Phraseology rant

JDE said:
Another thing to think about is flying in foreign countries. I haven't done it much, but the Canadians don't speak the same way we do, nor do any countries south of us. The accent sometimes is bad enough, but when they don't use "standard phraseology", it can get confusing because we're expecting one thing and get another.
Click to expand...

Very true. Between the accent, the lack of a clearance until just before takeoff, and them not saying what we expected, ie: non-standard, it's a wonder I got out of St Maarten one day.
 
JRH, Don't feel the need to quote Don Brown to me. Don is a close personal friend, and I've had many talks with him over phraseology and the current culture of life at the FAA. Second, trying to take the high horse route never works in this industry.

I think some of you guys are looking through what I wrote. Proper phraseology is crucial to maintaining a safe environment in the NAS. I'm only saying, don't get too anal about it when you're in a high traffic environment such as N90, A80 (or is it 90?), SCT, NCT, C90, etc.

Flying around in an uncontrolled pattern, yes, execute proper phraseology to the T. But when that newly minted Private Pilot enters his first Class B experience, and he is causing problems on the radio with severe congestion . . . he will learn real quick what to say, and what to leave out. No matter how hard his primary training CFI tried to set him up for 100% proper phraseology 100% of the time.
 
surreal1221 said:
But when that newly minted Private Pilot enters his first Class B experience, and he is causing problems on the radio with severe congestion . . . he will learn real quick what to say, and what to leave out.
Click to expand...

I take students into Class B airspace all the time, and I always insist on textbook, AIM phraseology. They aren't the ones causing the problem. The people that take up all the frequency time are those who
  1. don't think about what they want to say before keying the mike
  2. don't have any idea of what ATC needs to hear
These frequency hogs come from the entire spectrum of the aviation community, including professional airplane pilots. Their poor choice of what to communicate consumes far more air time than does the use of proper phraseology. It's a case of "penny wise, pound foolish." :)

ATC, in general, is much better at this than the average pilot. No, they're not 100%, although individual controllers get close. When I get one who is by-the-book on phraseology, my opinion of the controller rises immeasurably. I expect they feel the same when they encounter a pilot who can duplicate this feat.

So I don't buy the argument that "I don't have time to speak correctly", because it's being done by those who choose to do so. My view is that improper phraseology has one cause and one cause only: Most pilots pick up their ATC communication skills from other pilots, just like they learned to talk from listening to their parents. Both of these culturally derived behaviors are very resistant to change, and won't be changed unless something makes them do so. No such forces generally exist in the industry.

Perfectionists, of course, are a different story. They easily adopt new behaviors that makes them more perfect. :)
 
I don't think anyone is trying to make exceptions for "professional pilots," "private pilots," or even "ATC's."

Phraseology debates are a dead horse in my mind. 7110.65, and the AIM have both been pounded into my skull for far too long, so I tend to ignore debates over the subject for this primary reason. No one can agree on it.
 
surreal1221 said:
No one can agree on it.
Click to expand...

People debate about what controls airspeed, too, but that doesn't mean that the truth is a matter of opinion. :)

In this case, the discussion isn't about the content of proper phraseology, but whether there should be an effort to use it. You intimated that there often wasn't time for proper phraseology and that's rarely, if ever, the case.
 
Which wasn't my intent, and it appears that a number of people took it that way. Just goes to show that anyone can take anything out of context and spin it as they need to.

It's a very black and white issue, but some feel the need to muddle a little bit of grey into the debate just for the sake of doing it.

At times I think some make a big deal out of nothing just for the sake of debating a certain topic. No topic sees this more than the phraseology debate.
 
surreal1221 said:
Find a way to crack down on it, and I'm all ears, but you won't ever put an end to it.
Click to expand...

Absolutely true. But those who are trying to do the right thing deserve some encouragement and jrh hasn't been getting much.

jrh, I congratulate you on having high standards.

(pssst....jrh, it's not "passing", it's "leaving".)
 
This thread reminds me of those brave Chinese pilots who fly out of Deer Valley in Phoenix.

"Deearh Bawlley Towa, Paaa Aaaa twoo tenty twooo, nye mile nort, inbound wit infowmaytion charlay"
 
When you guys that think proper phraseology isn't important find yourself over Italian airspace and all you get from them is a heading out of their airspace because you can't communicate properly, well you get the idea.
 
