proper phraseology for...

jaybee

jaybee

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Jan 22, 2012
Messages
1,143
Location
sometimes Cocoa, FL
Display Name
Display name:
jaybee
...reporting established in a hold.

Read all I could find in the AIM, either missed it or it doesn't say.

I'm thinking -

  1. Callsign
  2. altitude

are all that is necessary ?
 
Also - when calling approach, requesting an approach and going to an Airport with an AWOS - would saying "have the numbers" be appropriate ?

Thanks.
 
See AIM 5-3-3 which says to report time and altitude reaching a holding fix.

With regard to the other scenario, I would probably just say, "with the destination weather."
 
I have heard a lot of folks report "N1234 entering the hold" period. And I am willing to bet a lot enter but forget to report at all!

Isnt the second answer "..the one-minute weather"?
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
I have heard a lot of folks report "N1234 entering the hold" period. And I am willing to bet a lot enter but forget to report at all!
Click to expand...
While that may be so, the AIM tells us to include time and altitude. Whether either or both should be omitted when in radar contact is unclear.
Isn't the second answer "..the one-minute weather"?
Click to expand...
I hear that a lot, but I've not seen where that's written. Controllers just ask if I have that airport's weather, and "affirmative" has always sufficed.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
I have heard a lot of folks report "N1234 entering the hold" period. And I am willing to bet a lot enter but forget to report at all!

Isnt the second answer "..the one-minute weather"?
Click to expand...

Agree. Though I usually give "Callsign is entering the hold at YYYYY, 9,000ft, at 0000Z."

It's like the vacating altitude call when given a discretionary decent; they only seem to care about 50% of the time. And they seem to care about the altitude change a LOT more than they do about hold entries. I could see how both the hold entry and altitude change calls would be mandatory if non-radar, but in a radar environment it seems...superfluous.

For the second, I usually check on with "Callsign has the [minute] weather and NOTAMs at East BFE, request the visual/ILS/RNAV/NDB approach." They're going to ask you about all of those things, anyways.
 
Teller1900 said:
I could see how both the hold entry and altitude change calls would be mandatory if non-radar, but in a radar environment it seems...superfluous.
Click to expand...
IIRC, the requirement to call with altitude stems from an incident involving two airliners in the same hold at the same altitude in the goo for about 45 minutes (never saw each other). The fact that it allegedly involved DC-7's from Northeast and National sort of dates it to pre-Mode C (and maybe even pre-transponder) days. Like you said -- in today's radar environment, that seems "superfluous," but that's what the book calls for, so that's what I teach.
 
Ron Levy said:
While that may be so, the AIM tells us to include time and altitude. Whether either or both should be omitted when in radar contact is unclear.
I hear that a lot, but I've not seen where that's written. Controllers just ask if I have that airport's weather, and "affirmative" has always sufficed.
Click to expand...

I usually answer with the specific ATIS, e.g. "xxx has Bravo". It really depends where you are. Out here in the west, depending on the time of year, we've been known to get 3 or 4 ATIS in an hour when the weather really changes fast. This way ATC knows that I have the current weather.

YMMV.
 
murphey said:
I usually answer with the specific ATIS, e.g. "xxx has Bravo". It really depends where you are. Out here in the west, depending on the time of year, we've been known to get 3 or 4 ATIS in an hour when the weather really changes fast. This way ATC knows that I have the current weather.

YMMV.
Click to expand...

Heh... he was specifically asking about AWOS, where there's no letter code.
 
What Id like to know is, why are controllers all now asking if we have the notams before issuing an approach? Get it here all the time lately. Will they be checking on our preflights before giving clearances next?
 
Ron Levy said:
While that may be so, the AIM tells us to include time and altitude. Whether either or both should be omitted when in radar contact is unclear.
Click to expand...
Practically speaking (without being anal about the AIM), I always figured that "entering the hold" is present tense, so the time is "now" and the altitude is the one I was cleared to.

