Saying "with you" to Center

[350DRIVER]

Somewhat unrelated to this thread but most female controllers can always provide a good amount of entertainment on any given day depending on the "mood" at the time !.


Lady So Cal Appch controller: " AeroMexico 232 how do you copy?"

still nothing, few mo minutes pass-

lady So Cal Appch controller: "AeroMexico 232 for the third and final time are you going to be able to get down and cross XYZ at 10,000?".

a few minutes pass... - still nothing.

AeroMexico 232: (in a deep Mee hee canna accent) "Aidi Me hee co too dirty too ahhhhh.. sometimesa we doa but ahhh sometimesaa weee don'ta"



3 5 0

 

[cougar6903]

I've got another one for you guys.

Flying under the Class B today at 500', south shore of LI. JFK's landing to the north and tower advises me to caution wake turbulance since heavy traffic on final is crossing my route of flight. I make a quick reply without thinking and say "roger, i'll take that into consideration". Tower gets back with a chuckle and says " thats good, thats the fist time i've ever gotten anything except for roger, thats good". Being as bone headed as I am I couldn't figure out if I was being made fun of or if it was just a friendly reply. Anyone ??

 

[pilot_guy]

This phraseology thread is just anal.

I used to try to say things "the right way", but after lots of flying in South and West Texas, you just say fukc it after awhile, cause they don't have a care or a clue anyway. More than likely, other aircraft won't even use the radio at all. (Yes I know they don't HAVE TO at uncontrolled fields. Still, it's the 21st century, use the radio if it has one, or buy a d*mned handheld!) I knew guys who thought I was so kick a** because I knew how to get in and out of airports in class c and d airspace?!?!

"He!!, I don't nothing 'bout them radios. You do the talking when we get there, ok?" That was part of an actual conversation I had with a guy on our way to Lubbock. He couldn't read a diagram either though. Oh well.

I know there must be other parts of the country where it's the same way.

 

[JeffSKDTW]

This phraseology thread is just anal.

At the risk of being labeled "anal" (which I am BTW), perhaps this article (and the entire series) might be informative to those still reading this thread:

http://avweb.com/news/columns/188083-1.html

Not that "with you" will necessarily lead to anyone's demise, I like this quote from the article in particular:

As a matter of fact, you can read a lot of examples about phraseology gone wrong while you're on that page. A paper I recently read stated that 70% of all the reports in the NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System database involve some sort of miscommunication. The paper was written by a fellow named Dave Wilkerson. He wrote it as a thesis for his Masters degree. Very interesting stuff.

 

[MED]

These are not in the AIM too:

willco
talleho
nojoy

 

[JeffSKDTW]

These are not in the AIM too:

willco

Are you sure? AIM 4-2-3

 

[midlifeflyer]

These are not in the AIM too:

willco
talleho
nojoy

The other two aren't, but "Wilco" (often confused with "Roger" by pilots) sure is.

 

[Clyde]

While we are on the subject of comm procedures, what do you guys think when someone on center frequency uses the phrase "heavy" on frequency. I thought you were only required to use it within the terminal areas because of the separation standards.

I probably could go look it up, but that would require me to get up and walk over to my bookcase. Too much work.

 

[Falconjet]

"On to hold"

"On to hold"

I never thought to much about this one, but a few months ago the Captain I was flying with asked the F/O to not use that phrase before we even got near the runway. I was kind of surprised becasue like I said I had never thought that much about that phrase, or heard it very often. So the F/O complied and read back "position and hold" when directed and off we went.

Since then I have been listening for that phrase and I must say that I hear it a lot at Memphis and it seems to be contagious. Once somebody says it and the tower ignores it then the next one says it and so on and so forth. Very interesting. I think the Captain was right, you should read it back as "position and hold". I can't believe that every ATIS in the country has to remind us to read back all runway crossing and hold short clearances, yet I still observe folks not do it once in a while. I really wish everybody would just do it so we could get garbage like that off the ATIS.

Now I haven't spoken with ATC in almost 3 years so I'm not really in a position to criticize, but I think more standardized phraseology would be a good thing.

I also can't stand the thought of somebody "vacating" an altitude. I'd prefer they report "out of" or "leaving" , instead of reporting what sounds like a bodily function. Anybody with an AIM know what that call should really be so I don't mess it up if I ever get to talk on the radio again?

