I know that either the AIM or Regs say that when vacating an altitude for another altitude you are supposed to say what altitude you are leaving, but we never do that when I fly now, just say, roger, climbing to fl 320 or whatever, I never say what fl level im leaving. Do controllers expect that?
changing fl level
- Thread starter heph224
- Start date
meritflyer
Well-Known Member
Good question. I usually say my altitude I am leaving for a new one when a few things occur -
A) Climbing out and changing to departure from tower;
B) When told to descend at pilots discretion;
C) When told to cross XYZ VOR at a certain altitude; or
D) When I am asked to report a certain altitude from a previously assigned alt I usually say "I am out of (altitude) for (new altitude) and will report reaching blah blah blah..
I am interested in what the controllers have to say.
A) Climbing out and changing to departure from tower;
B) When told to descend at pilots discretion;
C) When told to cross XYZ VOR at a certain altitude; or
D) When I am asked to report a certain altitude from a previously assigned alt I usually say "I am out of (altitude) for (new altitude) and will report reaching blah blah blah..
I am interested in what the controllers have to say.
wheelsup
Well-Known Member
I try to avoid the use of "to" and "for" when talking about altitudes. There was a crash somewhere over in the pacific due to that.
When saying altitude I normally say " departure, wisconsin 3776, four-thousand climbing eight-thousand"
or
"flight level 2-2-0 decending flight level 1-8-0".
anyway, just wanted to put that out there.
meritflyer
Well-Known Member
I actually discourage the use of "for" as well. Its a peeve of mine when students say "Cleared to land for 1234X". It could and will be confusing to the controller.
Just a typo.
Good day!
Just a typo.
Good day!
B767Driver
New Member
Yes. Although the compliance rate is less than stellar. If you make the report...you'll identify yourself as an astute professional to all those on the frequency and quite possibly bring them into compliance as well.
It's those little things that alert people as to what type of pilot you are. I can typically tell how sharp a guy is by the time we finish reading the checklists...before we're even airborne.
JDE
Well-Known Member
I try to avoid the use of "to" and "for" when talking about altitudes. There was a crash somewhere over in the pacific due to that.
When saying altitude I normally say " departure, wisconsin 3776, four-thousand climbing eight-thousand"
or
"flight level 2-2-0 decending flight level 1-8-0".
anyway, just wanted to put that out there.
I do the same thing, but I don't seem to hear many other guys/gals doing it this way. Of course, I don't pay too much attention to what they're saying, so maybe more people say it than I think.
I do, however, refuse to say "tree", "fower", and "fife".
By all means, please report leaving altitudes. In a radar environment, it's not as big an issue. However, if you ever go into a non-radar sector, we cannot use that altitude until you report being out of it. Since we can't confirm it with Mode C, it's locked out from us until you either call out of it, or call reaching your newly assigned altitude. It also helps us confirm our Mode C readout in a radar environment, which is always fun.
"NWA321 leaving FL260 climbing FL280."
"N734TV leaving 10 thousand descending to 8 thousand."
I don't know that saying "to" is a bad thing. I can't see where it would be an issue. Any place it would be a concern, the FL is put in the middle so I can differentiate and make sure you didn't say '280' instead of 'to 8000.' 28thousand would be FL280. Clear as mud? Just leave it off it you want.
"NWA321 leaving FL260 climbing FL280."
"N734TV leaving 10 thousand descending to 8 thousand."
I don't know that saying "to" is a bad thing. I can't see where it would be an issue. Any place it would be a concern, the FL is put in the middle so I can differentiate and make sure you didn't say '280' instead of 'to 8000.' 28thousand would be FL280. Clear as mud? Just leave it off it you want.
seagull
Well-Known Member
I, too, leave off the "to" and "for". The accident referenced above was Flying Tiger 77 into KUL. ATC said "descend two four zero zero" and the crew took it to mean "descent TO four zero zero". Not sure what they were thinking there, but they were heading to 400' when they hit the terrain. I would just have the terms dropped.
