"With you"

[dasleben]

What am I missing Doug?

Doesn't "beer can 1234 two thousand" cover it for a check in after a handoff if you're level at two thousand?

At twenty thousand wouldn't it be " beer can 1234 flight level two oh oh"

I think proper ICAO is "maintaining," but I could be wrong.

And there's no such digit as "oh."

 

[derg]

What am I missing Doug?

Doesn't "beer can 1234 two thousand" cover it for a check in after a handoff if you're level at two thousand?

At twenty thousand wouldn't it be " beer can 1234 flight level two oh oh"

because the transition level varies ad the controller (icao) doesn't know if youre on th local altimeter or 1013.

 

[derg]

On an iPhone so apologies for punctuation.

 

[web265]

Good to know......thanks.

My only international experience is visiting our Canadian friends.

 

[Tommay85]

Good to know......thanks.

My only international experience is visiting our Canadian friends.

Ever been in a "Roger" argument?

 

[rframe]

Because 2000 and level 200 are different altitudes.

Exactly my point, why would you ever use the word level unless you are actually at a "flight level"?

 

[MikeD]

Exactly my point, why would you ever use the word level unless you are actually at a "flight level"?

That's my thing.....if you're AT a flight level, then use "Flight Level XXX". Things like "maintaining" and "level" to indicate you're remaining at one singular altitude, are unnecessary, since checking in with a singular altitude such as 8000 or Flight Level 60, conveys this fact already.

 

[wildfreightess]

Ever been in a "Roger" argument?

I love doing this!

Speaking of "Roger," and as long as we're complaining about the little things, why do most guys I fly with respond to me saying, "checklist complete" with "Roger"? We're not even speaking on the radio. Does this happen to you guys too, or is this a Chautauqua thing? It drives me up the wall.

 

[Tommay85]

I love doing this!

Speaking of "Roger," and as long as we're complaining about the little things, why do most guys I fly with respond to me saying, "checklist complete" with "Roger"? We're not even speaking on the radio. Does this happen to you guys too, or is this a Chautauqua thing?

HA! I say "roger" to my friends but usually it's something more like "ROGGGEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN" or "ROWger".

 

[Cruise]

Thanks, I just sprayed my Crown Royal all over the place and into my eyes too. Note to everyone: Crown in the eyes.....burns!

Needless to say (but I'll do it anyway) I LOL'd......then, once the burning began.....I winced.

 

[Cruise]

I got corrected (reprimanded?) by a senior pilot recently for doing just this. He said it should be "wherever approach beer can 7732 two thousand level"
His reason was if you were in the flight levels you would say "flight level 190" and saying level before your altitude below the flight levels could be confusing depending on circumstances (which type of controller, aircraft type etc.).

Thoughts?

If you're at 2,000....there is almost zero chance (probably actually zero), that you'd be talking to the same person at FL200. So, 'Mr. Reprimand' may just be a tool trying to pass off technique as procedure (there's plenty of guys like that.....and that's a topic for a separate discussion). It's far too late for me to bother looking it up in the P/C glossary, but I don't think the distinction between "level" before or after the altitude exists.....but I could easily be wrong on that one too.

 

[TripSix]

I think proper ICAO is "maintaining," but I could be wrong.

And there's no such digit as "oh."

Oh, but there is an "oh." Controllers discuss "oh" with as much enthusiasm as pilots discuss "with you."

 

[Alchemy]

That's my thing.....if you're AT a flight level, then use "Flight Level XXX". Things like "maintaining" and "level" to indicate you're remaining at one singular altitude, are unnecessary, since checking in with a singular altitude such as 8000 or Flight Level 60, conveys this fact already.

Not that I don't agree with you, but:

(a) When operating in a radar environment:
On initial contact, the pilot should inform the
controller of the aircraft’s assigned altitude preceded
by the words “level,” or “climbing to,” or
“descending to,” as appropriate; and the aircraft’s
present vacating altitude, if applicable.

