Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Career Builder > Technical
"Courtesy" ATC Calls >

"Courtesy" ATC Calls

Notices
Technical Technical aspects of flying

"Courtesy" ATC Calls

Old 02-01-2013, 03:59 PM
  #1  
Line Holder
Thread Starter
 
OzoneRanger's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Posts: 38
Default "Courtesy" ATC Calls

I'm only a student pilot, and recently during a group ground school lesson the instructor mentioned that it is against the FARs to give a "courtesy call" to ATC as you are not speaking your full intentions upon first communication.

For example, say there are multiple aircraft attempting to talk to Ground at a very busy airport. It appears relatively common (and maybe smart?) to simply call in "Anytown Ground, Skyhawk 1234A" and wait for a response instead of going forward with your entire spiel and canceling out another transmission.

Is this an example of real world versus the legal world?

Thanks
OzoneRanger is offline  
Old 02-01-2013, 04:03 PM
  #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
N9373M's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 2,115
Default Listen before you leap

Real life: judge the freq congestion and xmit as little or as much as required to get you on ATCs radar (pun intended).

FARs: Not familiar (or forgot) if one exists.
N9373M is offline  
Old 02-01-2013, 04:24 PM
  #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JamesNoBrakes's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 3,978
Default

It's not a good practice to give the "courtesy call". If you have a question, call up and say you have a question. If it's busy, they are hoping you are going to be as efficient as possible so they can move on to the next aircraft. I wouldn't say that it's "against the FARs", that's a little extreme.
JamesNoBrakes is offline  
Old 02-01-2013, 04:47 PM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Twin Wasp's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2007
Position: Sr. VP of button pushing
Posts: 2,729
Default

You don"t want to "that person" in class but it would be interesting to ask the the instructor, "Hey, what page is that on so I can highlite it."

Radio contact procedures are outlined in chapter 4 of the AIM, which is not regulatory.
The basic who you're calling, who you are, where you are, what you want and what ATIS you've got. But they even say don't overload the controller. As pointed out above, go with the flow. All that being said, I can't count how any times I've sent the complete message only to get back, "Ah, who's calling?
Twin Wasp is offline  
Old 02-01-2013, 05:02 PM
  #5  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jan 2012
Posts: 93
Default

Around Bravo airspace I will announce Cessna xxxx, and they will either say VFR traffic calling approach stand by, or go ahead. Never had any complaints from ATC.
prwest is offline  
Old 02-01-2013, 05:02 PM
  #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
USMCFLYR's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Default

We checked into Eielson AFB for a training detachment once and during the in-brief ATC informed us not to make 'courtesy calls' to them and to check in with all of the information they required of us on initial contact.

I told my students that we would try it and play by their rules, but that it was my experience that it would lead to missed calls and therefore more unnecessary radio traffic. After day two of making the initial calls without any heads up, and having to reiterate the string of information after numerous "Raider XX say again", we went back to doing things the *old* way.

You get a feeling for when such calls are required and when they aren't. I'll use my own judgement and not worry about being "that person". Real life isn't quite so neat. Of course I still fly with a few who still use "with you" too
USMCFLYR is offline  
Old 02-01-2013, 05:08 PM
  #7  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JamesNoBrakes's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 3,978
Default

Originally Posted by prwest View Post
Around Bravo airspace I will announce Cessna xxxx, and they will either say VFR traffic calling approach stand by, or go ahead. Never had any complaints from ATC.
That's a little different with class B/C. It's good to say "with request" when you can tell it's extremely busy, and they know you are looking for some kind of ATC service. In this case they are dealing with aircraft already in the air and flying. More important here is to call with plenty of lead time.
JamesNoBrakes is offline  
Old 02-01-2013, 08:32 PM
  #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Posts: 174
Default

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes View Post
That's a little different with class B/C. It's good to say "with request" when you can tell it's extremely busy, and they know you are looking for some kind of ATC service. In this case they are dealing with aircraft already in the air and flying. More important here is to call with plenty of lead time.
+1, I routinely use "cessna xxx, vfr request" when opearating VFR under, over, around, and/or in class B and want flight following with busy radios, no issues, the worst reply I got was, "cessna calling, remain clear of class B, I don't have time for vfr traffic!

Originally Posted by USMCFLYR View Post
We checked into Eielson AFB for a training detachment once and during the in-brief ATC informed us not to make 'courtesy calls' to them and to check in with all of the information they required of us on initial contact.

I told my students that we would try it and play by their rules, but that it was my experience that it would lead to missed calls and therefore more unnecessary radio traffic. After day two of making the initial calls without any heads up, and having to reiterate the string of information after numerous "Raider XX say again", we went back to doing things the *old* way.

You get a feeling for when such calls are required and when they aren't. I'll use my own judgement and not worry about being "that person". Real life isn't quite so neat. Of course I still fly with a few who still use "with you" too
another one........"at this time"
AF2Navy is offline  
Old 02-02-2013, 12:16 AM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Posts: 218
Default

Different areas may have different feelings about this. In Phoenix, we've been told they prefer us to spit it all out on the initial call, if they need us to repeat it, they will. It wastes far more radio time if you do the whole "vfr request" thing. In California and Seattle, it seems they prefer "vfr request", but I'm not sure.
phalanxo is offline  
Old 02-02-2013, 06:43 AM
  #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 342
Default

I wholeheartedly prefer--in all circumstances--the method James posted above, "Approach, N123, request," or "Approach, N123, for flight following." Giving the whole story on the first call usually means you'll have to repeat it.
EasternATC is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ghilis101
SkyWest
72
06-11-2019 03:53 PM
cantwin
Technical
6
04-28-2012 02:04 AM
Sniper
Cargo
10
03-31-2010 05:05 AM
atpcliff
Major
18
06-03-2009 10:56 AM
AUS_ATC
Hangar Talk
4
04-15-2006 07:03 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices