Redundant "traffic" and other annoyances . . .

How 'bout pilots who call the runway in use at a pilot-controlled field the "active runway?" ;)

I'm far more annoyed by those who stop mid-transmission to think about what they're going to say, while holding the PTT.

Nauga,
the wordsmith
Is a pilot controlled airport the same as an uncontrolled airport? Just wondering. :dunno:
 
Only if you remember that the FAA used to use “uncontrolled” terminology before they decided it was a bad idea.
And yet...pilots still know what you mean. I'm far more concerned with how people fly than what they say while they're flying as long as their message is conveyed.

Nauga,
five by five
 
Uh huh.

And when a pilot says “Cirrus 123AB on 7 mile final” it might help to say whether it’s an SR22 or a Vision Jet. That’s happened here a time or two.
Some say "Cessna" which is unhelpful, as the approach speed can be anywhere from 50 knots to over 150 knots.
 
TIL that saying “ traffic “ at the end of a transmission annoys people.

I would have told you it was expected verbiage and that my CFI taught it.
 
One of the more dangerous reasoning in aviation is that, "I was taught to . . .". That's exactly how poor technique gets spread. It's like a virus.
Except in this case, AC90-66C addresses self announcing with the following guidance.
9.8.1 Self-Announcing. Self-announcing should include aircraft type to aid in identification and detection, but should not use paint schemes or color descriptions to replace the use of the aircraft call sign. For example, “MIDWEST TRAFFIC, TWIN COMMANDER FIVE ONE ROMEO FOXTROT TEN MILES NORTHEAST” or “MIDWEST TRAFFIC, FIVE ONE ROMEO FOXTROT TWIN COMMANDER TEN MILES NORTHEAST.” When referring to a specific runway, pilots should use the runway number and not use the phrase “Active Runway.” To help identify one airport from another when sharing the same frequency, the airport name should be spoken at the beginning and end of each self-announce transmission.
and
10.1 Recommended Communication Practices. To achieve the greatest degree of safety, it is essential that all radio-equipped aircraft transmit/receive on a common frequency identified for the purpose of airport advisories, as identified in appropriate aeronautical publications.

1. Pilots should only use the correct airport name, as identified in appropriate aeronautical publications, when self-announcing or exchanging traffic information to reduce the risk of confusion. For example, when landing at Midwest National Airport (KGPH), state, “Midwest National Traffic” as stated on the VFR aeronautical chart and as found in the Airport’s Supplemental Chart information. Do not use the town’s name “Mosby Traffic” or “Clay County Traffic.”

2. To help identify one airport from another, the correct airport name should be spoken at the beginning and end of each self-announce transmission.

If a CFI teaches FAA recommended procedures, is it really a poor technique?
 
Where does it recommend “traffic” at the end of the transmission?

Context is important. Until the example given, the FAA says uses the airport name. In the example given, it’s Airport name traffic, NOT Airport name, traffic,. If the FAA didn’t want you to say airport name traffic, the example would have prefaced with Airport name only.

Having said that, it’s also childish to suggest having a CFI sent to detention, stood against a wall and shot, or sent to a 709 ride for teaching a recommended procedure that has an example that doesn’t clearly reflect the explanation nor does it give an example when additional guidance is provided.

Personally, I don’t use the word “traffic” at all. “Boerne, Cessna 1234, right downwind runway 17, Boerne Stage”’ since there’s a couple other airports sharing 123.00 nearby and their calls can be heard at traffic pattern altitude.
 
Last edited:
Having said that, it’s also childish to suggest having a CFI sent to detention, stood against a wall and shot, or sent to a 709 ride for teaching a recommended procedure that has an example that doesn’t clearly reflect the explanation nor does it give an example when additional guidance is provided.
nobody said that about the CFI, but if enough 709 rides occur as a result of the same instructor, he probably should be evaluated as well.
 
Your callsign is "November 12345" or "(Make/Type) 12345", not just the numbers.

If 12345 is on a 5-mile final i might like to know whether you're a Cessna or a LearJet.

Once upon a time when we could visit a tower I heard the following call to the Ground Controller. "Cessna 123 ready to taxi for departure, from south ramp". The ground controller can't see the south ramp (non-movement area) and responds to Taxi via Alpha to runway 28R. We watch the taxi way and see a Cessna Bobcat taxi out. Not sure the controller have ever saw one and responded with " Cessna 123 please confirm you are the Twin Cessna that just taxied out"

Brian
 
The names have been changed to protect the Guilty...

