"With you" "With you" "With you"

[Almerick07]

Who is that in your avatar say again? goodness

 

[Photoflight]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnndddddddddddddddddddd............nobody cares

 

[stonewall]

I blame each "with you" pilot's primary instructor, who should have stopped that nonsense before they got their private.

I don't know what goes on in the military primary instruction.

It's a shame that jet pilots say useless stuff. Whenever I hear "with you" from a pro pilot, I wince a little.

Does it matter? Not really - it's a point of technique. I personally think it's a dumb thing to say on the radio, no more.

Military is up to the individual IP in primary. I said "with you" once on the radio and got beeatch slapped. "Is he in the f'in cockpit with us?? NO. You're not WITH HIM at all!" or something like that.

As a fighter guy, it's been ingrained that brevity is good. I really don't care what anyone says on the radio in my civilian flying, but everyone should know that in high-demand times you should keep it short and to the point. But when it's 0500 and you're talking to the same guy from 100 miles out to the gate, nobody really cares what's said!

 

[DJS]

Alrighty. As a typical GA dude, I've been shamed into not saying "with you" by this bbs in order to save a couple milliseconds on the airwaves, but just what is the proper phrasology for "request". I don't want to tie up the busy frenquency with the complete text of my vfr flight following or ifr popup request (mainly because there's a decent chance I'm stepping on someone else anyways). So what is is the FI-approved way to say, "hey, Seattle Center, I've got to spew a bunch of info at you probably leading up to a request for VFR flight following or an IFR popup; can you talk now or do you need me to wait a minute or two?"

I learned from my instructor (and have continued using) "Seattle Center, N12345 Request" was a good way to express that. They could either respond, "N12345, Seattle Center, Go ahead" or "N12345, Seattle Center, Go away" (unable, call back in 5, etc.)

What's wrong with that?

 

[KingDriver]

Whoever started this post and agree with it can "Eat Shiiiiiiiite"! Get a Life!

 

[HAL]

Come ON!! Everyone, knock it off PLEASE!! For the grace of God, let it stop NOW!!!

Dave, I think you need to take a sit down, take a stress pill, and take it easy. Stop Dave, Stop.

Daisy, daisy......

HAL

 

[blingair]

I like to go swimming with bow legged women and swim between their legs. (just trying to fill in the space). I feel dirty for even replying to this post.

 

[blingair]

Heard those 2 words 9, yes 9 times in an hour while listening to NY app
this afternoon online. This REALLY gets annoying and does nothing but clog up the freq during the busiest time of day in some of the busiest airspace in the US!! Come ON!! Everyone, knock it off PLEASE!! Of course ATC knows your "with them." Why does everyone tell them your "with them" when in actuality you could be 30 miles away!!! For the grace of God, let it stop NOW!!!

Some day you'll get your dream ERJ job and wont have to listen to ATC online. You're a tool. Blingair, so long.

 

[AngelKing]

Who is that in your avatar say again? goodness

that is the fab. Shakira


AK

 

[A Squared]

Alrighty. As a typical GA dude, I've been shamed into not saying "with you" by this bbs in order to save a couple milliseconds on the airwaves, but just what is the proper phrasology for "request". I don't want to tie up the busy frenquency with the complete text of my vfr flight following or ifr popup request (mainly because there's a decent chance I'm stepping on someone else anyways). So what is is the FI-approved way to say, "hey, Seattle Center, I've got to spew a bunch of info at you probably leading up to a request for VFR flight following or an IFR popup; can you talk now or do you need me to wait a minute or two?"

I learned from my instructor (and have continued using) "Seattle Center, N12345 Request" was a good way to express that. They could either respond, "N12345, Seattle Center, Go ahead" or "N12345, Seattle Center, Go away" (unable, call back in 5, etc.)

What's wrong with that?

Here's the deal: It's about how many radio transmissions it takes to take care of your request. Let's say you want direct your destination If you request to transmit a request, which in itself is a request, (are you going to request to transmit your request to transmit your request? where does it stop?) it takes a minimum of 4 transmissions to deal with it, 5 if you acknowlege his response.

you: Seattle Center, Cessna XXXX with a request.

SEA: Cessna XXXX, sigh, Go ahead your request. (you can't actually hear the sigh, but it's there)

You: Request direct XXX VOR.

SEA: Cleared Direct XXX

OK, now, if you just request direct XXX without going through the chararade of requesting to ask your request, it will take 2 transmissions:

You: Seattle Center, Cessna XXXX Request direct XXX VOR.

SEA: Cleared Direct XXX

That's 2 transmissions, and you're done, most of the time. Now of course, on occasion, he's not going to catch it the first time, so you'll have to repeat your request, but that doesn't take any longer than "requesting your request"


You: Seattle Center, Cessna XXXX Request direct XXX VOR.

SEA: Cessna XXXX say again?

You: Cessna XXXX Request direct XXX VOR.

SEA: Cleared Direct XXX

So, in the worst case, it takes the same number of transmissions to address your request, but *most* of the time it takes half as many, and yes, that does matter to controllers.

If you haven't already, I would encourage you to read Don Brown's "Say Again?" columns on Avweb: Say Again Columns.

Among other things, he addresses the situation you mentioned, picking up VFR flight following, and how best to handle that. The one common thread through all his columns is: Communicate the way the AIM tells you to communicate. All the time. Don't add stuff, don't omit stuff. It's that way for a reason, and the reasons may not be apparent to pilots, and yes, it *does* matter.