Just a reminder about numbers and letters

calcapt said:
You certainly are entitled to disagree with me - even jtrain is afforded that luxury. :laff:

For a moment, let's discuss your "who cares" philosophy. I approach this discussion with the utmost sincerity and respect. Aviation is a unique animal in that it is extremely difficult to produce a predictably safe product with so many individual personalities and the quirkiness that exists in most pilot pools. If pilots were allowed to individualize their flying techniques like picking and choosing checklist items or arbitrarily choosing their own techniques for abnormal situations, there would be an absolute meltdown of current safety standards. Standardization is what makes it work despite a few holdouts that still do it their way for reasons unknown. Defining touchdown zones, approach parameters, phraseology, emergency procedures and most other duties associated with a flight allows us all to essentially operate in this zone of commonality and predictability. I know what techniques and procedures my first officer will be using because we have trained that way. And, not having to wonder what the other guy is doing improves safety by significant margins.

So as you said, who really cares if you use zero or oh? I will admit that most controllers probably don't care. In fact, I don't ever recall hearing a controller scold anyone for using oh instead of zero. So if they don't care why should you? I think you should care because throughout an aviation career you will be called on and pressured by many to do things that are in strict violation of FARs and/or company regulations. You will have many many opportunities to put your own rationalizations and justifications into everyday routine things as well as very challenging situations that need solutions. Admittedly, some of the decisions I have made as a captain have not 100 percent complied with the all the rules. These decisions are never easy for me, nor should they be. If I allow myself to become comfortable using non standard techniques (including phraseology), it is only one small step in becoming comfortable with the next non standard thing, then the next, then the next. Standardization should be the norm for all of us as that is where we will achieve peace of mind in our careers, while providing our passengers with the absolute highest safety margins, which is essentially our job.

Am I perfect in my phraseology - Absolutely not. Do I say tree and fife instead of three and five - Nope. But, I am aware that five and fife are the same thing, as is tree and three. Zero and oh are not the same thing. Nobody would ever think to identify the NORAD fix as November Zero Romeo Alpha Delta would they?

I believe the successful outcome of a flight is no real indicator that the flight was conducted safely. I have seen horrible technique and poor decision making used on flight decks, yet they managed to get the airplane to the gate. Just because it arrived, can we seriously deduct that it is no different than the flight that arrives at the next gate over that was flown by a professional crew that conducted their flight to the highest levels of integrity and standardization? To the outsider they see no difference, but I would certainly have issues about which flight I placed my family on as would most here.

Here is the bottom line guys....You are all free obviously to pick and choose the way you will attach your signature to your flights. If you are comfortable in the way you do things - so be it. The purpose of my post was to remind everybody that it becomes a slippery slope when we start rationalizing that wrong is right - it isn't, and never will be despite the fact that we sometimes try to make it so. Learning from today, and being a better pilot tomorrow should be the worthy goal of each if us.
Click to expand...

Here, here.....:beer:
 
I may be totally off base and to be honest I don't really remember (don't have a Far/Aim in front of me) but I am pretty sure the radio phraseology is only gone into in the AIM which is non-regulatory. It reminds me of the whole CFI mentality that my way is the only good way to teach this maneuver and who ever teaches it different is wrong. You stated that you don't use tree and fife. I don't blame you because 90% of the time I don't either but if you decide to leave out certain things in this so called proper phraseology (non-regulatory) then where do you draw the line? Safety in completing a flight where the Capt decided to bust minimums, not follow checklists, chat about this hot blonde he almost pickup in the airport bar during the t.o roll then that is a totally different story. Using non-standard radio term's is by far different as long as both the ATC'er and Pilot know exactly what is going on.

I am sure that this was very painful to read grammar wise but I am exhausted and you will just have to deal with it.:)
 
BobDDuck said:
I set a goal every New Years to improve one bit of my radio phraseology. The first year I did this I dropped "for" and "to" in my altitude checkins. The second year I tried to use single digits for my flight numbers ("two-two-five" as opposed to "two-twentyfive") I think next year I am going to attempt to start adding "speed", "heading" or "Climb or Descend" to my clearance read backs.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I am wrong, but arnt flight numbers supposed to be read all together and not seperate.