"the airport name should be spoken at the beginning and end of each self-announce transmission"

The fun really begins with the non-pilot marketing oriented airport management decides to change the to name for Podunk Airport to the Northwest Upper Valley Regional Executive Airport.

So to demonstrate the absurdity radio calls frequently sounded like

"Northwest Upper Valley Regional Executive Traffic, Skyhawk 123 turning left downwind for 14 Northwest Upper Valley Regional Executive" and just to be nice they would occasioanlly add "at Podunk" at the end of call so people actually knew where they were.

Management soon got the idea and changed it back to "Podunk Airport" since no one actually knew where NUVRE airport was unless they read the name off of the map and radio call went back to the normal "Podunk traffic, Skyhawk 123 turning left downwind for 14 Podunk.

Brian
 
The names have been changed to protect the Guilty...

"the airport name should be spoken at the beginning and end of each self-announce transmission"

The fun really begins with the non-pilot marketing oriented airport management decides to change the to name for Podunk Airport to the Northwest Upper Valley Regional Executive Airport.

So to demonstrate the absurdity radio calls frequently sounded like

"Northwest Upper Valley Regional Executive Traffic, Skyhawk 123 turning left downwind for 14 Northwest Upper Valley Regional Executive" and just to be nice they would occasioanlly add "at Podunk" at the end of call so people actually knew where they were.

Management soon got the idea and changed it back to "Podunk Airport" since no one actually knew where NUVRE airport was unless they read the name off of the map and radio call went back to the normal "Podunk traffic, Skyhawk 123 turning left downwind for 14 Podunk.

Brian


Even more fun when there are 5 (or more) airports sharing the frequency.
 
Nah, that doesn't bother me.
"active runway" only really bothers me when I have been listening to CTAF for the past 10 minutes while inbound and 3 people do it in a row and I then have to ask which runway is the active runway so I can decide which way I am going to land.
 
Nah, that doesn't bother me.
"Clearing the active" only bothers me because it's just as easy to say "clearing runway (number)" and that can give VERY useful information to the pilots that are five or ten miles out in planning their approach to the field, which makes it safer for everyone in the pattern.
 
Why make a “clear the runway” call, unless it’s a runway with enough elevation change that a plane at the hold-short can’t see it?
 
It may be, but isn't always, head up the ass. Some airports have an instrument approach only for one runway, and on some days that happens to be the opposite runway to use given the wind direction. So if they are practicing instrument approaches on a VMC day with VFR planes in the pattern, conflicts happen. But even if legal, it is disruptive and perhaps that qualifies as discourteous.

It doesn’t have to be disruptive or discourteous.

There is nothing wrong with practicing or flying an actual approach to the opposite runway that VFR traffic are using.

What IS stupid is insisting on landing straight in from that approach against the traffic pattern.

My home field only has one ILS approach. If there is VFR traffic using the opposite runway, I’ll simply level off at pattern altitude and break off to enter the downwind. It’s not hard.
 
Last summer I called 3 miles south then a little later a Skyhawk on the ground asked me for my "20". When I told her she replied "10-4".

"I'd tell you if I knew what that was."
 
"Clearing the active" only bothers me because it's just as easy to say "clearing runway (number)"
If I hear either at an airport with only 1 landing surface, I just "harumph".
 
I've been hearing a new one lately from a local flight school where someone must be knocking out commericial / complex stuff in a Lance:

"ABC Traffic Retract XYZ entering left downwind runway 31 ABC."

...they used that one all night for all pattern and departure calls.

The fun one is the teardrop entry call at a really busy pancake breakfast. I have no issue with that arrival. Just fun to hear that call when the "uhh" and "umm" start happening in the middle of the call.
 
Why make a “clear the runway” call, unless it’s a runway with enough elevation change that a plane at the hold-short can’t see it?
At Sugarbush with an active glider operation, the field crowns in the middle and it's impossible to see an airplane on the opposite end of the runway. We absolutely require radio communication that a plane is clear of the runway and what some pilots consider taxiways, i.e. the grass on either side of the pavement which is also used as a runway. Otherwise we need to wait until it taxis back towards the middle of the runway to get positive visual separation.

I do agree though that it's a useless call in most situations, but rarely a problem when made.
 
