"..With You.."

[FL717]

Yabba Dabba Doo!!!! LOL!

I think "yabba dabba doo" would suffice.

Or what about something like...

Geronimo?

Hot damm, here we go again!

Jesus, I thought for sure there was going to be a breathalyzer today!

Alah Akbar!

Go Wee hawks! (or whatever it was that Rodger at Chicago center used to say!"

Sporting Wood on 7 left!

I'm sorry, meant to say...

Sporting WOOD, "with you", on 7 left!

LOLOL!!

I was laughing so hard....... I think I just spotted!!

 

[MickeySlapnutz]

I'm not completely sure, but I believe "on the hold" is military phraseology.

The Air Force had you respond with "On to hold"...that is what I think you are hearing.

 

[Sundevil]

--------------------------------
My only pet peeve is "On the hold." I don't even know what that means. I know it loosely translates to "position and hold," but its just a jumble of words. Just say, "position and hold."
--------------------------------

I thought that the "on to hold" (not "on the hold") was weird too until I went to AF pilot training. That was only correct way to respond to a "taxi into position and hold" clearance in the T-37. I don't know where it came from originally, but my guess is that it has been spread throughout the civilian industry by the AF. The AF is where they learned to fly and that's how they learned.

The thing that ticks me off the most is when people use the word "Sugar" instead of "Sierra" for the S in their callsign. Talk about queer.

 

[Sundevil]

mickey beat me to it while i was typing. Lots of interest in this thread

 

[klhoard]

I don't know where it came from originally, but my guess is that it has been spread throughout the civilian industry by the AF. The AF is where they learned to fly and that's how they learned.
QUOTE]
.
.
.
That's why the airlines should only hire military pilots; then we'd all be standardized. . . .
.
.
.

 

[MickeySlapnutz]

I don't know where it came from originally, but my guess is that it has been spread throughout the civilian industry by the AF. The AF is where they learned to fly and that's how they learned.
QUOTE]
.
.
.
That's why the airlines should only hire military pilots; then we'd all be standardized. . . .
.
.
.

Here we go.....poop, meet fan.

 

[blzr]

What about hearing some of you airline guys on clearance saying "delta 105 instruments to Atlanta". I mean, How the He11 else are you going to go?

A/C CLT tower, PDT 3344 with you for the visual to 36L.

CLT Tower: Roger PDT3344, CONTINUE....

No, I'm going to wait right here until you clear me to land...

 

[Fly_Chick]

It is very redundant and dumb to ever use the phrase "with you" in your radio transmission to an ATC controller. He certainly realizes that you are "with him" by the mere fact you are speaking to him! And while we're at it, lets drop the phrase "any chance" when requesting something. Just request it, it's not a bookie joint.

I love it! I fully agree with Captain 7 that there IS NO NEED to mention "with you". It is not in the pilot controller glossary. "Palm Beach approach, Arrow 12345 two thousand five hundred" is sufficient. That is it, short, concise, to the point.

I cringe when I hear "Daytona Departure, Cessna XXX with you on the missed out of Melbourne, heading 240 as assigned, leaving 800 for 2000". I think the reason for this is that the student is not understanding what is happening, does not have the full picture of radar, does not really know what is going on.

I say this because when I was a student, I used to say the exact same thing. I did not have a clue, was just told by my instructor to state my position, my heading, my altitude. Now that the tables are turned and I am an instructor, I have a bit more "insight", yet also make sure my students have that insight as well!

Funny story... yesterday I was flying with someone (with a heavy British accent) who told Miami that he was "with them at flight level two five hundred." I started laughing and he asked me what I was laughing about. I said, "there is no need to say 'with you' as they know you are there. "And since when are we at 250,000 feet?"

He defended his position. I tried to explain to no avail so I took a laid back attitude, and just told him he would find out soon enough.

Next call was "Arrow 123 maintain VFR at or above two thousand six hundred." I motioned with my hands 3 and 5 (meaning three thousand five hundred). Of course student is on top on the game and does not need any guidance from me.

He responds, Miami center, Arrow 123 requests flight level three five thousand".

I am laughing... Miami center "Arrow 123, I do not know what they do on your side of the pond, but our flight levels do not start until 18,000 feet! Maintain VFR at or above two thousand six hundred, altitude your discretion." did not need to say another word... my initial point was very well taken.

 

[Doug Parker]

Yo Jax Center, can I ax you fo thirty right to defecate around some Cumulo - Mamma - Jammas ?????

 

[FL717]

The thing that ticks me off the most is when people use the word "Sugar" instead of "Sierra" for the S in their callsign. Talk about queer.

There is a Bank that is headquartered in Kansas City that had their business jet based there. The aircraft N# ended in the bank initials "CB". The Pilot that flew for them always ended ATC calls with "Charlie Brown" versus the correct "Charlie Bravo".

Apparently the MKC tower had a controller that was really sick of it and one day in the late 90's, I was flying out of Kansas City Downtown (MKC), and this Pilot got reamed over the radio by the tower controller. This Pilot was so used to saying it that after a few minutes he would instinctively revert back to saying "Charlie Brown" out of habit.

