Radio etiquette

[Scooter14]

Originally posted by Hoser:

"Go": #2 acknowledges the "Go" and a check in on the new freq is accomplished.

"Push": no acknowledge of the "Push" call, check in on the new freq

"Switch": no acknowledge, no check in.

Hoser

...and now the jackass (Scooter) who hasn't flown a cell hop since last semester will take this golden opportunity to STFU and let the guy who does it every day (Hoser) talk so others can learn.

[busdriver]

Hydro, I don't feel like looking up regs but I can say with 100% accuracy that the only two terms used at Moody are push and roll. The fisrt being what Hoser called "switch" and the second what he called "go." I remember this being an issue during UPT as well, we had a prior WSO in my class who wanted to use the terminology she was used to versus what was being taught. I won't argue that we should all just agree on something to make life easier on the youngins, but in the end it doesn't really matter, given that it's all jibber jaber between you and two anyways.

[Guest Hydro130]

Busdriver, I apologize formally to the community that I ever devoted brain cells to any defense on your behalf.

Dig into the 3-1 / 3-3 bro, not any Moody 'Chap 10' crap (or whatever it is); you're playing with the Big Kids now....

Do I promise all definitions? No... Hoser's explanation simplifies THE joint standard. Period. Dot.

Questions on that? Then go ask one of your sq IPs if you don't want to take our word for it... I think you'll find we all agree on this one....

"Now? Yes, right MEOW!!!" :D

Hydro

[ 16. February 2006, 23:17: Message edited by: Hydro 130 ]

[busdriver]

Ok, after looking through my 3-3, I've been only slightly humbled, "roll" apparently doesn't exist, in it's place should be "go" that being said, push still means shush according to my pubs..................Like I said, it's different depending on the airframe. All in all, I still dont' see that it matters one damn bit though, you might as well speak fraggle, as long as your wingman knows what you're saying.

[Guest Hydro130]

Originally posted by busdriver:

All in all, I still dont' see that it matters one damn bit though, you might as well speak fraggle, as long as your wingman knows what you're saying.

The WHOLE ENTIRE point of this tiresome thread is that your world is bigger than the unit/personal lingo between you and your damn wingman.

Huh?!? Perish THAT thought!...

Other platforms? Working together inter-operably? That sort of rubbish must be nonsense!

Ummmmmmm, where'd "2" go?.... And where's that damn Batman costume??? :D

Cheers, Hydro

[ 16. February 2006, 23:28: Message edited by: Hydro 130 ]

[Guest rotorhead]

OK, we all need to use the source document...AFTTP(I) 3-2.5 Brevity (2005 EDITION). Some terms change edition to edition (approx 2 year cycle) like WELL vs. OKAY vs. SWEET.

Everyone's own MWS AFTTP 3-1/3-3.xx has the brevity atch which is usually a poor cut and paste, frequently from an outdated AFTTP(I) 3-2.5. While you're checking the current AFTTP(I) 3-2.5 source (2005), also review POGO and KICK for comm issues. There should be no argument about what the various comm terms mean, using the source.

I can't speak about what the Moody 60 bubbas are doing, but here in the schoolhouse, we (ok, at least I) stress use of terms definable in AFTTP(I) 3-2.5...and stress avoiding terms individual communities "invent" (for example, the H-53 and H-1 folks invented BLIND ALLEY instead of using the proper LOST WINGMAN, found in AFTTP(I) 3-2.5, and used in the 60 (and all other) communities.

Also, in my original post condemning "ready to copy", ...what I meant was when the pilot makes the original call to the clnc agency, he should be ready to copy when he calls (and not need to say it). If however, the controller starts the conversation, the controller may likely say "advise ready to copy" to which the pilot REPLIES "Ghost 77 ready to copy".

To add some finality to this and the CLEARANCE ON REQUEST issue:

The Salt Lake City ARTCC SOP says:

"When possible, review each aircraft's flightplan even before the pilot requests clearance. By being prepared, you will be able to respond to a pilot clearance request quickly, without the necessity of saying, "Clearance on request, standby." The words "clearance on request" should be the exception, not the rule!"

Similarly, the Boston ARTCC SOP says:

"Usually, clearances are given on a first come first served basis. But if a particular a/c needs help with a flight plan, it is recommended to inform other aircraft that their “clearance is on request.” By saying this, you are telling the pilot that you heard his request, and you will get back to him as soon as possible."

And for even more, VIRTUAL AIR TRAFFIC NETWORK says:

"When an aircraft calls for its IFR clearance unless you are ready to issue it right away you should transmit: AAL41, Jacksonville Ground, clearance on request

When you're ready to give the clearance, you can say:

AAL41, Jacksonville Ground, clearance available, advise when ready to copy

[Guest Brewdog]

As for "clearance on request" being the exception not the rule...

Unless there's automation at the field, CD has to call center and ask for the IFR clearance, as center is the clearing authority. You will see this mostly in OEF/OIF AOR's. In these cases "clearance on request" will be the rule without exception.

