Redundant "traffic" and other annoyances . . .

dbahn said:
While I think it's best to go beyond the departure end for the crosswind
Click to expand...
As always, it depends. If there is an airplane about to depart, and it is a jet or other fast mover, you would be safer to fly the crosswind over the middle of the runway than beyond the departure end.
 
dbahn said:
Me too, but that may be because it only started fairly recently.
Click to expand...
I've only noticed it in the past couple of years.

But it's not nearly as annoying as, "Podunk traffic, ah, bugsmasher 12345 is, ah, about 10 miles to the east, ah, and we're, ah, going to make a, ah, left downwind for runway, ah, one seven, ah, Podunk."
 
Gilbert Buettner said:
As always, it depends. If there is an airplane about to depart, and it is a jet or other fast mover, you would be safer to fly the crosswind over the middle of the runway than beyond the departure end.
Click to expand...

True, or you could just do a 360 from the upwind leg or turn back away from the airport and come back around. There are several options, and which to choose depends on the traffic situation.
 
John Spartan said:
It’s essentially verbal “book ending”. Start words equal end words. X Traffic - info - X Traffic. Humans do this kind of thing when following patterns. Are you technically correct? Yes the final traffic isn’t needed or correct. But if that extra “traffic” at the end really bothers you that much, you probably have bigger problems. Considering all the other offenses out there for bad airborne communication, a superfluous “traffic” at the end really doesn’t rate for me.
Click to expand...
it doesn't bother me any more than "with you," "last call," "position checks," "clear if the active," "position and hold" at a nontowered airport, or any of the myriad of other sloppy communication techniques that don't do anything to enhance clarity of communication or safety and often end up being carried over to other areas.
 
Gilbert Buettner said:
As always, it depends. If there is an airplane about to depart, and it is a jet or other fast mover, you would be safer to fly the crosswind over the middle of the runway than beyond the departure end.
Click to expand...
On one of my solo cross-countries, I landed at Sacramento International and did a taxiback. When climbing out for departure, while I was still over the long runway, Tower said "right turnout approved," or words to that effect. Obviously he didn't want me delaying the airliners behind me.
 
Palmpilot said:
On one of my solo cross-countries, I landed at Sacramento International and did a taxiback. When climbing out for departure, while I was still over the long runway, Tower said "right turnout approved," or words to that effect. Obviously he didn't want me delaying the airliners behind me.
Click to expand...
I got “Cleared for takeoff, left turn as soon as you’re able, contact tower when able” from Ground once when I was halfway from the ramp to the runway. I had to wait until I was past the parking garage before I made my left turn. :)
 
Daleandee said:
SIGHT, SITE, & CITE ...
Click to expand...

To, too, and two.

There, their, and they’re.


Brake and break.


I can overlook the occasional incorrect homophone usage, as I’m sure autocorrect can be to blame. But I have a hard time accepting the seriousness of anyone that persistently uses the incorrect spelling. Sadly, it’s often seen today in professional journalism as often as informal forum posts; which makes me believe that a lot of today’s professional journalism is being written by AI bots and sold as authentic writing.



Maybe we can create an AI bot to make our traffic calls… :idea:
 
aterry1067 said:
snip
I can overlook the occasional incorrect homophone usage, as I’m sure autocorrect can be to blame. But I have a hard time accepting the seriousness of anyone that persistently uses the incorrect spelling. Sadly, it’s often seen today in professional journalism as often as informal forum posts; which makes me believe that a lot of today’s professional journalism is being written by AI bots and sold as authentic writing.

snip
Click to expand...

I won't argue the percentage of today's journalism being produced by AI, but spelling errors aren't just limited to AI. It seems like most children no longer learn how to spell even the most basic words nor do they learn basic grammar. I would say that up until age 35 or so, you have about a 70/30 chance of finding an adult who understands spelling and grammar...with the 30% chance being the adult who actually knows what word to use and how to spell it.
 
aterry1067 said:
To, too, and two.

There, their, and they’re.


Brake and break.
Click to expand...
Alfa and alpha.
aterry1067 said:
which makes me believe that a lot of today’s professional journalism is being written by AI bots and sold as authentic writing.
Click to expand...
I think the current state of the art AI bots are better at homophones than humans.
 
aterry1067 said:
Sadly, it’s often seen today in professional journalism as often as informal forum posts; which makes me believe that a lot of today’s professional journalism is being written by AI bots and sold as authentic writing.
Click to expand...
Please tell me where you are finding this professional journalism. I haven't seen much of that in years.
 
