Radio Call - your opinion
- Thread starter British Pilot
- Start date
OldTownPilot
Well-Known Member
I say :
Bangor Ground, Cessna 4916B, clear of 33, taxiway Kilo, for GA ramp.
There is only one runway surface in BGR so the only active is 33. That is if tower and ground are on 2 different frequencies. However if one was at a airport, say PWM that has 2 runway surfaces that can both be active at the same time and has taxiways cross both runways, what do you do now? Getting in the habbit of proper radio phraseology is a very good thing. Just because it works at one aorport does not mean that it is OK for all.
Bangor Ground, Cessna 4916B, clear of 33, taxiway Kilo, for GA ramp.
There is only one runway surface in BGR so the only active is 33. That is if tower and ground are on 2 different frequencies. However if one was at a airport, say PWM that has 2 runway surfaces that can both be active at the same time and has taxiways cross both runways, what do you do now? Getting in the habbit of proper radio phraseology is a very good thing. Just because it works at one aorport does not mean that it is OK for all.
Chris_Ford
Well-Known Member
TonyC said:
How many people do you know that put it in reverse to get off the runway? Of course the initial call by an aircraft to ground is going to have the airplane pointing away from the runway. And in the second part of your paragraph, there's got to be a taxiway to connect the parallel (hence its name) taxiway and the runway, and one should read that taxiway name as where they are located, unless you're just given free reign to keep rolling all the way to the ramp at your airport.
Chris_Ford said:
I can't count the number of airports where the parallel connects to the runway at both ends. I can exit Runway 21 at the end and be on Taxiway Alpha, or I can exit Rwy 03 at the end and be on Alpha. Or I can leave any of several non-movement areas and be on Alpha. Just stating Alpha is not as descriptive as "clearing Runway 21 on Alpha." If there's a non-movement area immediately adjacent to the Alpha at that end, I could be in the same place facing the runway and make the call, "On Alpha" and be factually correct, but less descriptive.
Hey, listen, if y'all don't like the way the AIM has it, you stand a much better chance of effecting change by taking it up with the FAA than you can by critiquing it on an internet message board.
.
Chris_Ford
Well-Known Member
TonyC said:
So you're saying that ground works 100% independently of tower and has no idea which runway is in use? Or are you just able to put it down on the numbers and make the taxiway immediately to your left or right?
As for the non-movement area being adjacent to Alpha, wouldn't you call that "the ramp" or some other locale rather than alpha, since you're not technically on alpha? Also, when you put it in context, you'd likely say "N12345, at ramp taxi with Golf" or whatever ATIS, which would infer you're departing. Unless you guys like to repeat the ATIS code to everyone you talk to? 
desertdog71
Girthy Member
WTF!!!
"Tulsa Ground, Skyhawk 881 clear of 18R at Charlie, request taxi to Mercury"
What is so hard about it.
At an uncontrolled airport with a single runway. "Down and Clear" or "clear the Active is Fine"
ORD may be different but I DOUBT IT.
"Tulsa Ground, Skyhawk 881 clear of 18R at Charlie, request taxi to Mercury"
What is so hard about it.
At an uncontrolled airport with a single runway. "Down and Clear" or "clear the Active is Fine"
ORD may be different but I DOUBT IT.
Chris_Ford said:So you're saying that ground works 100% independently of tower and has no idea which runway is in use? Or are you just able to put it down on the numbers and make the taxiway immediately to your left or right?
Let's just cut to the chase.
Which part of the AIM guidance do you not like?
.
Chris_Ford
Well-Known Member
TonyC said:
The part where people think it's solid unchangable law and regulatory in nature, not that I'm naming names or anything
bob loblaw
New Member
bike21 said:
Why repeat the runway in use if there are numerous aircraft in the pattern. If he was alone in the pattern, he can say "clear runway 29." But otherwise a pilot 20 miles out listening to the CTAF could determine the runway in use by the other aircraft making pattern leg calls while in the pattern. Common sense guys...Common sense.
BobDDuck
Island Bus Driver
If you are taking to ground chances are you are off the runway or at least exiting it. At a non controlled airport, making the "clear of the runway" call is a a curtisy to ther people coming in or taking off. Remember, there are some runways where you can't see one end from the other and somebody holding short up at the top would like to you when you are off.
frog_flyer
FredFlyer
Doug Taylor said:
doug, can you get me an inteview with airliner airways?!
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
TonyC said:
Um, wouldn't that be perpendicular? Either that or a parallel taxiway has to be connected by another taxiway (something like M6 connecting 18R with N with N being the parallel taxiway). In that case unless towered told you to go to N, you'd stop on M6 and tell ground that's where you are. Odds are the ground controller doesn't even NEED a taxiway diagram to know where you are. He deals with that area every day the way pilots deal with the overhead panel.
bob loblaw said:
You've never flown in GKY, have ya?
Common sense isn't so common around there. You could have 15 guys making radio calls for 34 and there will be some yahoo call downwind for 16.
ColMustard
New Member
Chris_Ford said:The part where people think it's solid unchangable law and regulatory in nature, not that I'm naming names or anything
I agree Chris. While the AIM is perhaps the best FAA publication, it is NOT regulatory. I've seen a lot of folks quote it like it has a regulatory jurisdiction and it drives me nuts! Unless it relates to the FARs, it is not regulatory, though probably a good suggestion.
I believe the AIM serves a vital role in helping pilots and controllers operate safely and on the same page, but there is always a grey area where a little intuition and experience on behalf of the pilot is necessary.
-ColM
Chris_Ford
Well-Known Member
ColMustard said:
Well, you're going to have to change your opinion. Agreeing with me isn't permitted on this board
Doug Taylor said:
Amen. Same as I use, with the exception of no "airliner", lol.
I'm all about clear/comcise/correct comm....everyone round here knows that. But once that's met, everything else from there is style.
The arguments over the radio transmission in question are seemingly ones of semantics. Not that that's wrong, it's interesting to see everyone's techniques and thoughts, but the intent and spirit of C3 is being met here, IMO.