With automation, IIRC on a system like FDIO, flightplans print only within 30 minutes of their proposed departure times. If you call prior to that, CD has to update your P-time in order to get the flight strip to print. On occasion, nothing will be in the system which takes a call to base operations or whatever agency you filed your flight plan with. Other than that You're right, CD shouldn't have to say "clearance on request"

I saw you mention POGO. It's funny, I used that the other day in the context "change to my frequency ###.xx, if no joy, POGO." It didn't seem to be understood. Is that a valid brevity code for AF aircraft? Does the AF use the ACP-165 at all as a brevity ref.? I know the Navy lists it for most of the brevity used at sea.

[BrownTail SandFlea]

"Roger" does not mean "yes"!

[Guest rotorhead]

Brewdog, I'd know what you meant by "change to my frequency ###.xx, if no joy, POGO." and I too use POGO as appropriate.

To be "more perfect" in use of POGO, IAW AFTTP(I)3-2.5, the phrase would be:

"change to my frequency ###.xx POGO." (no need for the "if no joy" and by the way, it is defined differently, but we know what you mean). Proper use would also be:

"change to button 12 POGO button 3."

"change to my frequency ###.xx POGO yyy.yy."

From the source:

NO JOY: Aircrew does not have visual contact with the target/bandit/landmark. Opposite of TALLY.

(freq) POGO (freq): Switch to communication channel number preceding POGO. If unable to establish communications, switch to channel number following POGO. If no channel number

follows POGO, return to this channel.

Note that the AFTTP(I) is also called:

Army: FM 3-54.10(FM 3-97.18)

Marine: MCRP 3-25B

Navy: NTTP 6-02.1

USAF: AFTTP(I) 3-2.5

[Guest Brewdog]

Thanks for the gouge. The pilot responded something about point POGO as if I had told him to switch freq's over it. I felt like an ass and wondered if it was a Navy-ism. Thanks for the clarification.

[ 17. February 2006, 03:52: Message edited by: Brewdog ]

[Toro]

Originally posted by Clearedhot:

My personal favorite…

Me: ”Spectre-69, Right base, gear down, full stop”

Tower: “Spectre-69, check gear down, cleared to land.”

I asked a tower controller about that once - it's required for them to say that, even if you've already reported gear down. If she's around still, Kick Chick could give the definite answer.

Originally posted by Swingin:

Flight leads who check their flight in on every single frequency

So you're cool with your wingman potentially being lost on your ATC frequency? Hmmmm.

Originally posted by Swingin:

Or you could check them in on ground, tower, and departure, and if after that they didn't make it to any freq to which you pushed them, you correct it on victor (or aux for our twin-tailed friends) and debrief it later.

That's great until my wingman goes back to trail, lost wingman, or takes the lead and doesn't know what our clearance is because he missed the radio frequency. I suppose you'd just let your #2 fly around in $hitty formation all day, then fix it in the debrief. Bull$hit - fix it on the spot. If #2 doesn't check in right away - or if he clips his check in - he gets checked in again.

[Guest someatcguy]

I asked a tower controller about that once - it's required for them to say that, even if you've already reported gear down. If she's around still, Kick Chick could give the definite answer.

Toro - I am sure that you would rather get the answer from her, but here you go:

2-1-24. WHEELS DOWN CHECK

USA/USAF/USN

Remind aircraft to check wheels down on each approach unless the pilot has previously reported wheels down for that approach.

NOTE-

The intent is solely to remind the pilot to lower the wheels, not to place responsibility on the controller.

a. Tower shall issue the wheels down check at an appropriate place in the pattern.

PHRASEOLOGY-

CHECK WHEELS DOWN.

If a controller says it again after the pilot has reported them down already, s/he is so used to saying it that it is nothing more than routine phraseology.

[Guest Hoser]

Here are the 3 regs that contain the complete listing of joint comm:

Joint Publication 1-02, DoD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms(https://www.dtic.mil/jcs)

Joint Publication 3-09, Doctrine for Joint Fire Support

AFTTP(I) 3-2.5, Multiservice Air-to-Air, Air-to-Surface, Surface-to-Air Brevity Codes

Hoser

[ 17. February 2006, 09:27: Message edited by: Hoser ]

[Guest Hoser]

Originally posted by BrownTail SandFlea:

"Roger" does not mean "yes"!

ROGER—Indicates aircrew understands the radio transmission; does not indicate compliance or

reaction.

Hoser

[dmeg130]

How 'bout the old Navy "perform landing checks..." call? Thanks for the tip, seaman (oh, such a sts)

[pcola]

OK, I was taking the IRC last week and while scouring the GP looking for the answer to one of the test questions I came across this info regarding initial radio contact to clearance delivery:

from GP chapter 5 Section B para. 5-9 b.

b. INITIAL RADIO CONTACT - Pilots in their initial radio communication with the facility concerned will state: AIRCRAFT IDENTIFICATION, LOCATION ON THE AIRPORT, TYPE OF OPERATION PLANNED (IFR), POINT OF FIRST INTENDED LANDING AND REQUESTED ACTION (TAXI/CLEARANCE ON REQUEST/ETC.).

