Learning to fly, or thinking of learning? Post your questions, comments and experiences here

Moderator: AndyR

#1911988
@Paul_Sengupta I think we can all agree that it is a very poor instruction.

As I believe @rikur_ and @PeteSpencer have pointed out, some pilots seem to have a tendency of reading back the Squawk and then passing message/life story even when only receiving the instruction "G-ABCD, squawk 4567". Maybe the ATCO has become sick if this so is trying to emphasis "Just readback squawk and say absolutely nothing else". It is a maybe however.

I don't think anyone can be thought of as doing something wrong for either choosing to readback or remain silent. It is just my logic (and maybe my RT tutor's) of what is being requested. The tutor's logic was keep quiet because they will ask you to readback the squawk later when they have time to deal with you.

There was a nice extract from CAP413. 2.70 2 "The ATS messages listed below are to be read back in full by the pilot/driver. If a readback is not received the pilot/driver will be instructed to do so" SSR Operating Instructions are listed as requiring read back.

So if you do not read back (because they have told you to standby which) they will instruct you to read back when they are ready. Ideally, just as you have written down the squawk and are about to read it back, the ATCO will have started talking to other traffic making the standby instruction obvious. But at a mlitary airfield the ATCO may have started communication on UHF.

Maybe it is examples like this that make people wary of using the radio.
#1912020
rikur_ wrote:
"Descend with the ILS, and contact tower on 118.625"

By your logic you'd say the instruction to contact tower trumps the requirement to provide a read back on the ILS clearance presumably?


To be strictly correct the instruction to contact tower also requires a read back, so you would do both before changing frequency…
#1912026
I think we're making a mistake if we believe that radio calls have to be absutely logically watertight.
Generally they need to be simple and clear.
Being pedantic on here is fine, but it's not OK to quibble on the air. I'd soon be recognised by the local atcos as a right PITA if I questioned their logic whenever I could :)
malcolmfrost, rikur_, JAFO liked this
User avatar
By rikur_
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912031
lobstaboy wrote:I think we're making a mistake if we believe that radio calls have to be absutely logically watertight.
Generally they need to be simple and clear.
Being pedantic on here is fine, but it's not OK to quibble on the air. I'd soon be recognised by the local atcos as a right PITA if I questioned their logic whenever I could :)

That's my bugbear about how some students are taught.
IMHO some instructors get into perfecting the terminology and phraseology too early, and students can end up paralysed as a result trying to remember the exact phrase to use, or indeed they babble out their life story parrot style without being asked because they've been trained parrot style.

Personally I prefer the approach where you build up with 'tell him who you are and what you want'; 'tell him where you are and where you're going', etc and perfect the phraseology once you are comfortable with what information has to be exchanged. I'd also advocate doing ATC visits, once you've spent a few hours watching: (a) it can be less daunting talking to someone who you've met; (b) you know what's happening at the other end of the radio and can pass information in a way that helps the ATCO (c) you have a far better understanding of why some things are the way they are (E.g. an overhead transit is not simple because of the missed approach procedure, etc)
lobstaboy, T6Harvard liked this
#1912064
@lobstaboy, I agree that calls may not be watertight logically but they do need to be clear. As there are at least two different opinions on interpretation of the instruction, the instruction is not clear and I think we all agree on this. As I said, I don't think anyone could be criticised if they chose either option it is more the pedantry of why the ATCO added the "and standby". I liked the logic of my RT Tutor and as they will be the examiner, I'll stick with their logic

In the case of your "remain outside controlled airspace and standby" there is potentially a serious incident in the making if clarification or correction is not sought (caveat; I presume you had permission to be in controlled airspace)

I do wonder if there is a controllers' forum out there where they discuss something along the lines of;
"The other day I made a call of 'G-ABCD squawk 4567 and standby' and the idiot read-back the squawk/remained silent"
#1912065
@rikur_, I fly from somewhere where blind calls are the norm and have learnt to fly (sort of) with almost no contact with ATSU. I don't think I fit the usual student profile regarding radio procedure. Most of my radio 'experience' I have learnt from literature including CAP413. I decided on having an RT lesson from someone recommended to me by my FI so that I could see how well I performed and ask a few questions when it wasn't obvious what call to make. The "Squawk 4567 and standby" came up as an example during mock flight.
#1912742
Just mentioned this on my "Starting PPL lessons at Cambridge" thread, but on my practise skills test yesterday, guess what came over the radio from Cambridge ATC...
"G-NC Squawk 6175 and standby"
I think they must have been reading this thread... turns out I am in the "Squawk 6175, G-NC" camp and our school's CFI is in the "shut up and wait for them" camp :-D
FlyingBoot liked this
By riverrock
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912831
Did you discuss your answer with the examiner after the exam?
There were a couple of things I discussed with examiner (after he had told me I had passed) which were useful.
One was that you could talk to someone without requesting a Basic service, if you didn't need one.
StratoTramp liked this
#1912900
FlyingBoot wrote: "... hold at Bighill".


Did you? Or did you keep quiet and ignore them because Bighill is outside CAS? What's good for the goose is good for the gander :) :oops:
#1912931
I didn't need to ask the examiner. The examiner had been giving me lessons previously and the same call came up during a lesson. On that occasion I read back the squawk and was then told that I shouldn't have said anything. In both cases I was outside CAS requesting entry.

During the test I 'did' hold at Bighill, well as much as you can when your aircraft is a bent paper clip on a map.
StratoTramp liked this
#1912949
CAP413 cannot cover all eventualities.

When I am reviewing the test, prior to the candidate result and debriefing, one consideration I find useful is whether or not there was any confusion or whether I was unsure what the applicant pilot’s intentions were at any time during the test.
User avatar
By codejunkie
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1956398
Apologies for dragging up an old thread, but this came up as a top search result in Google when looking for the RT for a lost position fix in prep for my FRTOL exam tomorrow. I wanted to add for anyone else that lands here looking for the same that the CAA's Safety Sense Leaflet 22: Radiotelephony now gives a specific example of this (and guidance on when it's a PAN or MAYDAY situation):
Lost procedures

...

You should seek assistance from a surveillance equipped ATSU as soon as possible. If you do
not have an assigned squawk code, 0030 should be selected with ALT mode. A request such as “G-ABCD, unsure of position, request position fix” would be appropriate. If requiring navigational assistance to a particular destination, asking for a heading is also appropriate.

...

If the safety of the flight is in question, for example if you are struggling to maintain VMC, or are IMC without being qualified, this is an emergency and an Urgency or Distress call should be made using the standard format.

Would be nice if they actually put this in CAP413 given they reference it in a few places, but at least we have something approaching a definitive answer.
T6Harvard, StratoTramp liked this