Old Subject - Interesting Input

Lawreston

Lawreston

En-Route
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
4,573
Location
Georgetown, ME
Display Name
Display name:
Harley Reich
Cut/pasted from CFO - Cardinal Flyers Online:
The Center response is to be noted.

HR
************************************************************

From: "Paul Millner [OAK]" <paulmillner@compuserve.com>
Subject: AVwebFlash 13.15a

I heard this somewhere out East while in the clag and trying to find an
approach plate:

*Piper:* Center, Lance Six Two Eight One November, with you at 7,000 feet.

*Center (sounding tired):* Lance, Six Two Eight One November, roger. But
two things: first you don't need to say "feet" because that's
understood. And more importantly, you aren't "with me." I know everybody
in this radar room, and you aren't here.

[Yeah, the “with you” is a pet peeve of mine as well. What is it
supposed to tell anyone, besides the fact that the pilot likes to
consume bandwidth. By the very fact that you’re calling, the controller
has a pretty good clue that you’re there now. If he has you on the
scope, then he knows it’s a hand off. If you got lost somehow, he’ll
ask you what’s up. And either would be true if you *didn’t* say “with
you” too! Some controllers don’t care, others are annoyed by “with
you”. I’ve never heard a controller say that he *liked* it; so cut it
out! :) Do include your altitude, though on initial callup after hand
off. Otherwise, the controller has to ask for it. More wasted
bandwidth. Paul]
 
Okay, the Piper wasted 4 syllables. The controller wasted over 40. And, if he's sounding tired, he probably wasn't speaking as quickly as the Piper! But yes, the Piper could have been tighter on his callup.
 
controller woke up on the wrong side of the radar screen i guess.
 
smigaldi said:
Any extra syllables in the area please advise.
Click to expand...

:D

Man, I was doing pattern work at JOT yesterday evening, and there was some dude at another airport (C81, I think) who kept saying "any aircraft please state your position and intention." I wanted to fly up to Campbell and strangle the guy myself! :mad:
 
ReverendSlappy said:
:D

Man, I was doing pattern work at JOT yesterday evening, and there was some dude at another airport (C81, I think) who kept saying "any aircraft please state your position and intention." I wanted to fly up to Campbell and strangle the guy myself! :mad:
Click to expand...

"Cessna 123AB at 3000, 5 NM west of the field enroute to throttle you."
 
ReverendSlappy said:
:D

Man, I was doing pattern work at JOT yesterday evening, and there was some dude at another airport (C81, I think) who kept saying "any aircraft please state your position and intention." I wanted to fly up to Campbell and strangle the guy myself! :mad:
Click to expand...

You did not reply my position is seated and my intention is to inform you to read the AIM section on radio technique?
 
ReverendSlappy said:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

If only I had your rapier-like wit, I would have!
Click to expand...

Well I would have been mumbling something like that to myself. The only time I went after a guy on the radio was a boring evening and kept making the 'any traffic in the area please advise' calls. He was way up in Fond du Lac, after about the 5th one I replied I am 150 miles south of Fond du Lac on the downwind for runway 27 at Galt. That shut him up on that inane phrase.
 
I understand some of the phrasing is sometimes irritating and for some like fingers on a chalkboard. But, I'd be happy if pilots would just enter the pattern correctly, call well ahead and none of this nonsense of entering on base or short final.

As for the controller's statement, I saw this in Avweb. I took it as comical and believed he meant it as such along with a gentle reminder about how to announce yourself.
 
Entering on base at a nontowered airport is not recommended anywhere, including the AIM and the various AC's on nontowered airport operations. There's nothing illegal about it, as it does not violate the turn restrictions in 14 CFR 91.126(b), but it is still a pretty bad idea, since it has you joining from a direction from which nobody is expecting traffic, and requires you to clear for other traffic both left (from the downwind) and right (straight in). For those reasons, my personal practice is never to join the base leg or the downwind beyond the "abeam" position. If I'm arriving from a direction where a base entry would fit, I will either go further out and join the final at least 3 miles out for a straight in, or position myself for a 45-downwind entry.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Please provide documentation for your assertion that entering on base is incorrect.
Click to expand...
AIM 4-3-3

F0403002.gif
 
flyingcheesehead said:
That gives a nice *suggestion* but does not state that a base entry is "incorrect."
Click to expand...
The AIM is not regulatory in nature but it does establish a set of standards and practices. Failing to follow these is a step or link which could lead to undesirable consequences.

Hence, sticking by a standard at a non-towered field does indeed go quite the distance in improving the level of safety.
 
KennyFlys said:
The AIM is not regulatory in nature but it does establish a set of standards and practices. Failing to follow these is a step or link which could lead to undesirable consequences.

Hence, sticking by a standard at a non-towered field does indeed go quite the distance in improving the level of safety.
Click to expand...

True. I'm just picking nits. You said it's "incorrect" which is not true (provided you're coming from the direction of the pattern...)
 
flyingcheesehead said:
True. I'm just picking nits. You said it's "incorrect" which is not true (provided you're coming from the direction of the pattern...)
Click to expand...
The word I should have used is "appropriately" and I should have originally emphasized it as a matter of "standards and practices."

About the time I learn to write something to the necessary level of detail, I'll be all set to write my own obituary. :)
 
I wonder if this aversion to "with you" is a regional thing? I maybe shouldn't say anything online about it, but I just did my first dual cross country yesterday - well, Wednesday, I guess day before yesterday now - and picking up flight following and on every hand off my instructor said "with you" AND I noticed that every single other airplane I heard check in did so as well. Does this vary regionally?

I didn't handle the flight following radio on this one, but I have once before when AHN offered us flight following back to LZU without asking. I agreed and checked in when handed off to ATL approach with "Cessna XXXX level three thousand five hundred." LZU apparently will no longer begin flight following on the ground and just tells you to call ATL after departure, but AHN will and occasionally asks if you want it.
 
PostTenebrasLux said:
I wonder if this aversion to "with you" is a regional thing? I maybe shouldn't say anything online about it, but I just did my first dual cross country yesterday - well, Wednesday, I guess day before yesterday now - and picking up flight following and on every hand off my instructor said "with you" AND I noticed that every single other airplane I heard check in did so as well. Does this vary regionally?

I didn't handle the flight following radio on this one, but I have once before when AHN offered us flight following back to LZU without asking. I agreed and checked in when handed off to ATL approach with "Cessna XXXX level three thousand five hundred." LZU apparently will no longer begin flight following on the ground and just tells you to call ATL after departure, but AHN will and occasionally asks if you want it.
Click to expand...

It is just that the phrase is in common usage and it has become a type of jargon used in aviation. It is not good procedure to use it on the radio but it is not the only thing that you will hear that is bad. It is just now currently in vogue to slam it use since "any traffic in the area please advise" has been squashed via the AIM
 
Wait till ya'll hear my next radio call. :D
 
smigaldi said:
It is just that the phrase is in common usage and it has become a type of jargon used in aviation. It is not good procedure to use it on the radio but it is not the only thing that you will hear that is bad. It is just now currently in vogue to slam it use since "any traffic in the area please advise" has been squashed via the AIM
Click to expand...

I understand that. But unlike ATITPPA, which I do hear sometimes but not from everyone, I was listening to ATL tracon for nearly the entire 2.8 hour flight Wednesday (except being on LZU tower leaving and coming back, AHN for the touch and go, and two CTAFs long enough for a touch and go - figure at least two solid hours) and not once did I hear anybody check in the "right" way, instead hearing everybody saying "with you." That seemed weird if it's such a verboten phrase.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top