[patowalker]

I use the type designator EV97on RT, to avoid being told what platform is in use.

[GonzoEGLL]

ATC have to record point of departure, destination, type etc for their flight strip, which is a legal document.

Even though you may have filed a flight plan, the ATSU to which you are speaking might not have access to it.

[chevvron]

Back in the '60s and '70s, the RAF were markedly reluctant to divulge what make of aircraft they were flying. I remember hearing aircraft with military callsigns calling up for airways crossings and when ask for type of aircraft, would reply 'military twin piston' or 'military multi turboprop'.
If you had a 'D' man (procedural controller) of the old school, you could hear the exasperation in their voices while they tried to get the pilot/radio operator to divulge the actual make of aircraft eg 'twin piston' =Varsity (very slow) and 'multi turbo prop' could be a Britannia/Argosy, the thing being ATC needed to know what sort of speed range they were operating.

[PaulSS]

Gonzo, the flight strip requirement sounds a bit like the tail wagging the dog. The pilots have to tell ATC so they can submit a flight strip because it's a legal document. A legal document to document what? If it was for ATC charges then the callsign is sufficient, plus what service was provided. If it's to show that G-ABCD was routed through the overhead at 2000' then what does it matter where he started his journey? If he lands or takes off then, as I said before, it'll go in the movements log. It sounds to me as if this was invented as a 'great idea' when Icaraus was still flailing around and nobody has thought to upgrade the system to relieve everyone (pilots and ATC) or more unnecessary chat and wasted air time. Submitting flight strips sounds a bit like the requirement we used to have to hand in our flight plans and ETOPS plotting charts after a flight. Eventually someone twigged that the cupboard full of ancient paperwork were a complete waste of time and so the requirement went away. Perhaps ATC will catch up one day, be they paper or electronic strips

[Ex-FISO]

Discussions over what landing fee to pay is nothing to do with ATC. Whether you are an R22, an SU27 or an SR22 may be relevant to ATC. But they don't decide on the landing fee.

Well at lots of places the type air traffic enter into their computer determines the size of your landing fee. So be nice to them and get it correct, particularly if you are not stopping to pay/argue the bill there and then.

[Ex-FISO]

The details are so they can give you an alerting service. The writing of them on the strip makes the legal document. No tail wagging involved.

[kanga]

... The pilots have to tell ATC so they can submit a flight strip because it's a legal document. A legal document to document what? ..

Last reported position if overdue ?

[chevvron]

Gonzo, the flight strip requirement sounds a bit like the tail wagging the dog. The pilots have to tell ATC so they can submit a flight strip because it's a legal document. A legal document to document what?

It's a legal requirement by the CAA for ATCOs and FISOs to record flight details either on a written FPS or electronically. By law, these details must be retained for a minimum of 30 days as often, incidents might occur which are not reported immediately, so the details recorded by the controller or FISO can be referred to.
ATSD Investigations will require you to submit the FPS when making a report of incidents such as Airprox, and will refer to them (and transcripts of the RTF in the case of ATCO involvement to ensure the two items match - I suppose now you'll query why it's necessary to record the RTF) when they interview the controller/FISO involved.
NB: ATC messages both on RTF and telephone have to be recorded but there is not (yet) a similar requirement for AFIS although it is recommended.
I know; I've been on the receiving end of some of these investigations.

[AlanM]

I feel a conspiracy theory coming....

[PaulSS]

Thanks, Chevvron, that is good information and, no, I don't feel the need to question why a record of RTF needs to be retained

I understand the use of the flight strips for alerting and last known position....that all makes sense. I also see (now) why they might need to be retained for investigative purposes....again, a good argument. BUT what I don't see is the requirement for place of departure and destination and, to a lesser extent, the aircraft type. Now, I will qualify this by saying that I'm not talking about a Heathrow flight strip but, rather, a smaller ATC unit that might be either a FISO or ATC used for zone transit etc.

I'm not questioning the flight strips per se, just some of the seemingly irrelevant information that someone has decided needs to be regurgitated on first contact and can often go on for ages. All of the examples given so far have no bearing on the fact that a Scroggins X5 departed a strip 5 miles west of Upper Chuff and is destined for a private strip 10 miles east of Downer Lane. ATC are almost certainly not going to know what that aircraft is, where they've come from or where they're going and what relevance has any of that when they have a close encounter with a 172 or when the engine goes pop? Yes, their current position is absolutely relevant, as is where they're going while under the control of the ATC unit but the rest of it, I suggest, is superfluous.

Put simply, I know there's a Dep and Dest field on the flight strips but for zone transits etc I think these could be left blank and, thereby, reduce the RT clutter.

Mind you, me venting about the ridiculous length of RT transmissions on a forum is not going to achieve anything at all. I think I'll grab my CAA flight ops inspector mate (or whatever they're called nowadays) and have a bit of a chest-prodding session. He might be able to suggest why I'm talking out of my backside......again

[Rob P]

The details are so they can give you an alerting service. The writing of them on the strip makes the legal document. No tail wagging involved.

Of late Lakenheath have dispensed with the bollox.

With Mode S at least the transaction goes like this

"Lakenheath Zone, G-BZXB for basic service and MATZ penetration"

"G-BZXB squawk 4502 QNH 1021"

"4502 and 1021, G-XB"

Pause...

"G-XB you are radar identified five miles east of Old Buckenham, basic service and MATZ penetration"

"G-XB, basic service and MATZ penetration"

Which apart from some fascinating overhears and occasional traffic information is all you will hear from them until the legendary

"Golfxraybravoyouhavereachedtheedgeofmyzoneswuawkseventhousandfrequencychangeapproved"

Rob P

[Ex-FISO]

Then their procedures and words are as gash as those of G-BZXB. Very poor show.

[Rob P]

I doubt they will be troubled much by your opinion. I'm certainly not.

Rob P

[matspart3]

I'm not questioning the flight strips per se, just some of the seemingly irrelevant information that someone has decided needs to be regurgitated on first contact and can often go on for ages. All of the examples given so far have no bearing on the fact that a Scroggins X5 departed a strip 5 miles west of Upper Chuff and is destined for a private strip 10 miles east of Downer Lane. ATC are almost certainly not going to know what that aircraft is, where they've come from or where they're going and what relevance has any of that when they have a close encounter with a 172 or when the engine goes pop? Yes, their current position is absolutely relevant, as is where they're going while under the control of the ATC unit but the rest of it, I suggest, is superfluous.

Point of departure and destination can be very helpful in obtaining details of those on board in a fatal scenario.

I've been involved in four such incidents professionally, including victims who were friends. Overdue action wouldn't have affected the outcomes but it did make the notification processes for next of kin significantly easier.

[malcolmfrost]

Would
flexwing
microlight
single
single retractable
multi
not do?
Gives a good indication of speed and maneuverability.....