Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By James Chan
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1464825
Whatever really happened, use of "I will be filing a report" type of phrases over the radio waves really isn't helpful and adds even more stress to the other party.

I've heard these being spoken by both pilots and controllers.

One of the worst I heard was at North Weald where a pilot of some character was adamant on reminding the A/G unit was merely just that and must not do anything more.

The one-way "attack" was animated to say the least and I really didn't need to hear all that!
u2flyboy liked this
User avatar
By alexbrett2
#1464829
While I'm not commenting on this specific case, to be fair mentioning that you're filing a report is potentially worthwhile, as it means the controller can flag that the RT tapes should be preserved perhaps longer than normal, and both parties may wish to jot down some notes at a convenient point for any future process that may occur so they don't forget the details...
Hawkwind, Ben K liked this
User avatar
By Flintstone
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1464830
Oh dear, BA and Dublin just don't mix do they?

That said the I think the BA was wrong to air his grievance on frequency and I think the others who berated him were just as bad if not worse. After another day of hearing crew swap football results, gossip and argue on 121.5 over Europe I'm wondering where the professionalism went in this industry.
By riverrock
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1464832
So I suspect that has been highly edited.
Original here, although it has transmissions blocked due to covering multiple stations:
http://archive-server.liveatc.net/eidw/ ... -1500Z.mp3
BA was given clearance to push back.
other aircraft (Stobart) cleared to push back behind (after) them.
However other aircraft pushed back before them (breaking their clearance)
partial transmission captured by ATC net (blocked by transmission on another frequency) by ground at 7.50 to warn BA that Stobart pushed early.
BA complains about aircraft pushed back in their way at 8.18 and hadn't been told about it.

So Stobart pushed early & BA missed a radio call warning them.
Later as BA cleared to taxi, they say they'll raise a safety report (which sounds fair as other aircraft pushed back into their way without captain knowing it).

Oh - and the handbags came out...
cjm_wales, Ben K liked this
By Cessna57
#1464835
I presume they've cut out all the dead air to make it sound more exciting ?

If not, she warns him about a Ryanair behind and clears him to push back after the Ryanair, and then they stop the push because of an aerlingus behind them.

She doesn't call him to stop him.
I suppose it's busy and the approach should be that you help eachother out. I presume the ground crew won't push back into a stationary plane, just because they've been given clearance ?

I'd say that everyone else jumping on frequency to stick their oar in is more of a problem than the conversation between the Pilot and ATC.
User avatar
By Korenwolf
#1464843
Flintstone wrote: After another day of hearing crew swap football results, gossip and argue on 121.5 over Europe I'm wondering where the professionalism went in this industry.


have they never heard of 123.45? :lol:
By riverrock
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1464846
123.45 certainly used to be assigned to an airfield as well as a number of oil rigs as their Air/Ground frequency. Should only be used for "chat" when out of VHF range of anything else (like the mid atlantic). So not for chat in Europe.
User avatar
By jollyrog
#1464848
riverrock wrote:123.45 certainly used to be assigned to an airfield as well as a number of oil rigs as their Air/Ground frequency. Should only be used for "chat" when out of VHF range of anything else (like the mid atlantic). So not for chat in Europe.

It is permitted to use this frequency for air to air conversation in the UK, subject to criteria.

See the link below, in the 2012 section.
http://www.nats-uk.ead-it.com/public/index.php%3Foption=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=160&Itemid=57.html
User avatar
By Chilli Monster
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1464853
After listening to that I don't think the ATCO or the Stobart was blameless, the BA tolerated a lot of cr@p he needn't have, and the sycophantic comments from the other aircraft to the female GMC, and the obnoxious comments to the BA, were almost vomit inducing.

Just a mere ATCO's point of view.
Cessna57, Danny liked this
User avatar
By JonathanB
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1464862
jollyrog wrote:
riverrock wrote:123.45 certainly used to be assigned to an airfield as well as a number of oil rigs as their Air/Ground frequency. Should only be used for "chat" when out of VHF range of anything else (like the mid atlantic). So not for chat in Europe.

It is permitted to use this frequency for air to air conversation in the UK, subject to criteria.

See the link below, in the 2012 section.
http://www.nats-uk.ead-it.com/public/index.php%3Foption=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=160&Itemid=57.html


It still says "In remote and oceanic areas out of range of VHF ground stations"
By ratman
#1464930
Flintstone wrote:Oh dear, BA and Dublin just don't mix do they?

That said the I think the BA was wrong to air his grievance on frequency and I think the others who berated him were just as bad if not worse. After another day of hearing crew swap football results, gossip and argue on 121.5 over Europe I'm wondering where the professionalism went in this industry.



Its been going on for years; overheard on 121.5 one weekend circa 2003 whilst monitoring Guard in Lyneham ATC.

AC 1 "callsign, is that you (name)"

AC 2 "Yup, its me"

AC1 "We are approaching BRECON, can you take a photo of us as you pass us?"

:pale: