Proper Response to ATC

[GlenWimpy]

Taylor , your on the $ 99.9% of the time. While training students in VFR weather , its appropriate to teach the FAR/AIM phraseology , but in the real world , doing approaches , in busy airports down to minimums with tired pilots ,when the controllers are busy , we just click the mic. Now if its headings , altitudes etc , now thats different. You have to be able to distinguish between the two...................

 

[tgrayson]

its appropriate to teach the FAR/AIM phraseology , but in the real world , doing approaches , in busy airports down to minimums with tired pilots ,when the controllers are busy , we just click the mic.

Maybe *you* click the mike, but I rarely hear that on the radio, particularly with professional pilots, no matter how busy the frequency. And if the frequency is busy, that's the last time you need to be clicking the mike, because that's the most likely time for a pilot to mishear an instruction. You should be using your callsign in every transmission; failing to do so is one of the biggest complaints of ATC.

If you truly wish to do things properly, you will find it can be done. If you don't want to, then of course you will find it difficult.

 

[Ian_J]

Taylor , your on the $ 99.9% of the time. While training students in VFR weather , its appropriate to teach the FAR/AIM phraseology , but in the real world , doing approaches , in busy airports down to minimums with tired pilots ,when the controllers are busy , we just click the mic. Now if its headings , altitudes etc , now thats different. You have to be able to distinguish between the two...................

Maybe *you* click the mike, but I rarely hear that on the radio, particularly with professional pilots, no matter how busy the frequency. And if the frequency is busy, that's the last time you need to be clicking the mike, because that's the most likely time for a pilot to mishear an instruction. You should be using your callsign in every transmission; failing to do so is one of the biggest complaints of ATC.

If you truly wish to do things properly, you will find it can be done. If you don't want to, then of course you will find it difficult.

Thanks, Taylor.

 

[N519AT]

I always read back the altimeter setting.

x2

 

[whysoserial]

If we are going to get trivial with all this context stuff...in the quoting of the AIM post it says "SHOULD". Should only means recommended, not required. Just putting that out there.

Not using your callsign when it comes to reading back an altimeter setting for example, isn't a big deal because:

1. The altimeter was correct. Who cares if someone else got it.

2. You aren't required to read it back anyway so I could care less who is responding.

Now when it's necessary...use your hoover dam callsign folks! If you don't, and we ask to verify that was N123 responding, don't get mad at us.

What it boils down to is preference. If you want to readback everything, go ahead. If you don't, then don't. It would also help for you to know what's required to be read back and what's not if you are going to fall into the "not reading back everything" category.

And for your back pocket. Not sure if all facilities got this or not but all altitudes must be readback now unless it is in conjunction with an approach clearance. Yup...when you get a clearance and you don't read it back...we are going to give you a "Verify assigned altitude." Rogers don't cut it anymore when it comes to altitude.

 

[tgrayson]

Should only means recommended, not required. Just putting that out there.

True, but the FAA can use failing to comply with AIM recommendations as evidence of a 91.13 violation (Careless or reckless operation of an aircraft), so it's not wise to be TOO dismissive of its recommendations.

More importantly, though, the AIM recommendations are put in place by those with a global view of the flight environment and if we pilots are to play our role in maintaining the smooth operation of the system, we should do as they ask. It's part of being a professional, in my opinion.

BTW, I recall one NTSB case where they dinged the controller for accepting a double-click as an acknowledgment of an instruction. I don't remember if it was causal of the accident.

 

[tgrayson]

The altimeter was correct. Who cares if someone else got it.

If the altimeter setting was for me, and I missed it, I could die, so I would really prefer that you care.

 

[jhugz]

I guess no-one else has anything better to do on a Thursday Night then to argue this...well either do I, so I would say this:

APP N4776T level 5,000

.....Alt 29.98

1015 millibars 76T

Have Fun

 

[whysoserial]

I'm never arguing. Most people always disagrees whenever I post something. I'm used to it. I've never stated anything untrue or outside the rules (which I know by the way, don't need a lecturing). I just try to explain the rules and how operate within them as they are written with a little reality to go with it. Nobody likes it I guess. You don't always need to over compensate/complicate everything. There's plenty of ways to do the same thing...I've never argued that nor said "that is wrong" when it comes to something.

