Terms that annoy you on the radio
#111
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,919
You're too grumpy. I'm a 3 direction FO. If the controller tells me more than 3 things (heading, alt, speed, new freq, etc.), I'll forget the last thing which is usually the flight number. So instead of stumbling through the flight number, I'll just trail off or mumble.
#112
The "here comes the" part is extraneous, but the 'flash' is comm brevity that many military bring with them.
#113
True but I guess I'm referring to the weekend warriors & private pilots who hear someone say it & think its cool to say.
#114
The instruction should be acknowledged. If brevity is the goal, try responding with the callsign or N-number. It's not a bad time to include a "Wilco."
If someone can show me where "flash" is standard terminology, I'll stand corrected.
.
#116
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Position: PA-18, Front
Posts: 187
Yes I am. I've been out of the heavy metal world for some time now, but I don't recall ever having to put up with this kind of uploading in Europe or Asia, or anywhere else outside North America for that matter. The problem is that the Regulator, by approving an Air Carrier's Flight Operations Manual, elevates its contents to the power of regulations, albeit indirectly. So if the Air Carrier's FOM says, the use of the word "shall" means mandatory action, and that pilots "shall" comply with ATC instructions (save specified circumstances), then by approving the FOM, the Regulator, in effect, says, pilots (of that carrier) "shall comply with ATC instructions (save specified circumstances)." And if the pilot doesn't, he subjects himself to enforcement - in addition to any disciplinary action. Granted, it's a power seldom enforced, but it is cited during post-incident hearings if relevant. And that's enough to cause a chilling effect, i.e. the disinclination to refuse ATC uploading. But I agree with you 100%: no pilot should tolerate it.
#117
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Position: PA-18, Front
Posts: 187
"Compliance with Air Traffic Control Instructions and Clearances
602.31 (1) Subject to subsection (3), the pilot-in command of an aircraft shall
(a) comply with and acknowledge, to the appropriate air traffic control unit, all of the air traffic control instructions directed to and received by the pilot-in-command; and..."
"(3) The pilot-in-command of an aircraft may deviate from an air traffic control clearance or an air traffic control instruction to the extent necessary to carry out a collision avoidance manoeuvre, where the manoeuvre is carried out
(a) in accordance with a resolution advisory generated by an Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) or a Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS); or
(b) in response to a warning from a Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS) on board the aircraft."
(http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/regserv/cars/part6-602-2436.htm)
(I wrote my FAA ATP exams over a half a century ago, so I don't remember what the regs are down there anymore. I suspect they're similar)
#118
That's not the only bad habit or incorrect procedure that "many military bring with them." Many put their "clearance on request" and report ready for departure (in their turbojet) upon reaching the active. It's not ALL their fault -- that's the way they were taught.
The instruction should be acknowledged. If brevity is the goal, try responding with the callsign or N-number. It's not a bad time to include a "Wilco."
If someone can show me where "flash" is standard terminology, I'll stand corrected.
.
The instruction should be acknowledged. If brevity is the goal, try responding with the callsign or N-number. It's not a bad time to include a "Wilco."
If someone can show me where "flash" is standard terminology, I'll stand corrected.
.
OPERATIONAL BREVITY WORDS AND TERMINOLOGY
This link shows 'Flash' in the context we were discussing.
Can you explain why 'Clearance on request' or reporting ready for departure are wrong (and you specifically mention turbojets)?
You're right. Much of it is what I was taught and much of it is what I have used for 20+ years and it has worked with no problems. I've tried to de-militarize some of my comm since I left the military but some I'll keep.
Speaking of annoying.......at my home field of KOKC, it is always on the ATIS and published on the airfield diagram that the "Ramps are uncontrolled. Do not call for push/power back. Advise grd con when ready for taxi"
http://skyvector.com/files/tpp/1310/pdf/00301AD.PDF
How many times do you think crews still call? (Rhetorical)
#119
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Position: PA-18, Front
Posts: 187
Regarding readbacks and acknowledgments, forget it on ramp/apron/ground/tower control at some busy airports. E.g. "XX123 contact departure; YY456 cleared for takeoff; ZZ789 taxi to position be ready to go; ..." On the ground, you're expected to switch frequency when you reach the spot buried somewhere in the notes of page XX of your approach plates - as revised by NOTAM #YY - listen for your call sign, and do what the the controller tells you or lose your slot. Go with the flow and risk a violation (see above, post #117), or stick to the regs and you can be sure someone will be all over you. Your choice: spotless record or chow for the kids.
#120
I was on frequency where this foreign guy and a controller were trying to troubleshoot a transponder, and because the guy didn't say he pushed ident, it was this comical back-and-forth for 3 minutes, embarrassing.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post