"Any Traffic, Please Advise" by an Airline

PCL_128 said:
Damn, that's some irresponsible bulls---. And people wonder why I'm generally anti-GA. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Irresponsible to conform to AIM recommended practices and encourage other to do the same? (And few pilots are more irresponsible at uncontrolled fields than part 121/135 guys.)
 
PCL_128 said:
Damn, that's some irresponsible bulls---. And people wonder why I'm generally anti-GA. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Velocipede said:
:yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat:
Click to expand...

Both Taylor and Mark appear to be two of the most knowledgeable, safe, and dedicated instructors on this site. These guys aren't 250-hour green instructors. If you've read any of their posts it would be impossible to come to the conclusion they are irresponsible.

Speaking of professionalism, I see Mark and Taylor making calm, rational, well thought out posts, and then I see two respected airline pilots respond with the above.

I hope you'll agree they certainly aren't intentionally trying to be irresponsible. I hope you'll also agree they both have considerable aviation knowledge and experience. So if that's the case, wouldn't it be more professional to ask questions and find the true source of the disagreement rather than simply declare it irresponsible BS?
 
tgrayson said:
Irresponsible to conform to AIM recommended practices and encourage other to do the same?
Click to expand...

If you don't want to make the "any traffic please advise" comment on the radio because it's "non-standard," then have at it. But to refuse to respond when an airliner coming into the airspace asks for advisories is grossly irresponsible, yes.

(And few pilots are more irresponsible at uncontrolled fields than part 121/135 guys.)
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Ian J said:
Both Taylor and Mark appear to be two of the most knowledgeable, safe, and dedicated instructors on this site. These guys aren't 250-hour green instructors. If you've read any of their posts it would be impossible to come to the conclusion they are irresponsible.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what their qualifications are, but based on his responses to this thread, it would appear that he's at least irresponsible on this one issue.

I hope you'll agree they certainly aren't intentionally trying to be irresponsible.
Click to expand...

Intentional or not, it's dangerous.
 
When I hear someone making a position report, I ask myself "Am I an issue for him". If the answer is no, then I don't say anything weather or not he says the 'evil words'. If the answer is yes, I'll figure something out with him. My head is already turned off by the time he gets around to saying "any traffic in the area please advise"

Why add more unnecessary chatter on top of unnecessary chatter?
 
OldTownPilot said:
When I hear someone making a position report, I ask myself "Am I an issue for him". If the answer is no, then I don't say anything weather or not he says the 'evil words'. If the answer is yes, I'll figure something out with him.

Why add more unnecessary chatter on top of unnecessary chatter?
Click to expand...

I dunno, situational awareness maybe. You may not think you're an issue for me in your current position based on what you expect I am going to do (land at the airport, or enter the pattern on a go-around) but what if I have a special balked landing procedure or I pop an engine on a go-around and have a special single-engine departure procedure that flies me into your aircraft? Basically, unless you are familiar with all the procedures for the terminal area, some of which are company specific, you can not really answer definitively "no" to that question "Am I an issue for him?".

If I knew where you were I could have made allowances for your position in my approach planning.

When the frequency is so congested that it is hard to get a word in edgewise I see your point and I would expect traffic everywhere regardless, but when there is little other conversations not responding to this simple request is both rude and reckless.
 
I won't blindly respond to an "A.T.P.A." request either.

If the other aircraft's position report indicates that I'm not going to be a factor, I'll keep my trap shut. If it appears that we are going to need to be doing some coordinating, then I'll self-announce. Funny thing is that those are the exact same things that I would do if pro-airliner-pilot hadn't added the unneccesary "A.T.P.A." call. So he just wasted airtime for nothing.

Unsafe for me not to answer? Hardly. I can use my judgement and determine whether or not it is important for the other aircraft to know my position. I don't have to answer the call, and in many instances it may be unsafe for me to speak up. What if there is an aircraft that is a factor, and my response steps all over his? Now pro-airliner-pilot knows about me, who is not a factor, but is clueless about the the bug-smasher that's turning a 1/2 mile final right in front of him.

