Adlerdriver

Got debriefed on a line check this week. According to the LCA, my radio calls were backwards. 27 years of flying mil and civ combined and I never heard this, so I throw it out for comment.

According to this guy, we are supposed to end each response to ATC with our callsign rather than start it with callsign.

The example in question: Talking to Shanghai ground control.

SGC: "Airline 123, taxi L15, P4, hold short runway 17R at P4."

My response: "Airline 123, taxi L15, P4, hold short runway 17R at P4"

His debrief was that I should have said:
"Taxi L15, P4, hold short runway 17R at P4, Airline 123."

Now, we can probably go around and around about technique, but that's not what I'm after. I've heard it done both ways and I get the idea that some guys prefer to read back the instructions immediately so they don't forget them (got to know your limitations ).

For me, I'm of the mind that identifying yourself immediately is a good thing. Waiting until the end of the radio call to let ATC know who is actually responding to them is not a good plan. However, I'm certainly not claiming to be the expert on such things.

I'm talking procedures now, i.e. It must be done this way. Does anyone have a reference that supports his debrief point? AIM seems to indicate that callsign can be at the beginning or end of one's transmission. I don't know if there's another source.

Looking for any and all perspectives on this. Thanks.

Adlerdriver

Just to be clear: This was not a Chinese specific debrief. It was any and all radio calls, worldwide.

Though I did feel pretty good about getting Shanghai to respond that day and in English no less.

TonyC

Well, first off, congrats on passing the line check. You know you've done a pretty decent job if the only nit to pick is this.

Your LCA's technique is not a procedure prescribed by the AIM. In fact, most examples of radio communications in the AIM show the aircraft identification preceding all other information relayed in the radio call except for the ATC facility, if it is named in the radio call. In some cases, both orders are demonstrated in examples.

AIM 4-4-7.b.

ATC Clearance/Instruction Readback.

Pilots of airborne aircraft should read back
those parts of ATC clearances and instructions
containing altitude assignments, vectors, or runway
assignments as a means of mutual verification. The
read back of the “numbers” serves as a double check
between pilots and controllers and reduces the kinds
of communications errors that occur when a number
is either “misheard” or is incorrect.


1. Include the aircraft identification in all
readbacks and acknowledgments. This aids controllers
in determining that the correct aircraft received
the clearance or instruction. The requirement to
include aircraft identification in all readbacks and
acknowledgements becomes more important as
frequency congestion increases and when aircraft
with similar call signs are on the same frequency.

EXAMPLE−
“Climbing to Flight Level three three zero, United Twelve”
or “November Five Charlie Tango, roger, cleared to land
runway nine left.”

Procedure: Include aircraft identification

Technique: Include aircraft identification at beginning of transmission

Another technique: Include aircraft identification at end of transmission

Another technique: Include aircraft identification at some point in the transmission other than the beginning or end



Oh, and another nit ... It's Pudong Ground. We stopped going to Shanghai Hongqiao years ago.






.

SayAlt

Some people gripe just because they feel they can.

Your story reminds me of an LCA who got all worked up over a base leg that wasn't a precise 90 deg. angle to final on a visual w/ a landing clearance and we were the only ones on approach at the time.

LCA: "You did it wrong. It's supposed to be done this way."

Me: "Wilco."

Then dump and disregard.


You've got 3 decades of professional flight experience under your belt. You're experienced and expert enough to not need to worry about pedantic, over-bearing BS like this.

aviatorhi

Tell the LCA to get a grip... who on earth worries about something as ridiculous as that?

PerfInit

Yet another example of a narcissitic, ego driven LCA trying to prove that "he" knows more than everyone else.

Congratson passing the Line Check. Have another beer

FlyBoyd

I once got debriefed that I was wrong for not pulling out the QRH when we got the "Data Link Lost" EICAS message on a remote leg. The QRH says you've lost ACARS...end of checklist.

Singlecoil

I started flying 28 years ago and I can remember the AIM at the time expressly said to precede all readbacks with your aircraft call sign. The FOM at Alaska still says this. That line was removed from the AIM at some point over the years, so as referenced above, you just need to include your call sign in there somewhere. I still precede my readbacks with my call sign.

ExAF

You should have asked him to show you where that is written "so you could research it later." What a maroon!

UAL T38 Phlyer

Adler:

I think I'm like you. Short, simple transmission? C/S first, then the content.

Complicated reply, or not-quite-sure-what-they-said-looking-at-arrival-or-10-9-page-before-I-answer?

Then usually slowly reading back the content, C/S last.