Who goes first?

Ozelot said:
My trainer hammers on me hard about useless verbage. i'm sure its the same at other facilities.
Click to expand...

'About' isn't useless verbage when used correctly. It really has no place while IFR, but flying VFR in a less than modern airplane and used as a rough estimate of distance in a quality transmission(see my example above), it's ok. Do you know precisely how far you are just by looking outside? It tells the controller or other planes that it is an estimate, I can almost guarantee you are a mile or two off when making visual estimates. Unless, of course, you're over a checkpoint and KNOW the distance. When I know pretty accurately how far I am from something I just say the distance, when I'm not familiar with an area and am making a distance estimate, I will say 'about.'

It does not take away from a transmission, and DOES NOT ADD LENGTH. That's rediculous. It means nothing other than I am roughly a certain distance.
 
This whole argument is ridiculous clear and concise is important but "about" is not even close to being an example of excess verbiage.
IMO it is shorter than saying " I am on the XYZ 126 radial 6 mile fix"
 
I used to say "...about 7 miles out..." because I sucked at eyeballing distances and I really only had about a 50/50 chance that I was actually more than 5 miles and less than 10 from the field.

:cool:
 
Ozelot said:
My trainer hammers on me hard about useless verbage. i'm sure its the same at other facilities.
Click to expand...
Your trainer is training you well. It is a good practice to start early. In fact, I have copies of "electronic voice reviews" written by the Quality Assurance Specialist for a facility regarding a journeyman controller that stress just that point.

FAA Order 7110.65 paragraph 2-4-5. "AUTHORIZED TRANSMISSIONS Transmit only those messages necessary for air traffic control or otherwise contributing to air safety."

It is much easier to start off doing it correctly than to change later. As this thread illustrates, once a person learns something incorrectly, they often find it difficult to recognize and acknowledge the error in addition to the difficulty of correcting it.
 
Guy said:
Your trainer is training you well. It is a good practice to start early. In fact, I have copies of "electronic voice reviews" written by the Quality Assurance Specialist for a facility regarding a journeyman controller that stress just that point.

FAA Order 7110.65 paragraph 2-4-5. "AUTHORIZED TRANSMISSIONS Transmit only those messages necessary for air traffic control or otherwise contributing to air safety."

It is much easier to start off doing it correctly than to change later. As this thread illustrates, once a person learns something incorrectly, they often find it difficult to recognize and acknowledge the error in addition to the difficulty of correcting it.
Click to expand...

How is telling a controller that you are "about" a certain distance (not exactly 100% sure) not contributing to air safety?

This thread is getting really old, but I can't help myself.
 
BrewMaster said:
How is telling a controller that you are "about" a certain distance (not exactly 100% sure) not contributing to air safety?

This thread is getting really old, but I can't help myself.
Click to expand...

I could really care less if a pilot says 'about', I was just saying that I am not "allowed" to use extra words. The only time I get long winded is when describing rides and weather, cause there is no specific phraseology for that, and I'm new and am not efficient at describing that yet.

:deadhorse:
 
BrewMaster said:
How is telling a controller that you are "about" a certain distance (not exactly 100% sure) not contributing to air safety?

This thread is getting really old, but I can't help myself.
Click to expand...
Adding "about" does add to aviation safety if the person receiving the transmission is too stupid to figure out that the aircraft or target 10.3 miles north is the aircraft or target that just reported 10 miles north.

As this thread illustrates, once a person learns something incorrectly, they often find it difficult to recognize and acknowledge the error in addition to the difficulty of correcting it.
Click to expand...
 
Guy said:
Adding "about" does add to aviation safety if the person receiving the transmission is too stupid to figure out that the aircraft or target 10.3 miles north is the aircraft or target that just reported 10 miles north.
Click to expand...


Since this thread started, I have been saying "about" in every transmission I give with a distance attached to it. So far, no one seams to be annoyed or upset with me. I think I'll just keep doing it.
 
mshunter said:
Since this thread started, I have been saying "about" in every transmission I give with a distance attached to it. So far, no one seams to be annoyed or upset with me. I think I'll just keep doing it.
Click to expand...
I think approximately is the more accurate word, so I use it.
 
mshunter said:
Since this thread started, I have been saying "about" in every transmission I give with a distance attached to it. So far, no one seams to be annoyed or upset with me. I think I'll just keep doing it.
Click to expand...
Sure. It that is your standard of excellence.
 
ATC RET 2003 said:
I much preferred to hear "dang near.":D
Click to expand...
Better yet was the pilot I heard the other day who reported "about xxx feet about xxx miles north". Wow! A double about. He just missed adding "more or less" before the word north to be the poster boy for the clueless.
 
Guy said:
Sure. It that is your standard of excellence.
Click to expand...

Guy said:
Better yet was the pilot I heard the other day who reported "about xxx feet about xxx miles north". Wow! A double about. He just missed adding "more or less" before the word north to be the poster boy for the clueless.
Click to expand...


Dude, are you serious? Get over it man. It's not going to hurt anyone if someone uses "about" in their radio transmission. Are you trolling? Because debating something as trivial as this sure makes it seem like it.

Whats the big deal anyways? And seriously, I have been using about in my transmission recently. It adds all of 1 second to my transmission. Are you that worried about one second of your life?
 
mshunter said:
Dude, are you serious? Get over it man. It's not going to hurt anyone if someone uses "about" in their radio transmission. Are you trolling? Because debating something as trivial as this sure makes it seem like it.

Whats the big deal anyways? And seriously, I have been using about in my transmission recently. It adds all of 1 second to my transmission. Are you that worried about one second of your life?
Click to expand...

Apparently not, if he is arguing one little word to three pages of a thread and then making typo's when he speaks about excellence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top