Figure it's much more important to let them know something they don't already know ahead of time like shortening leg lengths (like do 1 minute or 3 miles instead of the 7 miles published).
 
midlifeflyer said:
Practically speaking (without being anal about the AIM), I always figured that "entering the hold" is present tense, so the time is "now" and the altitude is the one I was cleared to.
Click to expand...
I'm with you on the time part, but that DC-7 story keeps me from omitting the altitude, especially in a nonradar environment.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
What Id like to know is, why are controllers all now asking if we have the notams before issuing an approach? Get it here all the time lately. Will they be checking on our preflights before giving clearances next?
Click to expand...
I can't find it in 7110.65, but controllers are supposed to know when there are NOTAMs affecting a SIAP in their sector, and I've noticed that when there is, they ask. Guess it's a double-check in case you scanned too fast through the FDC NOTAMs and missed the one raising the MDA on your approach by 500 feet because of the temporary crane on final.:yikes:
 
Ron Levy said:
I can't find it in 7110.65, but controllers are supposed to know when there are NOTAMs affecting a SIAP in their sector, and I've noticed that when there is, they ask. Guess it's a double-check in case you scanned too fast through the FDC NOTAMs and missed the one raising the MDA on your approach by 500 feet because of the temporary crane on final.:yikes:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think I'd like to know about that NOTAM
 
AIM 4-1-13(h) specifically addresses the "have numbers" question...my advice is to not use it when you have the alphabetical designator.

With regard to "proper phraseology," let me say once again :mad2: that plain language works just fine. There are no regulations governing phraseology, and AIM 4-2-1(b) gives you carte blanche to say whatever you feel like saying.

Bob Gardner
 
Ron Levy said:
The P/CG is organized alphabetically, not by numbered sections. Can you provide a quote or which phrase is listed?
Click to expand...

Sorry Ron. Section 4 of the AIM (4-4-6), which references the PCG


h. Pilots arriving or departing an uncontrolled airport that has automated weather broadcast capability (ASOS/AWSS/AWOS) should monitor the broadcast frequency, advise the controller that they have the "one-minute weather" and state intentions prior to operating within the Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E surface areas.

REFERENCE-
Pilot/Controller Glossary Term- One-minute Weather.
 
Ron Levy said:
missed the one raising the MDA on your approach by 500 feet because of the temporary crane on final.:yikes:
Click to expand...

Too bad we can't have controllers just mention in plain language such a life-threatening change, instead of asking if you have the millions of (mostly irrelevant) notams which are typical, and likely to be responded to with a 'ya, we gottem'.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Sorry Ron. Section 4 of the AIM (4-4-6), which references the PCG


h. Pilots arriving or departing an uncontrolled airport that has automated weather broadcast capability (ASOS/AWSS/AWOS) should monitor the broadcast frequency, advise the controller that they have the "one-minute weather" and state intentions prior to operating within the Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E surface areas.

REFERENCE-
Pilot/Controller Glossary Term- One-minute Weather.
Click to expand...
Thanks -- now I know.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Too bad we can't have controllers just mention in plain language such a life-threatening change, instead of asking if you have the millions of (mostly irrelevant) notams which are typical, and likely to be responded to with a 'ya, we gottem'.
Click to expand...
They just ask if you have the NOTAMs on that approach, not every NOTAM in the file, and considering the size of many of those FDC FI/T NOTAMs, and the myriad differences within them based on aircraft category, starting with "do you have 'em?" and then telling you if you don't seems less bandwidth-eating to me to me, but it's all situations.
 
Hmm... I'll remember the "one minute weather"... Usually it's more like this:

ATC: Diamond 2SE, plan on the RNAV 17, advise when you have the Leesburg Weather.
Me: We'll plan on the RNAV 17, and we have the Leesburg AWOS. Don't believe it, but we have it.

For a while JYO weather reporting was optimistic on the ceiling and visibilty. I think it was calling the ceiling 800-1000 higher than actual, and adding 3 miles to the visibility. I'd depart Frederick on a stable day where it was 004OVC 1 1/2SM and Leesburg (maybe 15 NM south) would be saying 1300OVC 4SM. And I'd fly the ILS or LPV and break out at 300 AGL with maybe 2 miles vis.