Like I said before, I'll stick to standard phraseology and recommended practices. The AIM isn't just an off-the-cuff collection of pilot aphorisms. There are reasons for the stuff that's in there, and it strikes me as rather arrogant to assume that we know more about the topic than the guys that put it together.
 
PCL_128 said:
If you don't want to make the "any traffic please advise" comment on the radio because it's "non-standard," then have at it. But to refuse to respond when an airliner coming into the airspace asks for advisories is grossly irresponsible, yes.
Click to expand...

The airliner is using unprofessional and incorrect operating procedures by making such radio calls and so is making our operating environment unsafe. He has a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of voice communications in collision avoidance at uncontrolled fields. Every time someone responds to these radio calls, not only does it encourage the pilot to keep making them, but it also sets a poor example for those listening on the frequency, leading them to believe that these calls are appropriate. I suspect that most people learn to use the "any traffic please advise" by hearing it on the frequency. I know I did; my instructor never taught it to me. Anyone who wants to improve the situation must start by behaving properly himself.

I use my own judgment about whether or not the airliner has any need for my position. If I'm in the pattern, he will hear me very shortly as I make my AIM recommended position reports. If I'm not in the pattern and I'm at a location where there could be a potential conflict with the airliner, then I will inform him of my position, which I would do anyway without an "any traffic please advise" radio call.
 
Again -- both of you. Hypothetical situation:

You are not inside the traffic pattern but relatively near the airport to the northeast. I make my first position call and include the "ATPA" phrase. You conclude that your position is not a factor for my approach to the airport and make no call and continue on your manuevers. I enter the area and make my normal traffic pattern position calls but on short final a herd of elephants runs onto the runway and I have to go-around. This airport happens to have a company specific balked landing procedure that takes me outbound on a radial to the northeast to some intersection for a holding pattern, then back to the airport. My responsible radio call will be something like "On the balked, tracking radial 028 outbound" which may cue you in that I may be heading straight for your aircraft. You being a bright fellow would realize this and now decide maybe you need to tell me where you are. By the time you do so depending on your altitude and distance from the airport we already may be fairly close to each other and besides, there isn't much I can do to change course once established on the procedure. Also, perhaps there are other fellows less bright than you are who can not immediately put two and two together.

Had you reported your position, which you concluded wasn't a factor to me, I could have realized that in a go-around it would be a factor and then 1) expected you and 2) coordinated with you more quickly in the event of a balked landing, rather than have us both be surprised by the fact that there is an airplane coming straight at each other.
 
I think there is a big difference between calling it a "non-standard" phrase and "not recognized" . The recommendation by the AIM is in bold below:

"Pilots stating, “Traffic in the area, please advise” is not a recognized Self-Announce Position and/or Intention phrase and should not be used under any condition."

Not under any condition. If they didn't mean it so absolutely it would be worded more openly.

I like towered fields more anyways.
 
SpiraMirabilis said:
Had you reported your position, which you concluded wasn't a factor to me, I
Click to expand...

Your scenario is rather contrived. By the time you balked the landing, I'd likely no longer be in the original position anyway. Plus, since I wasn't a factor for you, you'd have likely forgotten where I was even if I had reported to you. Third, if I knew you were performing a balked landing, I'd be looking for you to avoid you.

The AIM says it's YOUR job to make position reports, not try to ping everyone in the area. I'd say you're trying to offload your responsibilities onto other pilots. You must be a LIBERAL. :)
 
It's not that contrived at all, in my opinion. Sure if you're just flying through you wouldn't be there, but if you were teaching / doing air work there is a great chance you would be in the exact same general vacinity.

I'm not trying to offload my responsibilities and frankly I take a little offense at the suggestion. What I am trying to do is get all the information I can. The entire thrust of your argument relies on your ability to determine on your own whether or not you will be a factor for another aircraft. My example shows that it is impossible for you to make this judgement on your own, definitively, for every aircraft / operator.
 
It's called using situational awareness, using your head, thinking for yourself, and not being an asshat.

We don't go do practice approaches at ATL at 3pm and you shouldn't go to uncontrolled airports and make us do all your work for you.

Simple enough?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top