Cactus385 = Cactus three eightyfive, not Cactus three eight five..?

On a differnet note, how many people say

"afternoon center, XXX2342 twelve point eight climbin two nine zero"

vs one two thousand eight hundred???
 
CalCapt,

While I agree with you in the intent of this thread, I cannot say I completely agree 100% with everything that has been posted. While we are getting all wrapped around the axle about "tree versus three," we still have pilots out there who cannot (or will not) utilize proper techniques for proper radio communications.

For example: Which is more important... the "Good morning" or "Good day" in your transmission, or a clear, direct explanation of a deviation request for serious weather ahead? Personally, as a Captain, I have had many First Officers who were well versed in all the things mentioned in this thread. However, when it really matters, their radio skills are lacking.

"Center, Jetlink 1234?"
"Jetlink 1234, Cleveland Center, go ahead."
"Uh, Jetlink 1234, we uh, need 10 left for weather please."
"Jetlink 1234, Cleveland Center, unable request due to traffic."
"Uh... *click*."

Then this comes the look of "what now?" from the pilot next to me. I could care less about the "zero/oh's, fife/five's, with you's," and so forth. When we need something, I want a clear, concise request... Something like, "Cleveland Center, Jetlink 1234 needs 10 degrees left for weather."

When Center responds, "Jetlink 1234, Cleveland Center, unable request due to traffic..." I'd prefer a proper respond rather than the "deer in headlights" look.

"Center, Jetlink 1234, understand, however we need to deviate. We'll need 30 right for 120 miles, or 10 left for 60 miles, we'd prefer to deviate left for fuel concerns. Again request 10 degrees left for Jetlink 1234." You don't need to be a jerk... You just need to be clear, explain what you need, and be professional about it. THAT is what I think is missing these days, more than the nitpicky "zero's" versus "oh's" we hear everyday.
 
FlyChicaga said:
...
Click to expand...

Yeah no kidding, I can't stand the "cleveland center, airliner 1234" then wait for "go ahead" line. Ever notice that the controller sounds annoyed as hell when they come back with that "go ahead"? Just say the request for crying out loud. (now that I say that I'm sure one of our ATC guys will come on and tell me how wrong I am)

I'd also be intested to hear exactly how we should be checking on in the flight levels.

Here's how I've been doing it for years:

Domestic:

Boston Center, Airliner twelve-thirty-four, level three-seven-zero
Boston Center, Airliner twelve-thirty-four, flight level three-one-one climbing to flight level three-seven-zero.

International:

Monterrey Center, Airliner one-two-three-four, maintaining flight level three-seven-zero
Monterrey Center, Airliner one-two-three-four, flight level three-six-eight descending to flight level three-three-zero. (same as domestic, except for flight number pronunciation)

I don't know if that's the most correct way to do it but it seems to work ok. No I don't say tree or fife, but I do niner. I've also seen debates on rather or not to include the hundreds value in your climbing/descending calls or just round to the nearest thousand. IMO you're going to say zero anyway if you round, might as well give a more accurate number.
 
FlyChicaga said:
CalCapt,

While I agree with you in the intent of this thread, I cannot say I completely agree 100% with everything that has been posted. While we are getting all wrapped around the axle about "tree versus three," we still have pilots out there who cannot (or will not) utilize proper techniques for proper radio communications.

For example: Which is more important... the "Good morning" or "Good day" in your transmission, or a clear, direct explanation of a deviation request for serious weather ahead? Personally, as a Captain, I have had many First Officers who were well versed in all the things mentioned in this thread. However, when it really matters, their radio skills are lacking.

"Center, Jetlink 1234?"
"Jetlink 1234, Cleveland Center, go ahead."
"Uh, Jetlink 1234, we uh, need 10 left for weather please."
"Jetlink 1234, Cleveland Center, unable request due to traffic."
"Uh... *click*."

Then this comes the look of "what now?" from the pilot next to me. I could care less about the "zero/oh's, fife/five's, with you's," and so forth. When we need something, I want a clear, concise request... Something like, "Cleveland Center, Jetlink 1234 needs 10 degrees left for weather."

