"Last Call" Advisory

kc4wsd said:
While not a pilot, and not *directly* responding to the thread topic, I'm goig to throw my two cents worth on he floor . . .
As a former public safety dispatcher, long-time radio hobbiest (is that a word), and current avionics student, I'm weighing in from the "how can I contact you if that were to become necessary?" position - that was alluded to earlier in the thread.
I understand the frustration with unnecessary radio clutter. Sometimes a simple, "10-4" is all that's needed, not a ten-second read-back. On the other hand, if you switch off dispatch, then run into problems, who will hear you if no one knows where to be listening. I digress . . . back to aviation . . . At a towered field, read-backs are not only helpful, they are expected. When the controller says, "Contact departure on 126.6," they expect the pilot to respond with, "126.6," and then go there. Unless the frequency is entered wrong, or the <--> button isn't pressed, the pilot's next radio transmission will be on 126.6 MHz.
Why does that matter? Let me offer a hypothetical:
Pilot takes off from Dirtroad Airpark, using 122.8MHz, the CTAF. Conditions are IFR or Marginal VFR. Somewhere out there, he experiences a problem that forces him (or her) to get back on the ground quickly. Rules are: Aviate . . . Navigate . . . THEN Communicate. If the pilot manages to get to the third one, chances are it will be just push the little red button and say, "Here I come, Dirtroad . . ." even if he/she switched to a different frequency.
When should the next departing pilot "assume" that the first pilot has switched frequencies, and know where to listen for someone with a problem who may try to occupy the same point in space, at the same time, ESPECIALLY if the departing pilot can't SEE the aircraft with a problem?
The Common Traffic Advisory Frequency is only effective when the pilot is able to dial it in. Otherwise, where are you?
OK, that was more than two cents worth . . .

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Aviation does not use 10 codes..."10-4" is not acceptable. "Roger" is an acknowledgement and means "I have heard your transmission." It does not mean "yes." "Affirmative" is aviation's "yes." "Wilco" is a commitment; it means "I understand your transmission and will comply."

Go to www.faa.gov and search for the Aeronautical Information Manual. Scroll down to 4-3-18 and you will find instances in which a controller is required to obtain a readback; readbacks are not expected except in narrowly defined instances. Pilots are required to read back altitudes and headings, and that is about it. "Wilco" is a perfectly acceptable response to a clearance...I have heard airline pilots say "We'll do all that" after receiving a clearance.

Bob Gardner
 
midlifeflyer said:
Not mine, but my favorite story about this phrase...

==============================

I stopped saying "with you" cold turkey (it had slipped into my pilot speak) when I heard Philly Approach talking to a GA pilot late one night.


Cessna 123: "Philly Approach, Cessna 123 with you, two thousand five hundred over Woodstown, Mike".


Philly: "Cessna 123, Uniform is NOT the current information, squawk three zero three one and my name's Mike too how do you do."


(there was a stunned silence as the Cessna tried to figure it all out)


Cessna 123: "Ah Philly, I didn't say Uniform. Um, I have the current information - what was that squawk?"


Philly: "Actually Cessna 123, you did tell me you had Uniform - I have it on tape - the word 'with' precedes the ATIS information code - you want to try again".


(More silence and then maybe a realization)


Cessna 123: "OK Philly, Cessna 123 with...shoot...over Woodstown with information Mike".


Philly: (Emphatic) "Good Evening Cessna 123! I see you over Woodstown, two thousand three hundred and Mike is current, squawk three zero three one and say intentions".
Click to expand...

I’ve heard that one before. When I returned to flying after about 25 years off I found that ‘with you’ was now a no-no. CFI that was getting me caught up told me all about it. Discovered things like POA and other ‘boards’ and heard more about it. I quit cold turkey to. Mighta just been that one incident with the ‘comedian’ at Philly that took on a life of its own and became the de facto law of the land. I heard it thousands of times as a controller and never gave it a second thought. Things are just fine without saying it but it’s certainly nothing to get stressed over.
 
bobmrg said:
Aviation does not use 10 codes..."10-4" is not acceptable. "Roger" is an acknowledgement and means "I have heard your transmission." It does not mean "yes." "Affirmative" is aviation's "yes." "Wilco" is a commitment; it means "I understand your transmission and will comply."

Go to www.faa.gov and search for the Aeronautical Information Manual. Scroll down to 4-3-18 and you will find instances in which a controller is required to obtain a readback; readbacks are not expected except in narrowly defined instances. Pilots are required to read back altitudes and headings, and that is about it. "Wilco" is a perfectly acceptable response to a clearance...I have heard airline pilots say "We'll do all that" after receiving a clearance.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

And runway assignments. The only things the controller absolutely must have a read back on is hold short instructions and runway assignment. Everything else is just common practice / recommended out of the AIM, controller preference or facility letters.
 
Sorry for the confusion . . . I was NOT implying that pilots use 10-codes. That was in the context of public safety and the acknowledgement (by me, a non-pilot) that long transmissions are often unnecessary.
My whole point was apparently lost in the long post.
The idea was that if a pilot changes frequencies . . . a later has an issue which prevents him/her from doing more than operating the PTT, those of us on the ground . . . who can't see the pilot's Comm 1 . . . will know where to listen in case we can be of assistance.
I was certainly not implying that we should outfit aircraft with CB radios . . . but thanks for bringing the confusion to my attention.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk
 
bobmrg said:
Aviation does not use 10 codes..."10-4" is not acceptable. "Roger" is an acknowledgement and means "I have heard your transmission." It does not mean "yes." "Affirmative" is aviation's "yes." "Wilco" is a commitment; it means "I understand your transmission and will comply."

Go to www.faa.gov and search for the Aeronautical Information Manual. Scroll down to 4-3-18 and you will find instances in which a controller is required to obtain a readback; readbacks are not expected except in narrowly defined instances. Pilots are required to read back altitudes and headings, and that is about it. "Wilco" is a perfectly acceptable response to a clearance...I have heard airline pilots say "We'll do all that" after receiving a clearance.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

They get pretty excited about Runway numbers to.
 
"They get pretty excited about Runway numbers too."

"...narrowly defined instances."

Bob
 
I heard someone make the "last call" statement on Friday. This was flying a across the CA central valley (Norcal) on 122.9. There was half a dozen pilots on the freq. at the time.

I thought the guy just sounded stupid and was taking up valuable air time.

Seriously, the lack of any common understanding or definition for this statement means it conveys nothing of value to anyone.You just sound stupid because you don't realize this.
 
"Last call"... really not that big of a deal. I'm gone, not a factor anymore, thanks for the memories and as my friend Jeff said earlier, "later beaches."*




* okay, so he didn't actually say it but he alluded to it and he's my friend.
 
"Ah, aircraft shooting the approach, what's yer twenty?" Hmmm, that could work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top