Palmpilot said:
I doubt that it's possible to answer that without getting political.
Click to expand...


There are plenty of magazines and journals, both online and in print, that I personally enjoy reading. Most of the material that I read is aviation related in some form or fashion, but I still also read magazines and articles related to a wide variety of topics such as camping and hiking, technology, cooking and recipes, motorsports, cars and motorcycles, travel, etc.
 
aterry1067 said:
I can overlook the occasional incorrect homophone usage, as I’m sure autocorrect can be to blame. But I have a hard time accepting the seriousness of anyone that persistently uses the incorrect spelling.
Click to expand...
it’s a basic human right to be persistently wrong.
 
Palmpilot said:
On one of my solo cross-countries, I landed at Sacramento International and did a taxiback. When climbing out for departure, while I was still over the long runway, Tower said "right turnout approved," or words to that effect. Obviously he didn't want me delaying the airliners behind me.
Click to expand...
that's not unusual. Airline and jet and even piston IFR traffic is making that 400AGL initial IFR turn, even if it's not past the departure end of the runway. ATC sequences approaches and departures based on that expectation. Even when the traffic at the time doesn't make it necessary.
 
Chip Sylverne said:
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!
Click to expand...

ATIS or more appropriately AWOS/ASOS is not the definitive answer for which runway to use.

Common thing that happens here in the morning is AWOS will be report calm or even 3 to 4knots favoring runway 11.
But at about 200feet the wind switches to about 15 kts favoring runway 29.
This is pretty obvious on all the pattern legs if you are watching for it, the most common indicator is watching every one come in way to high because of the tailwind and wind shear on final.
Not a big deal if you are just departing or arriving, although I tend to see a lot of go arounds. But it really messes with students trying to practice takeoff and landings. We often do 2 or 3 laps demonstrate the wind in the pattern and what approaching with a tailwind looks like and then switch to 29 so we can have a more normal approaches with the added benefit of not looking into the morning sun on landing. Since we usually are the 1st ones in the pattern or communicate with the other aircraft as to why we are changing.

Was once doing primary training in a J3, winds were calm and wind sock was hanging limp pointing to the 11 runway. We tried to use 11, but the sun was just right we couldn't see anything. J3 is blind out the front to begin with, add the Sun and we couldn't see anything. So we switched to 29. Another student came out and insisted using 11 so we did opposing patterns for a few laps. I didn't have a Push to Talk and my student was to timid on the radio to say we needed to use 29, even with me telling him what to say. I was tempted to stop go over the the wind sock and turn it around to see if the other student would change runways.

Short answer is what you Chip said "Say something" but understand occasionally that is not possible.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
 
"Traffic" is to keep the flight school office, which is "unicom", from answering on the same common frequency. Honestly, there are worse issues than this one.
 
brcase said:
Common thing that happens here in the morning is AWOS will be report calm or even 3 to 4knots favoring runway 11.
But at about 200feet the wind switches to about 15 kts favoring runway 29.
This is pretty obvious on all the pattern legs if you are watching for it, the most common indicator is watching every one come in way to high because of the tailwind and wind shear on final.
Click to expand...
Not sure "wind shear" applies here, since the difference is relatively slight. Here we have the advantage of steam from a nearby power plant and a paper mill and 3M plant, so we can observe what the wind is doing well above the surface.
skyking3286 said:
"Traffic" is to keep the flight school office, which is "unicom", from answering on the same common frequency. Honestly, there are worse issues than this one.
Click to expand...
"Traffic" is who you are talking to. The usual sequence is who you are talking to, who you are, where you are, and what you are doing or planning. Followed by the location that applies to your call.
 
Remember, there are many airports with a unicom frequency that is not necessarily associated with a flight school. It may be to contact an FBO at a large airport to inquire about rental car, passengers waiting, a fuel order, etc.
 
Timbeck2 said:
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
Click to expand...
I think it's worth mentioning that Leroy's actions got all his teammates killed in the process, as well.
 
"request" is a pet peeve of mine....
I know it's considered standard phraseology but it rings "stupid" and inefficient to my ear....

"Approach, Cessna 12345, request."
Cessna 12345, say request"....or sometimes they will make an assumption that the request is for following and will just cut to the chase and issue a code....

