"Any Traffic, Please Advise"

[MidlifeFlyer]

I think that "any traffic please advise" is redundant (and kind of grates a nerve with me as well). The whole purpose of self-announcing is so that others around you will know where you are, what your position and intentions are, and for them to respond as needed to keep you advised of what they are doing. The phrase ATPA is, to my way of thinking, already assumed in every self-announce transmission, so why say it again? :dunno:

Basically, the created justifications for "any traffic please advise" is the same as for the other nonsense phrase, "with you." In both cases the justifiers of these harmless phrases pretend they have some communicative value where the bottom line is that they just can't or won't make the effort to stop themselves from saying it.

But really, nothing to get worked up about.

 

[derg]

How about the "with you, onboard at" types. Drives me nuts.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

So then what do you do with planes without radios?

Personally, I'd like to outlaw them. But I'm not too popular with the general aviation crowd around here.

What are you flying that needs to be doing 220 knots in the pattern?

He's probably using true instead of indicated, and 220 true would be about right for most jets with slats out or the first notch of flaps, which is typical configuration for downwind.

 

[Roger, Roger]

How about the "with you, onboard at" types. Drives me nuts.

Of course you're with me, you're on my frakking frequency!

 

[Boris Badenov]

He's probably using true instead of indicated, and 220 true would be about right for most jets with slats out or the first notch of flaps, which is typical configuration for downwind.

Not if I'm flying one into an uncontrolled field where I'm worried about whether I can "see and avoid". I can do 150 indicated all day long, and I don't even HAVE slats. No one absolutely MUST go blasting around at 220 knots...in fact, try that under the Class B shelf and see what happens...

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Not if I'm flying one into an uncontrolled field where I'm worried about whether I can "see and avoid". I can do 150 indicated all day long, and I don't even HAVE slats. No one absolutely MUST go blasting around at 220 knots...in fact, try that under the Class B shelf and see what happens...

I'm not dirtying up and shaking the airplane and the passengers all over the sky while burning tons of fuel for the entire pattern. A DC9 airframe doesn't exactly fly very smoothly with the flaps out. Rattles like a mother------.

 

[dasleben]

220 seems excessively fast in the pattern regardless of the airplane. I'm usually 170-180 and flaps 5/15/20 on a normal visual downwind at a small airport. Obviously, bigger airports would be quite a bit faster.

 

[Boris Badenov]

I'm not dirtying up and shaking the airplane and the passengers all over the sky while burning tons of fuel for the entire pattern. A DC9 airframe doesn't exactly fly very smoothly with the flaps out. Rattles like a mother------.

Running in to Farmer Joe's Cessna is pretty loud, too, and you're liable to burn ALL your fuel.

 

[Bumblebee]

I would prefer that people did what was expected, but they don't, so I sometimes ask for others to advise. It's not as if I don't listen to the frequency, or do it unthinkingly but I have found that people do respond to it...so I will continue to do it on that limited basis.

The phrase ATPA is, to my way of thinking, already assumed in every self-announce transmission, so why say it again? :dunno:

Basically, the created justifications for "any traffic please advise" is the same as for the other nonsense phrase, "with you." In both cases the justifiers of these harmless phrases pretend they have some communicative value where the bottom line is that they just can't or won't make the effort to stop themselves from saying it.

But really, nothing to get worked up about.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Running in to Farmer Joe's Cessna is pretty loud, too, and you're liable to burn ALL your fuel.

I think I can look around just fine at slats and 190 indicated.

 

[derg]

I miss slats and flaps 23.

With the 757/757 flaps are simply "lift" and not to be used for drag

 

[Boris Badenov]

I think I can look around just fine at slats and 190 indicated.

I think you probably can, too. But if you go back to the post to which I was responding, the claim seemed to be that one can't do 220 and look out the window. I was just pointing out that it's not written down anywhere that you have to haul ass everywhere you go, particularly if you feel that it's a detriment to safety.

 

[KingAir]

Sedona traffic, Lancair 56DS taking the active runway 3. Any traffic please advise. Sedona.

So that's wrong? :crazy:

YES, reverencing the Airmans Information Manual, it is wrong.

 

[A150K]

Sedona traffic, Lancair 56DS taking the active runway 3. Any traffic please advise. Sedona.

So that's wrong? :crazy:

The "Active" part bothers me. Sedona can be like dodging missles sometimes...Oh and where are you taking the runway? I mean I kinda need to land and what not...