FJ

 

[midlifeflyer]

While we are on the subject of comm procedures, what do you guys think when someone on center frequency uses the phrase "heavy" on frequency. I thought you were only required to use it within the terminal areas because of the separation standards.

From the ATC Handbook (Order 7110.65, section 2-4-14.b.

==============================
The word "heavy" shall be used as part of the identification of heavy jet aircraft as follows:

TERMINAL. In all communications with or about heavy jet aircraft.

EN ROUTE. The use of the word heavy may be omitted except as follows:

1. In communications with a terminal facility about heavy jet operations.

2. In communications with or about heavy jet aircraft with regard to an airport where the en route center is providing approach control service.

3. In communications with or about heavy jet aircraft when the separation from a following aircraft may become less than 5 miles by approved procedure.

4. When issuing traffic advisories.
==============================

 

[Daveman]

"On to hold"


I also can't stand the thought of somebody "vacating" an altitude. I'd prefer they report "out of" or "leaving" , instead of reporting what sounds like a bodily function. Anybody with an AIM know what that call should really be so I don't mess it up if I ever get to talk on the radio again?

FJ

Guilty.

 

[minitour]

...I can't believe that every ATIS in the country has to remind us to read back all runway crossing and hold short clearances, yet I still observe folks not do it once in a while. I really wish everybody would just do it so we could get garbage like that off the ATIS...

when I was doing my paper for class on runway incursions, I read dozens of those NASA reports. Seems like a good majority of the runway incursions were caused by not reading back hold short instructions. Thankfully most were caught with just a bit of the nose over the hold short line as a C150 taxis by...but you can see how it could be more serious. The ones in CVG are particularly intersting. They actually have them taxi off therunway but hold short of the parallel taxiway. Well when they do that they're still on the active runway...really freaky. Be safe out there!


Oh yeah and the "vacating" thing...

Usually I'll just give it:
"Kentuckyhucky Approach, Cessna 12345 9er thousand 4 hundred descending 2 thousand 5 hundred"

Occasionally if I can tell it's busy (like I have to wait to check on) I'll shorten it or just try to spit it out faster...but I've been trying to do it the same way all the time...anyway hope that helps

-mini

 

[Daveman]

You've descended to 240. Buzzin' around, Center pipes in "cross blah blah at 11 thousand". I'm planning a 2k ft per min. descent to cross 'blah' @ 11.
Now, say me, (pnf), I might pipe in and say XXX vacating....
I like to give the center a heads up.

 

[Daveman]

No comment! Well someone owes mmmmmmmmmmmdonut 5 bucks.

 

[JeffSKDTW]

I also can't stand the thought of somebody "vacating" an altitude. I'd prefer they report "out of" or "leaving" , instead of reporting what sounds like a bodily function. Anybody with an AIM know what that call should really be so I don't mess it up if I ever get to talk on the radio again?

The AIM is always available online at: http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/AIM/

2. The following phraseology should be utilized by pilots for establishing contact with the designated facility:​

(a) When operating in a radar environment: On initial contact, the pilot should inform the controller of the aircraft's assigned altitude preceded by the words "level," or "climbing to," or "descending to," as appropriate; and the aircraft's present vacating altitude, if applicable.

EXAMPLE-​

1. (Name) CENTER, (aircraft identification), LEVEL (altitude or flight level).
2. (Name) CENTER, (aircraft identification), LEAVING (exact altitude or flight level), CLIMBING TO OR DESCENDING TO (altitude of flight level).​

​

 

[Falconjet]

Jeff: Thank you for the reply and the online reference. I will add that to my favorites.

It is easy to see where somebody could get the idea to use the word vacating since it is right there in the description, but I'm glad to see that the proper terms are level, descending to or climbing to.

Now, if I could only get into a window seat they might allow me to use the radio (with ATC) again!

FJ

 

[MED]

Are you sure? AIM 4-2-3

my bad

 

[FlyinTim]

I'm a Big... 'Annnndddd Providence Tower"... ahh everyone yells at me...the hell with it...primacy at its finest. lol

 

[staledog]

i can't believe i read this whole thread. only took me 45 minutes.

also, i can't stand "fife" or "tree".

 

[flyifrvfr]

Everytime I hear someone say tally ho I key up and say I don't know about you, but I had seven hoe's the last time I tallied my hoes.