When Center responds, "Jetlink 1234, Cleveland Center, unable request due to traffic..." I'd prefer a proper respond rather than the "deer in headlights" look.

"Center, Jetlink 1234, understand, however we need to deviate. We'll need 30 right for 120 miles, or 10 left for 60 miles, we'd prefer to deviate left for fuel concerns. Again request 10 degrees left for Jetlink 1234." You don't need to be a jerk... You just need to be clear, explain what you need, and be professional about it. THAT is what I think is missing these days, more than the nitpicky "zero's" versus "oh's" we hear everyday.
Click to expand...


FlyChicaga, I completely agree with your post from top to bottom. Let me once again try to be clear about this thread. It was not intended to critique what technique one chooses to use when talking to ATC (that's another thread). I often will say good morning or good afternoon to Center and I don't always get what I say to mirror perfect phraseology. What I did say was that zero and oh are different things like apples and grapes are - or cars and bicycles are. They share the same shape but ohs are letters and zeros are numbers. If you want to use a letter to describe a number then go ahead, but don't jump in this thread and argue that it is the same - it isn't. I mentioned it because frankly we tend to not think from time to time about what we are really saying. Back when I was young it was not uncommon for people to ask for a Coke when in fact what they wanted was a soda. They would ask for a Coke and then expect to hear what kind?
Is it likely to be a life or death thing? Probably not, but as professional pilots we should all be striving every day to be better at what we do, including yours truly.

There are hundreds, perhaps thousands of little inconsistent tidbits like this in aviation. I mentioned this particular thing because it's misuse had been noticed by me that same day several times. If pilots want to substitute an oh for a zero, or call their car stereo a glovebox, or their flight bag a rhinoceros, please do but at least realize what you are saying.

Hopefully this will clear up my intentions.
 
I think it's funny that this thread has reached Page 4 and nobody has pointed out the inconsistencies of the dress sharp / talk properly professionalism debate.

Many of the posts sound as though it's an either/or problem. "I'd rather have my pilot dress sharp than worry about what he's saying on the radio." A pilot can dress sharp, or he can speak properly, but he can't do both? Huh?

I'd like both, simultaneously, from my professional pilot. Thanks.
 
jrh said:
I think it's funny that this thread has reached Page 4 and nobody has pointed out the inconsistencies of the dress sharp / talk properly professionalism debate.

Many of the posts sound as though it's an either/or problem. "I'd rather have my pilot dress sharp than worry about what he's saying on the radio." A pilot can dress sharp, or he can speak properly, but he can't do both? Huh?

I'd like both, simultaneously, from my professional pilot. Thanks.
Click to expand...

I think it's implied that pilots are capable of both.
 
Lots of perspectives here and I always enjoy reading them.

That all said, you all should come up to JNU sometime on a low wx day and listen to us down low. SE Alaska and 5 mile vis is a good time......

Anyone who can show me a 121 ID is welcome for a ride, provided we've got the space.
 
Alchemy said:
Here's how I've been doing it for years:

Domestic:

Boston Center, Airliner twelve-thirty-four, level three-seven-zero
Boston Center, Airliner twelve-thirty-four, flight level three-one-one climbing to flight level three-seven-zero.

International:

Monterrey Center, Airliner one-two-three-four, maintaining flight level three-seven-zero
Monterrey Center, Airliner one-two-three-four, flight level three-six-eight descending to flight level three-three-zero. (same as domestic, except for flight number pronunciation)
Click to expand...


Don't forget freq changes. International it's "decimal" not "point."

Domestic: 123 "point" 45
Intl: 123 "decimal" 450
 
It is not so much that Oscar does not equal Zero; but, really about maintaining the exacting standard of the Aviation language and using it properly. I cannot recall a single time when ATC gave me instructions using “o” instead of zero.

Precise language is not exclusive to Aviation, but is used in many professional arenas where precise communication (enabling complete understanding) is necessary for safety and success.

Exercising the highest standards of professionalism, or regard for the privilege of piloting, demands conduct above sloppiness and mediocrity. We all can improve our abilities beyond where they currently stand. I am admittedly mediocre at several things and am working hard at improving my skill. Using proper language is relatively easy compared to many of the other challenges flying can present. The standard is where the individuals in a community set it. Collectively, we decide if it will be high or someplace less than that.