Anyways, I'm done with this one.

 

[tgrayson]

Most people always disagrees whenever I post something. I'm used to it.

No one has disagreed with you. You state things from a controller perspective, we state things from a pilot perspective. That isn't disagreement, it's communication.

 

[surreal1221]

:banghead:

Cheese and rice ladies. . .some read it back, some don't. ####.

 

[adreamer]

Thanks, Tgrayson. :rawk:

I readback whatever they said and correct my altimeter immediately. The reason - Altimeter you got from ATIS, it might not be accurate anymore.

Case in point. On the way to PHL(tropical storm Hanna passed by), I got ATIS, Altimeter was 2972. By the time, we got into PHL approach, it was 2942. That might not a lot difference in altitude. It could mean you can or can't made it to the runway.

 

[germb747]

True, but the FAA can use failing to comply with AIM recommendations as evidence of a 91.13 violation (Careless or reckless operation of an aircraft), so it's not wise to be TOO dismissive of its recommendations.

More importantly, though, the AIM recommendations are put in place by those with a global view of the flight environment and if we pilots are to play our role in maintaining the smooth operation of the system, we should do as they ask. It's part of being a professional, in my opinion.

BTW, I recall one NTSB case where they dinged the controller for accepting a double-click as an acknowledgment of an instruction. I don't remember if it was causal of the accident.

:yeahthat:

To me, "should" means that you better do it unless you have a good reason not to.

 

[PilotChip]

Go ahead an "click" your little mic when it gets busy and see if controllers don't get even more agitated because you don't acknowledge.

Be careful with those mic clicks. there's nothing recorded from them and therefore atc needs an official ack and that takes time away from sequencing other pilots.

"Gulf 45V, wilco." is simple enough most of the time. and safe.

 

[CaptBill]

An current altimeter setting is advisory and is not a clearance; therefore, a common courtesy acknowledgment of the information is appropriate without a required read back as a clearance would dictate. Do this in a way that fits into the workload of the frequency being used. If it's busy, keep it short and sweet. If it's not busy, brevity is less important - but be short and sweet anyway to practice when you need to be.

By the way, WILCO is a military term meaning "Will Comply". If one chooses to use this term please understand that you are saying "I will comply with what you just told me to do". Using the acronym WILCO to acknowledge an advisory call would not be appropriate - use ROGER instead.

 

[PilotChip]

Allow me to clarify... use "wilco" when responding to an instruction.

"Wilco" is not a military term. It is a published FAA phrase.

JO 7110.65 PCG
WILCO- I have received your message, understand it, and will comply with it.

 

[Alchemy]

I respond to altimeter settings with "roger, *callsign*"

 

[minitour]

"Thirty twelve, starcheck four twenty"

or

"Ninety seven, starcheck four twenty"

or if it's uber busy and I had to wait for a slow moment to even check in ...

"Starcheck four twenty"

I never used to read it back but after controllers started reading it to me nine times, I got tired of that ... so I read it back now.

It takes all of a second and a half to say your callsign at the very least. It's not hurting anything to read it back.

-mini

 

[Chief Captain]

I ALWAYS readback the altimeter. It's one of those things that if mistaken, can cause a lot of trouble. In some parts of the world, clearances are as follows:

Runway 14, cleared for takeoff, QNH1022

Runway 24, cleared to land, QNH1011

 

[TurdBird]

I usually just acknowledge the altimeter setting with the last 3 of the tail number.

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

From an airline perspective I never read back the altimeter setting. It's an advisory, plus generally I get the altimeter along with a clearance. Reading back the clearance will indicate that I heard the entire transmission. If the altimeter setting is by itself I just say 'Roger' or 'Thanks'. However if I'm the PF I do read back the altimeter setting to the PM when I set it in my altimeter.