Air Traffic Controller Discussion With a Global Perspective
By Daniel Hawton 876594
#513745
Andreas Fuchs 810809 wrote:
Dhruv Kalra 878508 wrote:"N1234, radar contact, say altitude."
And the reply will be "altitude", because you just asked the pilot say the work "altitude" :mrgreen: If you'd like a pilot to state his current altitude or level, then you better use the term "report".

Back to topic, I go with Ross there. If you want a pilot to report when airborne or when passing a certain altitude, ask him to do it when you handle his flight on the ground already. Easy!
And if a pilot does not call me, I innocently ask him "confirm you are airborne?" :twisted:


In FAA-land, when you want a pilot to say their altitude, speed, etc. the phraseology is "say ____".
By Tomas Hansson 840812
#513748
Daniel Hawton 876594 wrote:
Andreas Fuchs 810809 wrote:
Dhruv Kalra 878508 wrote:"N1234, radar contact, say altitude."
And the reply will be "altitude", because you just asked the pilot say the work "altitude" :mrgreen: If you'd like a pilot to state his current altitude or level, then you better use the term "report".

Back to topic, I go with Ross there. If you want a pilot to report when airborne or when passing a certain altitude, ask him to do it when you handle his flight on the ground already. Easy!
And if a pilot does not call me, I innocently ask him "confirm you are airborne?" :twisted:


In FAA-land, when you want a pilot to say their altitude, speed, etc. the phraseology is "say ____".


Reminds me of an old joke:

ATC: Say altitude passing
Pilot: "Altitude passing"
ATC: Say "IFR cancellation received"
Pilot: Passing 3,000 feet!
:D

On-topic: In Canada we need to do an altitude verification on departure in order to radar identify aircraft that just took off. On our departure charts it is usually indicated to "Contact Departure Control after passing xx feet unless instructed otherwise by ATC." Pilots often miss that part in the SID narrative and it would then be ATC's responsibility to contact them. It would be frowned upon in our FIR if ATC never took control of a departure just because the pilot didn't call in. Doesn't matter if it is the same person or not.
By Andreas Fuchs 810809
#513754
Daniel Hawton 876594 wrote:In FAA-land, when you want a pilot to say their altitude, speed, etc. the phraseology is "say ____".
In Europe it is not as we stick to ICAO-phraseology and here it is just French ATCOs who ignore it and keep on transmitting "say mach number", "say heading", "say speed", "say level passing" etc.. It is a major annoyance and almost every time that I am on a French ATC frequency, pilots have to ask "say again", because they did not get what ATC wanted from them. "Report" is sooooo easy and unambiguous...
By Daniel Hawton 876594
#513759
Andreas Fuchs 810809 wrote:
Daniel Hawton 876594 wrote:In FAA-land, when you want a pilot to say their altitude, speed, etc. the phraseology is "say ____".
In Europe it is not as we stick to ICAO-phraseology and here it is just French ATCOs who ignore it and keep on transmitting "say mach number", "say heading", "say speed", "say level passing" etc.. It is a major annoyance and almost every time that I am on a French ATC frequency, pilots have to ask "say again", because they did not get what ATC wanted from them. "Report" is sooooo easy and unambiguous...


FAA regs have us use say.. so it's not that we're not standard... Just different. We use "report" to have the pilot indicate something usually in the future... "Report airborne" "report leaving flight level 330" "report passing 5000" etc
By Andreas Fuchs 810809
#513763 When I wrote "say again" I knew exactly that you guys would come back to it :mrgreen:

But seriously, "say" is really annoying the hell out of me and lots of my colleagues. It is like "aircrafts", just wrong.
By Jim Hurst 1353723
#513769 Interesting discussion.

Quite early on in my VATSIM experience, I actually had this happen to me. As occasionally occurs, I was cleared IFR by CTR with the "Cleared to... Departure is with me on frequency xxx.xx" phraseology.

When he also cleared me a few moments later for takeoff, in addition to the earlier IFR clearance, I assumed he knew the guy taking off right after that was me, so I didn't check in with him when airborne. So, I'm happily flying the SID out of the airport area, when several (4 or 5) minutes later, the controller chided me for not checking in with him. Being quite new at the time, I just apologized, mentioning that I didn't call because I figured he knew it was me after giving the clearances (my Mode C was fine - no factor there), and we proceeded fine from there.

Interestingly, it was during one of my first Canadian flights, so perhaps Tomas' point is the explanation in that case, but I was definitely thinking along the same lines as Robert regarding the need to check in (again) with the same controller who cleared me in the first place.

That said, these days, I'll just do it anyway, but I really like Ross' idea for the situation by having the top-down controller add "report airborne" to the take-off clearance when he's also acting as the departure controller. To me, those two additional words would remove all doubt about what is expected and how it is to be handled.


Regards,
Jim
By Andrew Ogden 1336925
#513774
Jim Hurst 1353723 wrote:That said, these days, I'll just do it anyway, but I really like Ross' idea for the situation by having the top-down controller add "report airborne" to the take-off clearance when he's also acting as the departure controller. To me, those two additional words would remove all doubt about what is expected and how it is to be handled.

New Zealand phraseology already facilitates that. We cannot identify an aircraft (radar contact) if he does not state his altutude within 200' of the altitude displayed on the tag. If you are the tower controller, and there is a CTR or APP controller above you, then you say: "ANZxxx, airborne contact 1xx.xxx, runway x cleared for takeoff". If you are an APP or CTR controller doing a top down service, then you say "ANZxxx report airborne, runway x cleared for takeoff". The pilot will (usually) state his altitude when airborne, and we can say "ANZxxx, identified, track via the SID, climb FLxxx".
By Wygene Chong 1089621
#513785 Interesting, I didn't know that about NZ Andrew :) In Iceland we do say "After departure report passing xxxx ft" if they're departing an AFIS airport ('uncontrolled', although there is still mandatory radio contact with the information officer). But we don't specifically say 'report airborne' for controlled airports - it's just expected of the pilot.
By Martin Loxbo 811805
#513792
Andreas Fuchs 810809 wrote:But seriously, "say" is really annoying the hell out of me and lots of my colleagues. It is like "aircrafts", just wrong.


Almost as annoying as Lufthansa pilots doing all readbacks callsign first! :P