<O:pOh, and I always dress well when I fly. :) If I mess up, at least I’ll look good. :D<O:p
 
Cptnchia said:
Don't forget freq changes. International it's "decimal" not "point."

Domestic: 123 "point" 45
Intl: 123 "decimal" 450
Click to expand...

Absolutely, I make a point of saying decimal on int'l as well, although I occasionally slip up in Canada since they seem to say "point" just to make us feel at home half the time.
 
Alchemy said:
Absolutely, I make a point of saying decimal on int'l as well, although I occasionally slip up in Canada since they seem to say "point" just to make us feel at home half the time.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty much a horrible pilot, as I don't think I said "point" or "decimal" once at Express.

"Thirty two thirty five for Jetlink twenty nine forty, have a good one" was fairly standard for me.
 
calcapt said:
Becoming a professional pilot is accomplished one step at a time - this is simply one of those steps.
Click to expand...

Well you and your cohorts should set a good example then.
Heard all the time in IAH:
"ContinentalS xxx". You guys at CAL always give your call sign with an "S" at the end. Are you trying to imply ownership, as in Continental's airplane?
I've also had CAL guys chide us lowly regional pukes over the radio for flying too slow, climbing too slow, taxiing too fast/too slow, etc. you name it.
 
skatergeek said:
Correct me if I am wrong, but arnt flight numbers supposed to be read all together and not seperate.

Cactus385 = Cactus three eightyfive, not Cactus three eight five..?
Click to expand...

Are they???? I didn't know that, but I always hear airliners using the three eighty-five phraseology and have wondered.

Another thing I wonder about, if center calls me, "Hawker XXX, Boston Center" and I answer "Hawker XXX go ahead" and he then says "Say ride conditions" do I really need to say "Hawker XXX is smooth" or can I at that point just say "We're smooth", or "Smooth" eliminating the multiple use of my call sign when it is clear who I am? The other day I swear some airline dude said his call sign in about 10 calls with Center that were very similar to this where it was basically the two of them having a conversation about the ride and deviating for weather and what other pilots were doing to get around a cell. It just seemed like a lot of chatter.
 
FLflyer said:
Well you and your cohorts should set a good example then.
Heard all the time in IAH:
"ContinentalS xxx". You guys at CAL always give your call sign with an "S" at the end. Are you trying to imply ownership, as in Continental's airplane?
I've also had CAL guys chide us lowly regional pukes over the radio for flying too slow, climbing too slow, taxiing too fast/too slow, etc. you name it.
Click to expand...
USAIRs was very common too.
And I you not flying into CLT last month I heard "cactuses xxx"
 
Interesting little tidbit about the AIM: In the radio communication examples, they spell out "niner." However, they also spell "three" and "five," not "tree" and "fife." This is even though they have a section dedicated to pronunciation. You'd hear some interesting speech on the radio if every number was read how it's described in the AIM.
 
jtrain609 said:
I'm pretty much a horrible pilot, as I don't think I said "point" or "decimal" once at Express.

"Thirty two thirty five for Jetlink twenty nine forty, have a good one" was fairly standard for me.
Click to expand...

I would've had you dequaled had I known you were disgracing the company like that :p . Oh the humanity.
 
calcapt said:
What I did say was that zero and oh are different things like apples and grapes are - or cars and bicycles are. They share the same shape but ohs are letters and zeros are numbers. If you want to use a letter to describe a number then go ahead, but don't jump in this thread and argue that it is the same - it isn't.
Click to expand...

Ok we all get it. "O" and "0" are two different characters. So what? Just about everybody over the age of 6 already knows this. Ever since I can remember, I've heard people informally call zeros "oh", in the same way people call dollars "bucks". Linguistically speaking it's a perfectly acceptable alternative way of saying zero. A common example is software versions. People more commonly say "version three point oh", as opposed to "version three point zero". Even though they don't literally mean "3.O" (with the letter O).

Now, if the case may be that "35O" (with the letter O) is a valid possibility, then in that context, saying "three-five-oh" is not a valid substitute for "three-five-zero". But in the case of air navigation, there is never a time when the two would ever be confused.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top