No, you don't , do you?

Do try to make a positive contribution, old man.

Oh come on Chris. I don't fly AB so perhaps it is more noticeable.Their books sometimes read as though they were written by kindergarten kids!

I'm not an airbus supporter but...are you all serious in complaining for a stupid word to add?

Is it so difficult? I can understand if something is stupid or, worse, wrong but that is just a specification and I think it was added for the reason provided by Chris Scott. However, whatever the reason is, if you don't like it, write to your FOPH or Fleet Manager and ask for explanations.

I admit it is not a revolutionary improvement in aviation safety, but stop pretending to be fantasy ace super cool pilots and do it.

Are you aware you are writing complaints about a trivial issue?

Only having this discussion in the pub the other day but were the terms 'starboard' and 'port' ever used in aviation - if so - when did they stop using them although I can understand why ?

50 years ago the terms 'port' and 'starboard' were still used. I recall textbooks referring to both in the sections on lights and right of way. Nautical terms such as 'abeam', 'aft' and 'locker' may still be found in some manuals. Fokker certainly used those terms in the English versions of original F27 literature. The neat thing about nautical terminology is it leaves less room for misunderstanding in a noisy environment.

As for the current debate, why stress over a simple word? Whether ''SIDE" is included or not, it won't make a blind bit of difference if you don't actually look outside first! A bit like whether you parrot "xxxxx checkLIST complete" or "xxxxx checkS complete" - it means nothing if you haven't done it properly.

I will endeavour to use whatever my paymasters require, although I sometimes forget the exact fly-by-mouth words, especially if there are too many of them required to describe something basic. I see no safety hazard in an occasional lapse if the meaning is clear, unless the other guy in the cockpit is either a moron or so hung up on having the exact words that he goes into a catatonic state when he doesn't hear them.

It is when pilots rebel against SOP just to be different that a hazardous attitude can develop.

Who the hell cares if you say right is clear or right side clear.
Just do the check and announce. Simple.
Anyone who insists on the exact wording on this is so analy retentive that he/ she does not belong in the cockpit, let alone be allowed to train or write manuals.:ugh:

Common sense should prevail at all times.

Because the chaps sitting behind the desks writing this stuff have to be told it is nonsense. First this, then what's next? More and more verbal diarrhoea and complicated SOPs. Stand up and fight you AB lot! :ok:

If it is in the SOPs, then it should been done properly. Sama sama radio calls. It isn't difficult; learn the correct way and do it.

I sometimes use P or S in the tech log so the engos know which side I'm talking about regardless of whether they are walking forward or backward thru the cabin... :ok:

Hope they were sailors or they wouldn't have a clue where to look.

Considering many of the up and coming markets, and Countries (combined with recent incidents) it is probably prudent that Airbus AND Boeing add more of the basics back into the mix.

One just has to look back thru many of the topics on this board, to find a lack of consensus on many of the basics. :eek:

Didn't think of that. :{

No, they come up to our standard, not us descend to theirs.

Hmmm....if its so trivial - why do they want us to say it? Why would any copped on TC make a song and dance of it? The truth is - It's not trivial at all, is it. It's an SOP that happens to be BS (IMHO) and I'm interested in finding out if there is a sliver of logic to justify it. So far it's pretty flimsy.
It's a super little bit of trivia for a nerdish insecure newbie TC to show off with though, and quite pathetic given the fact we work in a company where a significant number of crew can barely hold a conversation in clear English. A clear case of wrong priorities. Plus added willy waving.

The Checks the thing (to slightly misquote the Bard).
Screw the wording - do the Check!

'Killa' to answer yr original question....NO there is no logic to all this just take a look at two pages of much to do about nufin'! Amazing that two pages of replies where generated over something so pedantic.
We all know SOP's are there & for good reasons (mostly) but they are now totally overtaking common sense, something that was intuitive in pilots, that's now been bred out of them & replaced with monkey see monkey do!

Common sense no longer has a place in aviation you have to justify yr every fart, we can thank the corrupt judicial system for that!:ugh:

There must be a lot of old salt pilots out there now retired sitting back & laughing their heads off thinking OMG look what aviation has become!

Indeed Wally, well said. I plan to join those ranks soon.

One more thing.
The phrase "Clear Left" does not 'belong' to Airbus. It is not 'type specific'. It is an Aviation Term, one that has been in use for decades. Maybe Orville and Wilbur used it. Boeing pilots use it too, as do the pilots of tens or hundreds of other aircraft types. None of them will be changing their language just because some lawyer in Airbus decided it was 'une bonne idee'. This will be totally ignored by most of the worlds pilots, and rightly so.
Theres a limit to this BS.
Bin it.