Like using the term "level" to mean a constant altitude, as the U.S. is the only place that uses it that way, everywhere else it means "flight level".
What about saying altitudes such as "twenty four point seven", when they mean "flight level two four seven"? There's another common misuse.
Why a controller would say 'point' anything, except in a frequency, is beyond me.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Also keep in mind that was an int'l flight and there was a language barrier. I have to wonder why the hell the crew didn't question him if they thought they were being told to descend to 400 ft, though.
On the point thing, I hear pilots say this but I've never heard a controller say it. As for the "to" and the "for" issues, I'll admit, I say "for." Like was said above, most of the time the controller is gonna know what you're talking about. If he doesn't, he'll either ask then or query why you levelled off when he thought you were gonna continue. If there's a question about an altitude a controller has assigned me, I ask for clarification. No one is gonna get pissy if you call back and say "Did you say two thousand four hundred feet or four hundred feet?"
On the point thing, I hear pilots say this but I've never heard a controller say it. As for the "to" and the "for" issues, I'll admit, I say "for." Like was said above, most of the time the controller is gonna know what you're talking about. If he doesn't, he'll either ask then or query why you levelled off when he thought you were gonna continue. If there's a question about an altitude a controller has assigned me, I ask for clarification. No one is gonna get pissy if you call back and say "Did you say two thousand four hundred feet or four hundred feet?"
wheelsup
Well-Known Member
pilots do it, as a way of shortening the altitude cross check on initial calls
ie "Twin cessna 414AM, sixteen point-7 climbing one-seven thousand"
16.7 = 16,700
I try not to but do find myself doing it every once in a while if the CA I'm flying with does it. I sorta get caught up in the moment
.
Van_Hoolio
Well-Known Member
Speaking of that, where does "decimal" come from? I hear the Air Canada Jazz pilots say that a lot. Example: "......departure one one niner decimal seven, squawk 4645, Jazz 929."
Mike
meritflyer
Well-Known Member
As for saying "climbing to", the AIM acutally says in an example on initial contact you should state CLIMBING TO or DESCENDING TO (altitude).
AIM 5-3-1 (b)
AIM 5-3-1 (b)
seagull
Well-Known Member
pilots do it, as a way of shortening the altitude cross check on initial calls
ie "Twin cessna 414AM, sixteen point-7 climbing one-seven thousand"
16.7 = 16,700
I try not to but do find myself doing it every once in a while if the CA I'm flying with does it. I sorta get caught up in the moment
I don't think that saves a substantial amount of time and clarity is more important, particularly if you ever fly international.
On the "decimal" issue, yes, that is ICAO standard, and I personally think the U.S. should switch to ICAO standard. All of the terms are easy for us to understand, but our local terminology creates potential safety problems for foreign operators coming into the U.S., and for those that share the airspace with them. I know of no valid reason for us to not use ICAO standard phraseology, but a lot of reasons we should switch to it!
ICAO standard on decimal instead of point is used because point is used elsewhere in terms of point outs.
The confusion with to and for with two and four is a valid point, same reason to say "ready for departure" and save the word "takeoff" for the actual takeoff clearance.
Radio hand book for UK ATC says that the decimal should be pronounced as DAY-SEE-MAL
The confusion with to and for with two and four is a valid point, same reason to say "ready for departure" and save the word "takeoff" for the actual takeoff clearance.
Radio hand book for UK ATC says that the decimal should be pronounced as DAY-SEE-MAL
pilots do it, as a way of shortening the altitude cross check on initial calls
ie "Twin cessna 414AM, sixteen point-7 climbing one-seven thousand"
16.7 = 16,700
I try not to but do find myself doing it every once in a while if the CA I'm flying with does it. I sorta get caught up in the moment
Oh I know pilots do it, but pilots do stuff they shouldn't do ALL the time.
