Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By alexbrett2
#1712485
At an ATC field if I've turned final and can see one ahead rolling to depart, I might delay my final call by a few seconds to save the "Continue Approach" back and forth that I'll get otherwise, but that's all.

You sometimes get good controllers in that situation who will start giving you the wind very slowly, and then the second they can actually clear you return to normal speed and give the clearance.
User avatar
By Genghis the Engineer
#1712489
Balliol wrote:Personally [and not having a dig at anyone] I don't think trying to second guess the situation / controllers decision making or add in superfluous wording is a good plan. When in the appropriate position succinctly call Final and let ATC plan/respond accordingly. If that is a continue, fair enough, that is what the process is there for. Delaying calls is even worse and will compromise situational awareness of other cct traffic.


Stating an understanding of the position is not the same as second guessing a controller's decision.

"G-CD final land, visual one ahead, one on" is a clear statement of *my* understanding of the situation ahead of me. It makes no assumptions whatsoever about any permissions I'm going to be given or when, only that I would like to eventually get a clearance to land.

And if it's A/G there are no clearances to be had, but I am making it clear to the two aircraft ahead that I know where they are so they can stop being unduly concerned about the risk of my landing on top of them (and of anybody behind, what they should be able to identify and account for themselves, aiding their situational awareness.)

G
User avatar
By Genghis the Engineer
#1712490
segillum wrote:>" G-CD, Final to land, contact one on (the runway)".<

I seem to recall being taught many moons ago that "Visual" is the word to use rather than "Contact". The latter implies that you're a receiver in contact with a tanker :-)


It is, and if you read back this discussion was already had. I admitted to tending to use "Contact" and "Visual" interchangeably, but that "Visual" is indeed the correct civil term. (Unless it's changed recently, the military RT term is Tally.)

G
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
#1712491
I've forced myself to use 'visual' now in place of 'contact', but still think the use of 'visual' and 'not visual' in standard R/T, as is now recommended by CAP whatever is crying out for an accident/misunderstanding to happen.

Peter
User avatar
By Josh
#1712496
In any circumstances, call final, and make sure you have a plan if it looks tight, setting a bottom line of how far you’re going to take the approach before throwing it away and a quick mental rehearse of how you are going to perform the go around is worth its weight in gold when you have to chuck it away at 100ft. The more you do before it gets exciting, the less exciting it gets.

My favourite response to a traffic report is “we’re IMC” :twisted:
AndyR liked this
By chevvron
#1712497
segillum wrote:>" G-CD, Final to land, contact one on (the runway)".<

I seem to recall being taught many moons ago that "Visual" is the word to use rather than "Contact". The latter implies that you're a receiver in contact with a tanker :-)

You could always say 'judy' (fighter control speak) :twisted:
By chevvron
#1712500
Talkdownman wrote:
MikeE wrote:I was taught not to call final when an aircraft was still on the runway but to wait until it had taken off or vacated

Utter madness. 'Final' is a POSITION Report. Same as is 'Downwind' (and that position REPORT is when abeam the upwind numbers). Such position reports are for EVERYBODY'S situational awareness. Omit them at your peril. If the R/T channel is free, avoid delaying reports.

So did MikeE report downwind? In which case the reply from the controller would have been 'report final' which is an instruction and his instructor was teaching him not to comply with an instruction.
'The world's gone nuts'.
User avatar
By flybymike
#1712509
surely you want to nudge him/her verbally off the runway, asap ? Not sure keeping quiet would help that.

I remember Taff Smith on short final at Breighton in the Holste Broussard.
“GET OFF THE (insert expletive) RUNWAY.......!
A le Ron liked this
User avatar
By Balliol
#1712510
Genghis the Engineer wrote:
"G-CD final land, visual one ahead, one on" is a clear statement of *my* understanding of the situation ahead of me. It makes no assumptions whatsoever about any permissions I'm going to be given or when, only that I would like to eventually get a clearance to land.

And if it's A/G there are no clearances to be had, but I am making it clear to the two aircraft ahead that I know where they are so they can stop being unduly concerned about the risk of my landing on top of them


Personally, I just think that all adds RT clutter for no value. If everyone did that the RT would be full of everyone confirming they can see everyone else in the cct. The assumption in the cct is that everyone has sighted and is conforming to the right of way aircraft priority order, I don't think we need to transmit to confirm that. I would say "G-CD Final" is all that is required.
AlanM, vintage ATCO, Talkdownman and 3 others liked this
By Dominie
#1712512
I like the way this has come up today: I just had a visiting aircraft taxi from the hard runway across the parallel, displaced grass runway just as I was about to touch down on it; the pilot had just ignored all my clear and correct calls for downwind and final on the unmanned A/G channel. All the correct calls in the world cannot overcome the state of mind that says "I didn't understand that call so I'll ignore it". However, he did understand "<call sign> overshooting", said in an annoyed tone!
By patowalker
#1712519
Genghis the Engineer wrote:It is, and if you read back this discussion was already had. I admitted to tending to use "Contact" and "Visual" interchangeably, but that "Visual" is indeed the correct civil term. (Unless it's changed recently, the military RT term is Tally.)

G


Isn't the use of "contact" a left-over abbreviation of "visual contact", which was used before "in sight" became the norm?

The phrase still appears in CAP 413, although not in RTF phraseology.

If no visual contact is gained, a missed approach is initiated at the missed approach point which is normally the VDF overhead.
User avatar
By David Wood
#1712520
Balliol wrote:
Genghis the Engineer wrote:
"G-CD final land, visual one ahead, one on" is a clear statement of *my* understanding of the situation ahead of me. It makes no assumptions whatsoever about any permissions I'm going to be given or when, only that I would like to eventually get a clearance to land.

And if it's A/G there are no clearances to be had, but I am making it clear to the two aircraft ahead that I know where they are so they can stop being unduly concerned about the risk of my landing on top of them


Personally, I just think that all adds RT clutter for no value. If everyone did that the RT would be full of everyone confirming they can see everyone else in the cct. The assumption in the cct is that everyone has sighted and is conforming to the right of way aircraft priority order, I don't think we need to transmit to confirm that. I would say "G-CD Final" is all that is required.

I'm afraid I don't agree with that @Balliol . At an uncontrolled field it's often very useful to let another aircraft know that you can see them. Obviously common sense has to be applied, but if RT head-space exists then "joining base to land; visual one on downwind' or 'downwind 24 touch and go; number 2' or whatever adds to everyone's situational awareness. And that's the issue, in my opinion, rather than slavish adherence to any text book that no-one actually slavishly adheres to.
User avatar
By AlanM
#1712524
At a controlled airfield with Air Traffic Control just do as asked....... nothing annoys me more than pilots (mostly trying to help/some being cocky) with the “have it in sight/I can nip in ahead and be number three” mentality.

Report final, call final. Simple. A land after is not a given anyway - there are provisos for that transmission in the CAP493.
rich_g85, Balliol, Danny liked this