 

[Roger, Roger]

Rollin' two zero Gustavus for Juneau.

Sisters two point five fer Hoonah.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

I think you probably can, too. But if you go back to the post to which I was responding, the claim seemed to be that one can't do 220 and look out the window. I was just pointing out that it's not written down anywhere that you have to haul ass everywhere you go, particularly if you feel that it's a detriment to safety.

Gotcha. I thought your were implying that those speeds aren't safe in the pattern.

 

[dasleben]

I miss slats and flaps 23.

With the 757/757 flaps are simply "lift" and not to be used for drag

You mean you're not one of those guys who trucks around at 230 knots with flaps 1?

 

[Lee D]

I'd like to play devil's advocate here for a minute. I try not to ask traffic to advise because I've read threads like this one. That said, we frequently fly into nontowered airports with very little if any turbine aircraft traffic.

I'm entering your traffic pattern at 3 to 4 miles per minute, very likely 2 or 3 times faster than any GA traffic that might be in the pattern. I may not be entering on 45 degrees to the downwind either. Even if we're flying a "visual" approach we've likely got instrument guidance up whether it be an RNAV approach or otherwise and are following that, especially if we're unfamiliar with the airport.

Inbound i'm talking with center and listening to 122.8 on #2. You're right, there are typically 10 airports on that frequency and i'm trying to pick out of all of that chatter which traffic is actually at the airport WE'RE going to ... all while trying to get set up for the approach, continuing to talk to center etc.

We want to try and plan to integrate into your traffic pattern if there are airplanes working there. That takes a little fancy footwork since we can't realistically do so by adjusting speed. So having a good idea of where everyone is in the pattern, what speed they may be operating at, and what their intentions are can help us to formulate a plan. Remember, we're not doing touch and goes here... we want to get in, on the ground, and out of your way as fast as possible.

Try to help us help you and to understand a little bit of the environment we are operating in.

Yeah, this battle has been picked before. . .
To Zap comments. . . . . I agree, I agree and I agree. I also fly into uncontrolled fields almost every day when at work and I also realize that some hate the phrase so I avoid it when able. Yet sometimes I find it to be the most efficient way of finding out what kind of pattern situation you are about to drop into. Think Star Wars when they cut the hyperdrive engines and suddenly find themselves in the middle of a bunch of asteroids or a battle. OK, fine, maybe I’m exaggerating here just a wee bit. And yes we watch the TCAS and try to monitor the CTAF long before ATC gives us the frequency change. Still, often ATC cuts you loose just minutes from uncontrolled airports and even in a turbo prop you are probably moving close to 3 to 4 miles per minute and for its part the Brasilia handles turns a bit like a concrete laden cement truck (I sure love her though.). IF I have the time and distance I make calls and avoid that "dreaded" phrase, but sometimes I think it is the most safe and efficient way for a 135 or 121 crew to ascertain the traffic in a pattern in the least amount of time.

I do agree that it should not be used as an excuse for lazy radio skills however. If you are working the pattern doing touch and goes or flying a slower plane there should be no need for it.

 

[Bumblebee]

... and for its part the Brasilia handles turns a bit like a concrete laden cement truck (I sure love her though.)

nu uhh! I loved flying that airplane, and it felt like a sport sedan.

 

[Blip16]

My WAG is that the AIM recommendation was aimed at a common pilot problem of talking before listening. On-air conversation like:

Airplane 1: Podunk Traffic. Skyhawk 1234X 3 miles south. Entering on a 45 left downwind Runway 29 Podunk.
Airplane 2: Podunk Traffic. Cherokee 2345Y left downwind Runway 29 Podunk.
Airplane 3: Podunk Traffic. Bonanza 3456Z left base to final Runway 29 Podunk.
Aircraft 4 (immediately upon tuning in the frequency): Podunk Traffic. Gumman 4567A. Ten north. Any traffic please advise.

Gets the pilot no more information than he would have had if he just waited 10 seconds and ties up a relatively busy frequency with a useless (in the context of what is really taking place at the airport) transmission.

I actually heard something like this happen in my first few months as a private pilot. First beautiful day in the spring and everyone and his cousin was flying into Block Island (KBID). People were making position reports but a good number would come on the frequency and say nothing other than the equivalent of "let me know what I would hear if I just shut up and listened for a minute."

It seemed to me to be a bit of a silly over-reaction, though.

i think I am going to try this out next time i fly