phraseology squawk
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: On the flight deck of course !!
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
phraseology squawk
Why does everybody answer "Ident you have" when the air traffic controler request "squawk ident (please)" ?? 
The correct phraseology is just "Ident" and that's it !!!
The correct phraseology is just "Ident" and that's it !!!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: N33 24.7 E36 30.8 E 36 30.8
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi...that's the first time i heard this term beign used...usually,the guys say.....identing,or identing followed by the code..and i've been flying in the middle east,north africa,europe for the last 20 years
could you tell me which region/airline..it is used in?
could you tell me which region/airline..it is used in?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: On the flight deck of course !!
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well, at least in UK !!! Most pilots from all UK airlines (thomson, BA, Monarch, easy, GB, flybe, etc,..) use this strange phraseology "Ident you have" !!
I've always thought that no response was required, except for pushing the ident button. If you've heard the request, the controller will have his reply when he sees an ident. That's all I've done for about 25 years and it's never been questioned by a controller. And it keeps the airwaves quieter.
BTW. Do you know whay a squawk is called a squawk? Well, it's because during WW2, the first transponders were a system called IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) and like many pieces of classified equipment, it was given a code name. IFF's was parrot. So when you parrot was interrogated, it gave out a squawk!
BTW. Do you know whay a squawk is called a squawk? Well, it's because during WW2, the first transponders were a system called IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) and like many pieces of classified equipment, it was given a code name. IFF's was parrot. So when you parrot was interrogated, it gave out a squawk!
I agree, Dan, nothing need be said. I was also taught when a new squawk code was given, simply enter it in the box correctly. If it is wrong the ATCO will tell you. Let the transponder do the talking--it is called SQUAWK for a reason.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely as an instruction from an ATC unit, it should be read back to the station to confirm the correct squawk. I understand your intentions/validity of not replying but the Iran Air incident is a case in point where the correct squawk was vitally important.
As to the correct response to the call, I think it's splitting hairs. There should be a correct phraseology for this but I believe "Ident(ing) XXXX", "Squawk XXXX" even "XXXX Coming Down" seem to be internationally recognised by the ATC stations I have spoken to.
As to the correct response to the call, I think it's splitting hairs. There should be a correct phraseology for this but I believe "Ident(ing) XXXX", "Squawk XXXX" even "XXXX Coming Down" seem to be internationally recognised by the ATC stations I have spoken to.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I suppose that's yet another leftover directive that predates concern over congested airwaves...
Thirty-something years back I was taught that an "Ident" request need only be followed by pushing the button. I've followed that since, nad have only been asked for a verbal response a handful of times.
It really is silly... If you hear and comply, the controller will see the result before you can reply verbally. If it doesn't work, or you didn't hear, another verbal exchange will be required regardless.
Thirty-something years back I was taught that an "Ident" request need only be followed by pushing the button. I've followed that since, nad have only been asked for a verbal response a handful of times.
It really is silly... If you hear and comply, the controller will see the result before you can reply verbally. If it doesn't work, or you didn't hear, another verbal exchange will be required regardless.
Psychophysiological entity
I like quiet on the airwaves, but surely, isn't there is a chance of the wrong A/C pressing the little red button ?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 1,266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As mentioned here already, crews often (incorrectly) squawk ident wihout being asked.
We need to readback the squawk ident instruction so that the ATCO can confirm that the correct aircraft has done so - instances of aircraft squawking within being asked or taking instructions intended for others are abound, as I'm sure we recognise.
If an aircraft is required to ident at all, it is because the ATCO wishes to identify an aircraft unambiguously - they can't do that without a readback.
Hence CAP413, regardless of what we were 'taught'.
I think 'ident you have' is lazy phraseology, but I don't think it's the end of civilisation!
Now "ready on reaching", that's another story.....
We need to readback the squawk ident instruction so that the ATCO can confirm that the correct aircraft has done so - instances of aircraft squawking within being asked or taking instructions intended for others are abound, as I'm sure we recognise.
If an aircraft is required to ident at all, it is because the ATCO wishes to identify an aircraft unambiguously - they can't do that without a readback.
Hence CAP413, regardless of what we were 'taught'.
I think 'ident you have' is lazy phraseology, but I don't think it's the end of civilisation!
Now "ready on reaching", that's another story.....
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bournemouth
Age: 77
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The world is full of unofficial, and often incorrect, RT.
Within ICAO, and that includes the UK, SSR instructions are mandatory read-back items and must be read back in full.
JP
Within ICAO, and that includes the UK, SSR instructions are mandatory read-back items and must be read back in full.
JP
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: On the flight deck of course !!
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fully ready on reaching? 
what about the difference between "ready" and "fully ready" ?
It's like "affirm" and "correct" ! have never really understood the nuance
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Co Mayo
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you read back a request to ident and the controller sees nothing on his screen he can reasonably assume that the aircraft has a faulty transponder.
If you do not read back a request to ident and the controller sees nothing on his screen then a whole world of possibilities opens up, from comms failure to a proper nasty, resulting in a lot more comms traffic while he tries to find out.
I was always taught to read back an ident request... and it only occupies the frequency for about 2 seconds.
WD
If you do not read back a request to ident and the controller sees nothing on his screen then a whole world of possibilities opens up, from comms failure to a proper nasty, resulting in a lot more comms traffic while he tries to find out.
I was always taught to read back an ident request... and it only occupies the frequency for about 2 seconds.
WD
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: land of the long BLUE cloud
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hate the 'fully ready' call.... sounds daft, and I wonder what would happen if I call 'semi-ready' one day.
Same goes for 'fully established' (ILS)
Sorry for the thread creep!
Same goes for 'fully established' (ILS)
Sorry for the thread creep!