I remembered reading this on this website:

Originally posted by rotorhead:

Today I administered an instrument flight evaluation, during which the examinee told clearance delivery "Ghost 77, clearance on request." I asked him later why he used that phrase/what he thought that meant...he said he was told to use it at UPT by his IPs...

If you are a UPT IP doing this...WHY?

Clearance on request is not a pilot phrase, it is a controller phrase...typically used when a single controller is busy doing other things (tower, ground, clearance, coffee, cleaning woman), and letting the pilot (who has not called yet) know that "hey, whenever you're ready, I have your clearance ready for you whenever you want to ask for it." The pilot initial callup phrase is "Ghost 77, IFR Yomama."

So, looks like either the GP is in error, or Rotorheads source is, but there is obviously a descrepancy. Any of you older, wiser types care to clear up my confusion?

[ 11. March 2006, 11:09: Message edited by: pcola stud ]

[EvilEagle]

When you start mixing MDS's or in any kind of big war/fight/red flag/training/whatever, then it's important to go to the joint standard.

I know in the C model world, we have to be checked in on one radio at all times. (plus, tower, departure and the fight freq)

[Guest KoolKat]

What up yo, pcolashizzle!

"AIRCRAFT IDENTIFICATION, LOCATION ON THE AIRPORT, TYPE OF OPERATION PLANNED (IFR), POINT OF FIRST INTENDED LANDING AND REQUESTED ACTION (TAXI/CLEARANCE ON REQUEST/ETC.)."

You correct on the fact that this is what the planning pub says to do & If fact, this is often the way it goes. For example:

"Little Rock Clearance Delivery, Horse 96, Parking Delta 5, IFR to Fort Smith, Request engine start at pilot's discretion, clearance on request." (And pay special note to the fact that there are NO Ummmss, or errrs in that.)

However, try not to take everything too literally. For example:

I'm NOT going to say that to every F'in dude (or dudette, Word up KC!) I talk to, only the INITAL one, or when the situation requires more/the information.

If CD is on 1 freq, and Ground is on another, and Tower is on another, and Departure on on another, and Center is on another....yada yada yada, they don't all need to hear that crap, it gets passed along if it's required.

I think what I'm trying to say is it's more of a common sense thing than just the engraved GP commandment.

Rotorhead's comment, I thought, were more geared to him thinking it was stupid to hear the pilot say, "Clearance on Request." He make a valid point, I'm still gonna say it if that what keeps me from saying, "uhhh...," but whateva.

Bottomline, yo: Clear and Concise, everything else is just trying to make your voice sound cool when the button is down!

Peace!

BENDY

[Guest rotorhead]

Okay, I thought my previous references (from ATC SOPs) would suffice...but add this to support my position that "clearance on request" is an ATC phrase vs. a pilot's:

From the FAA Instrument Flying Handbook, page 9-6:

"If you report ready to copy your IFR clearance before the strip has been received from the Center computer, you will be advised “clearance on request” and the controller will call you when it has been received."

AND

From the FAA Instrument Flying Handbook Glossary:

"clearance on request - After filing a flight plan, the IFR clearance has not yet been received but it is pending."

[Guest KoolKat]

THanks for the clarification RH.

The actual question is, after being told that the clearance is on request...the pilot should be able to say, "clearance on request." Yes, no? But only THE NEXT TIME, the call is made.

I concur that the inital call using that term is silly. That's where the GP phrase comes into the picture.

Again though, common sense reigns in how much of those info bits in the GP statement are required.

If CD, is all your talking too, they don't give a shit if you want to taxi or start your engines or whateva...too bad pilots have to think, huh?

BENDY

[Guest rotorhead]

You: Albuquerque Clearance, Ghost 77, IFR Kalamazoo etc.

CD: Ghost 77, Clearance on request.

You: Ghost 77 Roger.

(later)

CD: Ghost 77 advise ready to copy.

You: Ghost 77 ready.

[Vetter]

I have never heard (barring an ASR) a center controller give headings in anything less than 5 degree increments (ie heading 175, 285). Was that transmission really heard?

[Guest SpectrePilot]

Y'all can forget getting people to stop saying "At this time". It's a disease that has spread like cancer through military aviation and far beyond. I now hear "At this time" used on television, on Cingular voicemail recordings, and when I'm on hold with the cable company: "All of our operators are busy assisting other customers at this time..." FUUUUUCKK!!!! It just won't go away!!!

[Guest Ghost63]

Even better than getting the check wheels down (even though we know they HAVE to) in the pattern is when you're in the aero club 172 and get the "check wheels down and locked" call. (Note: Replying "gear down and welded" isn't as funny as you might think it is.)

Also, confirmed today with the Wing Stan officer. Navy says we will call CD with "clearance on request," with no regard to how ridiculous it is. :D

[Guest Mustang]

Is there an AFI or other reference used in SUPT for teaching standard radio phraseology to students that is available online? Danke...