Maybe they're picking up a clearance enroute, they're working the radios, trying to maintain vfr, report their position, fly the plane etc...you're all being a little to hard on people trying to fly around and be safe.
I'm sure the person that started this thread is a perfect pilot that has never made a mistake, said something that was not perfect or been a flight instructor that had to watch your student, talk to ATC and consult your chart.
Before you start ranting about how unprofessional that cfi is, you should sit in his seat and do his job.
 
whaleroast said:
Before you start ranting about how unprofessional that cfi is, you should sit in his seat and do his job.
Click to expand...

Ummm...I'm not sure how closely you read this thread, but I mentioned twice how I was impressed by this instructor. I thought he was very professional. I just thought he should do better (we all should do better) on the radios.

And I've been flight instructing for two years now...I know what it's like.
 
It must be picture taking season over Hilton Head, as there were 2 different photo ships flying around over the past 3 or 4 days. The first one was very quick and concise with his radio calls.

"Hilton Head Tower, N56789 is a Cessna 182RG, 10 miles north, would like to transition your airspace at or below 1500 for photos along the eastern shoreline, will report on station"
The comeback from tower: "Roger, transition at or below 1500 approved, report on station."

Yesterday, some goofball seemed to be doing the same thing, except he thought he was the only one in the area using the tower frequency.

"Uhh, Hilton Head, its N54321, we're uh, about, uh 8 miles north and uh, we'd like to uh, we're coming in to play around, uh, a little in your area. We're taking uh some pictures in the area and uh, we'd like to transition your uh, area."

I wanted to key the mic and say something, but I knew better.
 
On the controller non-standard side, I've only had one real; experience that qualifies. I was flying into St Augustine, FL and the Tower kept calling me by the first three characters of my tail number instead of the last three.

Sounds like no big deal, but even with only two airplanes being worked at the time, this tiny variation over what I was used to hearing had me pausing each time in order to understand that it was me he was taklking to.

I think that those who think that non-standard is shorter are wrong. But I also think that they are missing the boat. Communication is about receiving as well as speaking. When you teach communication to new pilots, the very first thing most of us explain is that that gobbledygook we hear over the radio is predicatble - the same type of information given in the same order. That's what helps us understand it so quickly.

Even a brief mental "Huh?" to process the non-standard on the receiving end probably takes far more time than anyone has ever saved by shortening the speaking end.
 
tgrayson said:
ATC, in general, is much better at this than the average pilot. No, they're not 100%, although individual controllers get close. When I get one who is by-the-book on phraseology, my opinion of the controller rises immeasurably. I expect they feel the same when they encounter a pilot who can duplicate this feat.
Click to expand...

I would say on average we are "good" but not where we should be. Controller phraseology has become a big issue within the FAA and it is one of the few things I agree with. I have listened to numerous tapes of operational errors and when you listen to how some controllers spoke on the frequency you were almost embarrassed. We all have random monitoring now for phraseology and it some cases it has improved things.

As for pilots my main pet peeve is that they read back critical things correctly. If I issue a crossing restriction I need that read back verbatim ... because separation is based on that clearance and I need to know you have it.
 
Fox Xray said:
As for pilots my main pet peeve is that they read back critical things correctly. If I issue a crossing restriction I need that read back verbatim ... because separation is based on that clearance and I need to know you have it.
Click to expand...

Many pilots defend their communication skills by saying "ATC has never complained." And that's part of the problem. ATC, in general, does not have a means to provide feedback to pilots to improve, so the pilots think they're doing ok.

Pilots, on the other hand, have the tower phone number to call when a controller starts getting sloppy.
 
tgrayson said:
Many pilots defend their communication skills by saying "ATC has never complained." And that's part of the problem. ATC, in general, does not have a means to provide feedback to pilots to improve, so the pilots think they're doing ok.

Pilots, on the other hand, have the tower phone number to call when a controller starts getting sloppy.
Click to expand...

I have a "bad" habit of saying "fox" instead of "foxtrot" when using tail numbers. When I do it, one of the controllers here really emphasizes the "TROT" part of it when saying my tail number. Really helps me watch my stuff, especially with a student on board.
 
ChinookDriver said:
I have a "bad" habit of saying "fox" instead of "foxtrot" when using tail numbers. When I do it, one of the controllers here really emphasizes the "TROT" part of it when saying my tail number. Really helps me watch my stuff, especially with a student on board.
Click to expand...

Same thing has happened to me. I'm startled that out of all sloppiness, they pick up on this particular thing. "Fox" and "Foxtrot" seem 99.9% identical to me, but I suppose that's just the law of primacy kicking in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top