Is major read-back not required when dense traffic.

[Lennart Vedin]

I don't know all typical RL situations, but at VATSM when very dense traffic, things for me tend to go out of control a few times, make me avoid busy traffic.

 

Example I am establish on localizer but still on approach frequency. I listen but here no transfer instruction, possible due to broken or bad mic/audio whatever, since I later read text-ATC was written me to contact tower. Regardless I [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umed lack of read-back shall mandatory result in a new call from ATC, but nope I just continue while radio is 100% busy. Just at 5 NM, I send "I'm on final SAS202" and ATC replied it is not a good time for this call. I do understand it is not a good time, but what is the good option then ?

 

The other question, how shall ATC act when no read-back on major instruction on very busy situations. Only once at VATSIM I have seen the action to put all AC into hold at peaks, to manage control the AC to ground as looked to me as controllable both for ATC and Pilot. The pilot shall of cause avoid call ATC when busy, but it is not a good situation when call ATC is not an option at all.

 

Even in real ATC traffic I here sometime missing and repeated call, but never AC goes out of controlling due to no communication options.

 

Bast regards

[Simon Kelsey]

Hi Lennart,

 

Without being there it's difficult to know exactly what the situation was but yes, it is very important to read back all mandatory readback items at all times. If you do not respond then ATC should indeed prompt you, but if you still don't hear then they may well move on to another aircraft if it is busy and often will send you a text message, as in this instance.

 

There are times when traffic density on VATSIM gets to the point where it if was real life the sector would have been split between controllers to reduce the controller's workload and frequency congestion. Obviously this is not always an option on VATSIM (controller availability) plus a controller will usually be handling top-down responsibilities as well which wouldn't be the case in real life. The result is that frequencies can get incredibly congested and, as you say, frankly it's not really much fun. Also, because VATSIM controllers are generally managing everything on their own if it gets too busy it is possible that they may forget things (a bit like how in reality there are normally at least two pilots flying an airliner, likewise in reality there are often at least two controllers, sometimes more, working on a single sector).

 

There's not much you can do other than make sure you are extremely attentive, always listening very carefully for your callsign and pick your moment to check in wisely (i.e. listen to the frequency and don't jump in when a pilot is about to read back an instruction!) as each missed call adds to the frequency congestion.

[Robert Shearman Jr]

Keep readbacks concise.

 

APP: "Baron 5 1 4 Delta Victor, six miles from JANNS, turn left heading 300, maintain 4000 until established on the localizer, cleared for the ILS 3 3 right approach."

 

Me: "300 and 4000 til established, cleared ILS 33R, Baron 4 Delta Victor."

 

Just one example, but, don't feel the need to repeat their instruction word-for-word. DO jump in with the readback as quick as you can. The approach clearance comes in the same form every time so with some experience you should be ready to pop your push-to-talk right on the heels of the word "approach."

[Nestor Perez]

Just one small 'tweak'. AFAIK, the controller should always be the first one to shorten the A/C callsign, as only they really know if there is any other with which it could be mistaken around.

[Richard Quigley]

Keep readbacks concise.

 

... DO jump in with the readback as quick as you can. The approach clearance comes in the same form every time so with some experience you should be ready to pop your push-to-talk right on the heels of the word "approach."

Yes please! There is so much time lost between instruction and readback. I know that the pilot is mentally rehearsing his readback but as a centre controller playing at controlling a major airport from APP down to DEL I sometimes have to call "Break" give an instruction to another aircraft and then ask ABC123 to reply with callsign only if instructions understood.

But having to do that gets the radio traffic out of sequence and can result in confusion.

The whole thing means that, as Robert hinted, both pilots and controllers must try to plan to be "ahead of the curve".

Spend some time listening on liveatc.net at JFK or LAX or SFO or any busy airfield.

[Robert Shearman Jr]

There is so much time lost between instruction and readback. {...} Spend some time listening on liveatc.net at JFK or LAX or SFO or any busy airfield.

DCA Tower is a great one for that, too. Zero time wasted!

[Simon Kelsey]

Keep readbacks concise.

 

APP: "Baron 5 1 4 Delta Victor, six miles from JANNS, turn left heading 300, maintain 4000 until established on the localizer, cleared for the ILS 3 3 right approach."

 

Me: "300 and 4000 til established, cleared ILS 33R, Baron 4 Delta Victor."

 

Just one example, but, don't feel the need to repeat their instruction word-for-word.

 

To be ever so slightly nitpicky:

 

Brevity is obviously very important in a busy environment but it is equally important to not sacrifice clarity, because therein lies the potential for embarr[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ment (at best) or a nasty incident/collision/CFIT etc (at worst).

 

R/T phraseology has been carefully designed (in many cases, like most aviation procedures, written in blood) to be economical with words but most importantly unambiguous to the greatest extent possible, especially where non-native English speakers are concerned.

 

So whilst we should definitely be brief and only read back the mandatory items in full, it is always worth taking an extra fraction of a second to read those mandatory items back properly to avoid confusion: in this example, the instruction (turn left heading 300). The direction of turn might be important (remember the Asiana cock-up at SFO?) and it's always worth confirming you have the correct instruction altogether (in this instance 300 knots would be an unlikely speed instruction, but imagine if the instruction was instead 'turn left heading 180'?). It wouldn't be the first time a pilot has confused a heading instruction with a speed instruction, or even a heading with an altitude (there are examples in real life of pilots descending to (or attempting to descend to), say, 300ft instead of turning to heading 300, unbelievable though it may seem from the comfort of an armchair).

 

"Bigjet 123, Turn left heading 160, reduce speed 180 knots"

 

"160, 180, 123." -- is almost entirely useless as a readback! (How can the controller verify that the pilot has received the instructions correctly and isn't about to fly heading 180 and reduce speed to 160 knots? What if there was a BlueSky 123 on frequency as well?).

 

So whilst I absolutely endorse the overall sentiment of Rob's comments, I would equally encourage all of us to be careful not to get sloppy with our R/T: brief and efficient is good, sloppy is not .

[Karl Mathias Moberg]

Please note however, that what is defined as mandatory readback items can vary from country to country. For instance: In the US, in an IFR clearance, unless anything has been changed in an IFR clearance, you as a pilot only need to readback the squawk code. If something has changed - you've been given a SID etc. that you did not file, you also need to read back the part that has been changed.

 

It's very common during busy times in the US to have controllers specifically tell pilots: "Read back squawk only".

 

For in the air read backs, technically, you only need to read back what has changed, but considering most of the times you get a call, something has changed, you will need to read back the entire thing, but even so, try to keep it short and concise - oh and please (while in the US): there is no need to call "established on the localizer".