Seems to me better to either
a) if the freq is slammed and the controller is obviously busy, just say "Approach, Cessna 12345"
the controller will know that Cessna 12345 has some sort of request or question.....
or b) if it's not busy, just cut to the chase with "Approach, Cessna 12345, request following" or "Approach, Cessna 12345, request flight following"
 
Brad W said:
"request" is a pet peeve of mine....
I know it's considered standard phraseology but it rings "stupid" and inefficient to my ear....

"Approach, Cessna 12345, request."
Cessna 12345, say request"....or sometimes they will make an assumption that the request is for following and will just cut to the chase and issue a code....

Seems to me better to either
a) if the freq is slammed and the controller is obviously busy, just say "Approach, Cessna 12345"
the controller will know that Cessna 12345 has some sort of request or question.....
or b) if it's not busy, just cut to the chase with "Approach, Cessna 12345, request following" or "Approach, Cessna 12345, request flight following"
Click to expand...

If the controller just hears "Cessna 12345", how will she know if the radio call was cutoff? Seems to me it makes sense to use "Cessna 12345 request" if the frequency is busy and you don't want to hear "Cessna 12345 blah blah ummmm, ahhhhh, blah blah um, ...um, blah" tying up the frequency.
 
well that's almost exactly my point....same way now that the controller can't know for sure that the rest of the sentence was cut off when using this "standard phraseology"
"Cessna 12345 request"
could have been "Cessna 12345 request higher altitude"
or "Cessna 12345 request flight following"
or "Cessna 12345 request your grandmother's apple pie recipe"
or "Cessna 12345 request 10° right deviation for weather"
etc...
 
In Andy Watson's book, A pilot's guide to Air Traffic Control..., he, as a controller, specifically recommends not stopping at 'request' and waiting for ATC to ask for the requested action. He strongly recommends including the request in the initial contact as it saves time on a congested frequency.
 
robin ardoin said:
In Andy Watson's book, A pilot's guide to Air Traffic Control..., he, as a controller, specifically recommends not stopping at 'request' and waiting for ATC to ask for the requested action. He strongly recommends including the request in the initial contact as it saves time on a congested frequency.
Click to expand...
I agree. I also hate “wake up” calls. Example:

Tower Pony36
Pony36 tower
Pony36 request landing at the north ramp
Pony36 cleared to land at the north ramp

Why make 4 transmissions when two are sufficient? It’s just unnecessary and ties up radio time. Additionally, if I just talked to you 15 seconds ago and you give me another wake up call, you are going to really cheese me off. Ive been preaching this to deaf ears for a long time.
 
And the problem isn’t just one word at the end of a transmission. Most of this stuff is a crutch for the person transmitting, not a benefit to the people listening.
 
robin ardoin said:
In Andy Watson's book, A pilot's guide to Air Traffic Control..., he, as a controller, specifically recommends not stopping at 'request' and waiting for ATC to ask for the requested action. He strongly recommends including the request in the initial contact as it saves time on a congested frequency.
Click to expand...

Around these parts, the controller may be talking to someone on a different frequency or otherwise busy. Just because the frequency is quiet for a moment does not mean the controller isn't busy. Saying "request" or "flight following request" and waiting keeps the contact brief in case he's occupied and let's him come back to you when he's free.
 
Ain't no pat answer to this say request or spit the request out on initial contact. Sometimes one way is best, sometimes the other. If you aren't sure if it would be good to give the whole speech on first contact, then you should do the request thang.
 
Half Fast said:
Around these parts, the controller may be talking to someone on a different frequency or otherwise busy. Just because the frequency is quiet for a moment does not mean the controller isn't busy. Saying "request" or "flight following request" and waiting keeps the contact brief in case he's occupied and let's him come back to you when he's free.
Click to expand...
I'll let Andy know. ;)
 
luvflyin said:
Ain't no pat answer to this say request or spit the request out on initial contact. Sometimes one way is best, sometimes the other. If you aren't sure if it would be good to give the whole speech on first contact, then you should do the request thang.
Click to expand...
Yeah, seems there's several variables in play here, such as whether you are talking to ground/tower/approach/center, the local style or even the individual controller's personal preferences. Helps to just listen, pay attention and try to infer what works.
 
I always kind of liked the Aussie version: "All stations and Darby Traffic..."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top