The AWOS got adjusted (The regulars at the field swear that a BFH was involved) and it got bette.
 
jaybee said:
Also - when calling approach, requesting an approach and going to an Airport with an AWOS - would saying "have the numbers" be appropriate ?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

No, I would say, we have the weather, or we have the AWOS, but I don't think it is required.

Edit: Just read the posts on the "one minute weather", now that's a new one on me. :dunno:
 
Last edited:
Ahh. How'd I miss that?

BOFH is the hero of sysadmins everywhere...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bastard_Operator_From_Hell

And where I learned the phrase, "Appeasement Engineer". The guy who has to show up within 4 hours at the customer site to meet the terms of the Service Contract, who has never even seen the equipment he's been sent to Service.

(I used to have that job. Unlike the AE in the early BOFH short story, I was never tricked into electrocuting myself or ending up quicklimed under the data center floor never to be found again.)

;)

The article that started it all...

http://bofh.ntk.net/BOFH/0000/bastard01.php

The modern version at The Register...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/odds/bofh/
 
Ron Levy said:
I can't find it in 7110.65, but controllers are supposed to know when there are NOTAMs affecting a SIAP in their sector, and I've noticed that when there is, they ask. Guess it's a double-check in case you scanned too fast through the FDC NOTAMs and missed the one raising the MDA on your approach by 500 feet because of the temporary crane on final.:yikes:
Click to expand...

At some point after LockMart took over FSS, I started hearing controllers asking this question a lot (usually Center controllers talking to an airplane destined for an uncontrolled field on an IFR flight plan). And they're not talking SIAP NOTAMs, they're talking about ALL of them, and if you say "no" they will read them to you on frequency. Maybe someone somewhere missed something important and there was some kind of change in the 7110.65 or a lesser policy change? I've heard it from both Minneapolis and Fort Worth Centers, at the very least (those are the two I specifically remember - I think I heard it in KC Center as well).
 
flyingcheesehead said:
At some point after LockMart took over FSS, I started hearing controllers asking this question a lot (usually Center controllers talking to an airplane destined for an uncontrolled field on an IFR flight plan). And they're not talking SIAP NOTAMs, they're talking about ALL of them, and if you say "no" they will read them to you on frequency. Maybe someone somewhere missed something important and there was some kind of change in the 7110.65 or a lesser policy change? I've heard it from both Minneapolis and Fort Worth Centers, at the very least (those are the two I specifically remember - I think I heard it in KC Center as well).
Click to expand...
Minneapolis Center does it all the time. It always makes me wonder if I missed one, since they're asking me, and I tell them I have all of them that were published when I departed and then they usually end up reading all of them back to me again...

This is one thing I really like about Foreflight. They e-mail you the DUATS briefing after you file - so its automatically on my phone and iPad with all the notams. It's very easy for me to refer to in flight.
 
jesse said:
Minneapolis Center does it all the time. It always makes me wonder if I missed one, since they're asking me, and I tell them I have all of them that were published when I departed and then they usually end up reading all of them back to me again...

This is one thing I really like about Foreflight. They e-mail you the DUATS briefing after you file - so its automatically on my phone and iPad with all the notams. It's very easy for me to refer to in flight.
Click to expand...

That was quite useful when they told us the lights were out at our intended destination one night. ;)

You and I both looked and that NOTAM wasn't in either of our briefings we pulled that night.

Was pretty dark during that missed. ;)

I'd have to say around here, it's the complete polar opposite. KGXY, KFNL, KBJC, and KAPA have all had minimums raised on at least one approach in the various briefings I have pulled this year here locally for temporary towers or cranes and you almost never hear DEN TRACON have time to ask anyone if they have NOTAMs. The towers are on the ATIS but you have to pull the NOTAMs to see the changes to the Approaches.

I wish FF had a way to scribble on the Approach plates or make a note for that reason. Not a huge desire, but being able to cross off a minimum altitude at least, so you'd remember to look down at your notes would be good. Paper beats FF in that small regard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top