The controller was so wrapped around the axel about this, and I thought the controller was going to just end it all and jump out of the tower cab.

We laughed our @sses off.

 

[FlyChicaga]

http://www.aviationspeakers.com/Speakers/Dave-Gwinn.html

Watch the video. Probably really fitting for the thread!

[nerd]

I try my best to use standard phraseology, particularly in Mexico and Canada. Sometimes you can get lax though; it happens. I think more important than what you say is how you say it though... lately I've heard some terrible mumbling, where you are sitting there thinking to yourself, "WTF did he just say?"

I am always impressed by ATC. 95% of the time, they are clear, concise, and use proper phraseology. Plus, 80% of the time they are 100 times more quick witted than we pilots will ever be!

After studying human factors, and taking some courses related to communication (one taught by a former Finnish ATCer), I've seen the light in regards to proper phraseology. Both in communication between crew and ATC.

Twice in the past six months I've seen situations where someone has answered for our aircraft with a "roger" without callsign, which quite possibly could have turned into a runway incursion. Once we were number two for departure, and ATC asked us if we were ready. I said "affirmative" and gave our callsign. We were cleared into position and hold. We began to taxi across the hold short lines, and the captain and I both said "wait" at the same time, since the airplane in position wasn't moving. Then we were given takeoff clearance, and I hesitated a second to respond. The aircraft in position then responded WITH OUR CALLSIGN for takeoff clearance, and departed. I immediately queried ATC, stating that someone just answered for us, we were halfway across the hold short lines, confim we are in position and hold. ATC seemed confused, and then cleared us again into position. Then they told the other aircraft, using its proper callsign, to contact departure.

Case two: We were taxiing in CLE, and were told to hold short of 24L at Sierra. Another airline had just pulled off the gates behind us. ATC asked us if we were ready for departure. The other aircraft said "roger." We were then cleared to "expedite across 24L, hold short 24R" since there was an aircraft on close final for 24L. The other aircraft then responded with the crossing and hold short instruction FOR US, again with no callsign. We just held our position short of the runway, and told ATC we were holding short, there seems to be confusion since someone else is responding for us. Luckily we were blocking the other aircraft from crossing.

Rip on me all you want, but Captain7 does have a point. Lax phraseology is just the beginning in a major breakdown in communication. Which could have dire consequences. I'm sure others have similar experiences.

[/nerd]

 

[Fly_Chick]

And while we're at it, lets drop the phrase "any chance" when requesting something. Just request it, it's not a bookie joint.
QUOTE]

I hear "any chance" all the time. Why not just request it? You either get it or you don't. It sounds like begging. I never thought of it as a bookie joint. Will think of it that way moving forward.

I especially love to hear the ATIS reporting runway 25 in use, then someone comes up with "any chance we can get the ILS 7?". Especially when there are 4 VFR flights in the pattern and 3 IFR flights shooting the LOC 25 BC.

 

[ivauir]

I actually agree with your point and there are countless other examples. But your delivery needs a little work. Consider it CRM outside of the cockpit - people don't like to be called dumb. Besides, before you call people dumb, I'd make sure your command of your mother tongue was a little stronger.

It is very redundant .

You cannot modify a superlative. It is not possible for something to be "very redundant". It is either redundant or it is not. The same rule applies to "unique" - that one drives me crazy! How can something be "very one of a kind"?

There is no need to add the addendum

I suppose this is "very redundant" too. Although what do you propose one do win an addendum? Subtract it?

Your point has some validity, folks should review AIM every now and then. But I can't help wonder, how do you read back altitudes or radio frequencies? AIM is specific on this phraseology, but for the most part only controllers follow it. When you switch frequencies do you make the switch as soon as the numbers are set or do you pause to give the controller a chance to correct your read back? Often the pilots who are least tolerant of other's bad habits have some real dozzies themselves.

 

[TonyC]

---------------------------------------
.....three three oh.
----------------------------------------

Reminds me...what's the deal with the "oh's"? It's "zero". Try flying in some other parts of the world and use "oh" instead of zero and you might get an earful.

Oh, sure, rail all over folks for "with ya" and "oh", but you'll let "three" slide for "tree"?!?!? What a hypocrite.

I tell ya, standardized lingo has really gone down the tubes theses days.
















.

 

[Fly_Chick]

Twice in the past six months I've seen situations where someone has answered for our aircraft with a "roger" without callsign, which quite possibly could have turned into a runway incursion.

The other aircraft said "roger."
[/nerd]

Roger. I will not let any of my primary students use the word "Roger". I have them look up the defintion in the pilot controller glossary. My interpretation to them is if the say "Roger" they are saying "I have heard everything you said, I understand everything you said, I will comply with everythig you said, and I alleviate you from any responsibility and I take full responsibility for every thing I do."

Most of the time when the student says "Roger" he/she has missed half the transmission and is just saying it as he/she has heard it elsewhere on the radios. When I ask them what they are expected to do, they typically cannot fully comply nor repeat back the instructions.

I am with FlyChicaga and Captain 7 on this one.