"POA traffic"
Nope not a fan of the use of "traffic".
I'll make a case for a straight in approach. This comes from sitting with some of the tower folk. It's not official it's just the result of conversation in the airport diner, and something we do.
I fly a slow airplane (PA-17). I buzz around at 2150 rpm and 85 mph indicated. At full power I can touch 100 mph, and I'm in the yellow zone.
There are a couple of active flight schools at KPOU. Four to eight planes up at any one time.
If I'm following the rules, when I'm in the pattern, I'm constantly being overtaken by faster aircraft. You know, rockets, like 172s, Cherokees, 182s, and Bos.
This annoys the snot out of the faster airplanes, and makes a lot of work for the guys in the tower.
So we have worked out something that makes life easier for everyone.
I call in, 10 miles out at 2,500ft, over 44N, lined up on rwy 24. The tower acknowledges me and I start coasting downhill to KPOU. they can sequence faster planes in in front of me and if it looks like there might be a conflict as I get closer they will extend someone downwind and call their base. More planes get in with less work.
Straight in at an uncontrolled field is, more often than not, the wild, wild west. "Traffic"
Nope, still don't like it.
 
My CFI taught me to say [airport name] traffic at the beginning, and just [airport name] at the end.
Old school. Which is to say, "done correctly". :)

Think about it. If you hear a transmission but didn't get the whole message, what's the most important thing you want to know?

I want to know where it applied, not that it addressed "traffic" where it applied. When I hear that the name of the airport isn't where I'm flying, whatever was said is typically meaningless to me and I concentrate on something else.
 
At the beginning of the call you are saying who you are talking to. Which is not the airport itself. So XYZ traffic would be grammatically correct.

At the end, there is an implied "AT" the location, so not saying "traffic" would be correct.
 
"POA traffic"
Nope not a fan of the use of "traffic".
I'll make a case for a straight in approach. This comes from sitting with some of the tower folk. It's not official it's just the result of conversation in the airport diner, and something we do.
I fly a slow airplane (PA-17). I buzz around at 2150 rpm and 85 mph indicated. At full power I can touch 100 mph, and I'm in the yellow zone.
There are a couple of active flight schools at KPOU. Four to eight planes up at any one time.
If I'm following the rules, when I'm in the pattern, I'm constantly being overtaken by faster aircraft. You know, rockets, like 172s, Cherokees, 182s, and Bos.
This annoys the snot out of the faster airplanes, and makes a lot of work for the guys in the tower.
So we have worked out something that makes life easier for everyone.
I call in, 10 miles out at 2,500ft, over 44N, lined up on rwy 24. The tower acknowledges me and I start coasting downhill to KPOU. they can sequence faster planes in in front of me and if it looks like there might be a conflict as I get closer they will extend someone downwind and call their base. More planes get in with less work.
Straight in at an uncontrolled field is, more often than not, the wild, wild west. "Traffic"
Nope, still don't like it.
Amazing what you can work out with competent controllers.
 
Old school. Which is to say, "done correctly". :)

Think about it. If you hear a transmission but didn't get the whole message, what's the most important thing you want to know?

I want to know where it applied, not that it addressed "traffic" where it applied. When I hear that the name of the airport isn't where I'm flying, whatever was said is typically meaningless to me and I concentrate on something else.
That's the way I think of it too. (I'm not saying that the extra word is a big deal, however.)
 
What I learned from my CFI all those years ago, and consistent with AIM:
"Podunk traffic Barnburner BA123 10 miles S inbound Podunk"
... a few other calls and after landing ...
"Podunk traffic Barnburner BA123 clear of the runway"
That's assuming a podunk airport with 1 strip of pavement. Technically speaking, 2 runways (X and 360 - X) but if you are announcing clear of the runway it doesn't matter which so why complicate your transmission?
 
"active runway" only really bothers me when I have been listening to CTAF for the past 10 minutes while inbound and 3 people do it in a row and I then have to ask which runway is the active

Which brings up another irritation, pilots who continue to use given runway after a change in wind direction, because " that's what everybody else is using". Listen to ATIS people. If the wind favors a different runway, say something!
 
No idea who that is.
Since nobody else has explained: it refers to a video game in which three or four guys are outside the kill room discussing a plan of attack for killing all the opponents inside when one of them just runs inside yelling “Lerooooooooy Jenkiiiiins!!” and subsequently dies because he didn’t have any teammates to back him up
 
Back
Top