And unbelievably incompetent pilot…. I guess the controller can’t just refuse clearance on the basis that he has no confidence that the guy knows what he is doing… Imagine if he took off and crashed…
http://atcmemes.com/longest-atc-clearance-read-back-ever-made/
The link does nothing for me (Firefox). I just see a repeatedly expanding dot.
Works for me in Firefox
face palm
Peter wrote:
The link does nothing for me (Firefox). I just see a repeatedly expanding dot.
Thanks for posting that, mh.
OK… it looks like the pilot didn’t have the charts, or did not study them. That’s not good.
That is a complicated departure which must be studied carefully. Also, to me, both the radio quality and the controller’s pronounciation are not great which is another reason to study all potentially relevant charts so you know the names of every SID you are likely to get.
However the thing which strikes me immediately is the use of the word “over”. That was last used in Battle of Britain but is still fairly widely practiced by very low annual time UK PPLs. That is the hardest thing for me to understand, especially for a (presumably) IR holder.
I’ve heard similar conversations between Frankfurt Approach control (very busy airspace and frequency…) and some large aircraft coming in from all parts of Asia. That’s really scary. Regarding “over”: This is still part of the standard ICAO phraseology and certainly also contained in every national radiotelephony handbook. But I can’t remember when I last heard it over the radio, which makes every single radio call during all those years de-facto non-standard!
what_next wrote:
Regarding “over”: This is still part of the standard ICAO phraseology and certainly also contained in every national radiotelephony handbook. But I can’t remember when I last heard it over the radio, which makes every single radio call during all those years de-facto non-standard!
If I remember correctly, “over” is standard for HF but not VHF.
CAP 413 says the following on the word “over”:
Chapter 2 Page 11:
Not normally used in U/VHF Communications
Chapter 3 Page 1:
The following words may be omitted from transmissions provided that
no confusion or ambiguity may result:
1. ‘Surface’ and ‘knots’ in relation to surface wind direction and speed.
2. ‘Degrees’ in relation to surface wind direction.
3. ‘Visibility’, ‘cloud’ and ‘height’ in meteorological reports.
4. ‘over’, ‘Roger’ and ‘out’.
Just downloaded the latest radiotelephony manual of Germany (NfL 1-251-14). „Over“ has completely disappered (apart from phrases like “hold OVER xyz fix”). Was about time. The version before that one still has it.
On military and joint military/civilian fields however, the controllers finish every clearance with “readback!”. Haven’t heard that anywhere else.
