cyras21

"COA1067 two-seven-zero"

What clearance was just issued?

Was it a heading, altitude, or speed?

What's my point? If I issue (yes I'm a controller) COA1067 cross RIDGY at Flight Level two-seven-zero and you the pilot respond with, COA 1067 two-seven-zero. What assurance do I have that you are acknowledging an altitude assignment and nothing else?

Today for 50 minuetes I logged out of 27 clearances only 3 were read back correctly. Even after asking for an altitude verification the response was numbers only.

Earlier I issued "DALXXX maintain two-six-zero knots" and the response was "DALXXX two-six-zero" and the pilot climbed into traffic.

In my opinion bad phraseology is a problem and we should be concerned. We're bad on both sides of the mic. Fundamentals are not what they used to be. Professionalism is low and complacency is high.

What's the fix? I'm fighting an uphill battle on my end. Too many young kids who know it all and an older generation just too worn out.

This is not meant to be a slam in anyway. I think this is a problem that needs correcting. Am I reading too much into this?

jackal24

A recent issue of NASA Callback dealt with precisely this issue.

CaptainCarl

Huh... I know when I'm on the radio, you're gonna get pretty standard terminology out of me, especially when it comes to the 150-360 number range. It ain't that hard to slap a "flight level" or a "heading" to the front end of three numbers or a "knots" to the tail end. I figure it's like a seat belt - Don't cost me nothin', but it could save my life

Twin Wasp

It's funny, we're got a couple page thread of how good the XJT crew did in Denver. Over on pprune the thread is twice as long going on about how their non-standard radio procedures almost caused a disaster.

stis202

This is my biggest pet peeve of guys I fly with. Drives me crazy. Just like reading back the flight number without the callsign or reading back a hold short without saying the runway or callsign.

Std Deviation

FAR-AIM discipline.

yimke

I'm a guilty party, that was trained using bad phraseology. After getting my instrument, I finally realized why controllers always made me read back a lot. So I started to read the ICAO guide for phraseology, and I actually get compliments on correct read-backs. However, I am still fighting bad habits and trying to switch over to "negative contact".

I have noticed about 70% of pilots and 20% of controllers use incorrect phraseology. Sometimes it drives me nuts when the controller does it. The pilots outnumber the controllers though, and the professionalism is down. I would actually recommend for everyone to read the ICAO standardized phraseology guide. Eventually, we will all have to switch over anyway. Someday...

cyras21

This discussion has gone much better then I anticipated. I've tried having similar discussions with my fellow controllers and it's like I punked a jock in a locker room in front of his crew. They want no part of it, fine with using bad techniques because it's worked before.

I fear if we, controllers and pilots, don't start turning around complacency in the workplace one of these days we'll have a perfect storm and the outcome is going to be disastrous.

N9373M

Poor technique is also contagious. Heard a airline guy read back a frequency hand off as "127 point flat". Someone in my bug smasher did the same response when given the same freq

Timbo

I've never been too bright, and I'm lazy, so I just repeat what was said to me, exactly as it was said to me, word for word, just like a Parrot (head). I was taught to do this at a very early stage in my flying life, and have never had a problem.

What I don't understand is why some guys always read back the instructions first, then put their flight number at the end...ie. they read it back, backwards. I've even tried to do it, to see if it's faster, or easier, but I find it is HARDER to re-arange the instructions, and I always forget my flight number by the time I've read everything else back in front of it!

SO, I try to keep it simple (stupid) and just read it back exactly as it came to me, Flight number first, then intstructions, word for word. If a Contoller throws me a curve ball ie. not 'standard' phrasology, I'll ask him to clarify it, rather than -ass-u-me- to know what he meant.