuss some safety issues pertaining to East Malaysia. ATC welcomes feedback.
Yes..regarding the "confirm" is also an issue with ATC. ATClers have no choice but to repeat the whole clearance when once the pilot says "confirm". Of course some might just say "Affirm" and finish it off but at the back of the mind of the ATCler, a confirm is interepreted as one which the pilot is not sure or clear hence the whole readback and as Rage as pointed out, it is really becoming a nuisance to us.Pardon me for those strong words but am glad even the pilots are thinking alike.Of course, we do understand if the frequency is bad but if five other acft has copied ok and one chap keeps saying "confirm", then it has something to do with a habit.
Rage..thanks for the readability report on 127.6. Still discussing this KUL ATIS problem with the right connection. News is that the power output for the KUL ATIS has been reduced for reasons best known to the service provider. ATC will look into it.
BKI Tower/Ground issues will be discussed on the 26th onwards. Couple of Safety Mgmnt Sys(SMS) chaps are going over there. One of my colleagues will be on board MH2616 on the 26th of June. His name is Suresh, from KLIA Twr. This will be probably a meeting to discuss some safety issues pertaining to East Malaysia. ATC welcomes feedback.
Yes..regarding the "confirm" is also an issue with ATC. ATClers have no choice but to repeat the whole clearance when once the pilot says "confirm". Of course some might just say "Affirm" and finish it off but at the back of the mind of the ATCler, a confirm is interepreted as one which the pilot is not sure or clear hence the whole readback and as Rage as pointed out, it is really becoming a nuisance to us.Pardon me for those strong words but am glad even the pilots are thinking alike.Of course, we do understand if the frequency is bad but if five other acft has copied ok and one chap keeps saying "confirm", then it has something to do with a habit.
Rage..thanks for the readability report on 127.6. Still discussing this KUL ATIS problem with the right connection. News is that the power output for the KUL ATIS has been reduced for reasons best known to the service provider. ATC will look into it.