EXAMPLE−
1. (Name) CENTER, (aircraft identification), LEVEL
(altitude or flight level).
2. (Name) CENTER, (aircraft identification), LEAVING
(exact altitude or flight level), CLIMBING TO OR
DESCENDING TO (altitude of flight level).

I actually suggested the same thing as you a few years back and got "flamed' by a controller on here for advocating the disregard of the AIM

Personally I substitute leaving for "passing" and level for "maintaining" since that's more inline with ICAO these days, and perhaps more likely to be understood by that skillful controller in Ujung Pandang at 0300 local.

 

[greg1016]

If you're at 2,000....there is almost zero chance (probably actually zero), that you'd be talking to the same person at FL200. So, 'Mr. Reprimand' may just be a tool trying to pass off technique as procedure (there's plenty of guys like that.....and that's a topic for a separate discussion). It's far too late for me to bother looking it up in the P/C glossary, but I don't think the distinction between "level" before or after the altitude exists.....but I could easily be wrong on that one too.

At TXKF you'll be talking to the same controller from the time tower switches you until you exit the radar service area 180NM away. That being said, the controller has your route, cleared altitude, requested altitude, type, and probably any other pertinent information before you even enter the runway. Additionally we have an altitude readout on the scope (the purpose of you stating your altitude is for positive radar identification). The likelihood of confusing "for three-thousand" and "four-three-thousand" is extremely low. Excess verbiage is the enemy on a congested frequency, but if the controller has time to give you a lecture about your phraseology, than s/he probably isn't that busy.

I hear "for" instead of "climbing" a lot, from pilots and controllers alike, and I never thought anything of it until it was brought up here, and have changed my routine as a student pilot because of it.

The biggest thing really is the CYA factor. No one wants to sit on a witness stand in court after an incident and explain why they said something when the book says it should be said a different way.

 

[Cruise]

At TXKF you'll be talking to the same controller from the time tower switches you until you exit the radar service area 180NM away. That being said, the controller has your route, cleared altitude, requested altitude, type, and probably any other pertinent information before you even enter the runway. Additionally we have an altitude readout on the scope (the purpose of you stating your altitude is for positive radar identification). The likelihood of confusing "for three-thousand" and "four-three-thousand" is extremely low. Excess verbiage is the enemy on a congested frequency, but if the controller has time to give you a lecture about your phraseology, than s/he probably isn't that busy.

I hear "for" instead of "climbing" a lot, from pilots and controllers alike, and I never thought anything of it until it was brought up here, and have changed my routine as a student pilot because of it.

The biggest thing really is the CYA factor. No one wants to sit on a witness stand in court after an incident and explain why they said something when the book says it should be said a different way.

That may be true....but we're talking about altitude, not distance. So are you saying the same controller at TXKF covers from the ground up to the flight levels? Can't imagine that's the case......but, like I said previously, I could be wrong.

 

[greg1016]

That may be true....but we're talking about altitude, not distance. So are you saying the same controller at TXKF covers from the ground up to the flight levels? Can't imagine that's the case......but, like I said previously, I could be wrong.

All the way to FL600

 

[Cruise]

All the way to FL600

Interesting.....

 

[derg]

That's my thing.....if you're AT a flight level, then use "Flight Level XXX". Things like "maintaining" and "level" to indicate you're remaining at one singular altitude, are unnecessary, since checking in with a singular altitude such as 8000 or Flight Level 60, conveys this fact already.

This.

 

[Cruise]

That may be true....but we're talking about altitude, not distance. So are you saying the same controller at TXKF covers from the ground up to the flight levels? Can't imagine that's the case......but, like I said previously, I could be wrong.

All the way to FL600

Guess I should've been more specific from the beginning. My peanut-sized brain was thinking in terms of U.S. ATC. I can easily see how that would happen internationally.

 

[scooter2525]

That's my thing.....if you're AT a flight level, then use "Flight Level XXX". Things like "maintaining" and "level" to indicate you're remaining at one singular altitude, are unnecessary, since checking in with a singular altitude such as 8000 or Flight Level 60, conveys this fact already.

redundant is redundant.