ATC Phraseology

I heard the following exchange this morning:


ABC-Tower: "Citation-XXX, ABC-Tower."

Citation-XXX: "ABC-Tower, Citation-XXX; say current wind."

ABC-Tower: "Citation-XXX, ABC-Tower, wind 150 at 4."

Citation-XXX: "ABC-Tower, Citation-XXX; is that wind *ZERO* 4?"

silence

Citation-XXX: "ABC-Tower, Citation-XXX; confirm wind *ZERO* 4."

ABC-Tower: "Citation-XXX, ABC-Tower; that's affirmative."


Was the Citation pilot's pedantic request appropriate? Must
controllers prepend a "zero" to single-digit wind speeds?

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

I heard the following exchange this morning:


ABC-Tower: "Citation-XXX, ABC-Tower."

Citation-XXX: "ABC-Tower, Citation-XXX; say current wind."

ABC-Tower: "Citation-XXX, ABC-Tower, wind 150 at 4."

Citation-XXX: "ABC-Tower, Citation-XXX; is that wind *ZERO* 4?"

silence

Citation-XXX: "ABC-Tower, Citation-XXX; confirm wind *ZERO* 4."

ABC-Tower: "Citation-XXX, ABC-Tower; that's affirmative."


Was the Citation pilot's pedantic request appropriate?


No.



Must controllers prepend a "zero" to single-digit wind speeds?


No.

Larry Dighera wrote:
I heard the following exchange this morning:


ABC-Tower: "Citation-XXX, ABC-Tower."

Citation-XXX: "ABC-Tower, Citation-XXX; say current wind."

ABC-Tower: "Citation-XXX, ABC-Tower, wind 150 at 4."

Citation-XXX: "ABC-Tower, Citation-XXX; is that wind *ZERO* 4?"

silence

Citation-XXX: "ABC-Tower, Citation-XXX; confirm wind *ZERO* 4."

ABC-Tower: "Citation-XXX, ABC-Tower; that's affirmative."


Was the Citation pilot's pedantic request appropriate? Must
controllers prepend a "zero" to single-digit wind speeds?




They should. 04 and 40 are very different directions and radios in
aircraft are notoriously bad so adding the 0 where it is supposed to be
certainly can cut down on mis-communication.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrote in message
...

They should. 04 and 40 are very different directions and radios in
aircraft are notoriously bad so adding the 0 where it is supposed to be
certainly can cut down on mis-communication.


The issue was the wind speed, not the direction. The controller issued the
wind correctly.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrote in message
...
They should. 04 and 40 are very different directions and radios in
aircraft are notoriously bad so adding the 0 where it is supposed to be
certainly can cut down on mis-communication.


The issue was the wind speed, not the direction. The controller issued the
wind correctly.


You are right I mis-read.

Larry Dighera wrote:
Was the Citation pilot's pedantic request appropriate? Must
controllers prepend a "zero" to single-digit wind speeds?


I'd say both were appropriate. The AC asked; the controller answered; the AC
wasn't sure whether he heard "four" or "forty" (although it should have been
painfully obvious), and so the controller clarified his original answer.

I still would have said "150 at 4" the first time. I'd bet 90% of pilots would
never ask for the answer to be amplified unless they had good reason... say
heavy turbulence, passing cells or whatever. So for 90%, that would have been
the end of it.

But if I don't understand or am not sure I understand a reply, I'd ask for an
amplified answer in a heartbeat.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

Was the Citation pilot's pedantic request appropriate? *Must
controllers prepend a "zero" to single-digit wind speeds?

I've never heard a controller or ATIS or ASOS or AWOS state wind is
"at zero four" when they mean "at four".

However, maybe the Citation pilot had static or otherwise bad
reception -- he wanted to make sure it wasn't "four zero". In other
words, he *might* have heard "wind 150 at 4static burst or heterodyne
squeal". In which case you might ask for clarification without being
pedantic.

I can't remember if that squeal that is caused by stepping on someone
else's transmission is called "heterodyne" or not.

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com wrote in message
news

I'd say both were appropriate. The AC asked; the controller answered; the
AC wasn't sure whether he heard "four" or "forty" (although it should have
been painfully obvious), and so the controller clarified his original
answer.


If there had been 40 knots of wind it would have been issued as "four zero",
not "forty".

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
...

If there had been 40 knots of wind it would have been issued as "four
zero",
not "forty".

It *should* have been issued as "four zero".

I've heard plenty of non-standard phraseology from ATC.

The wind speed makes a lot more difference to the guy in the plane than it
does to the guy in the tower. I would have asked.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

I'd say both were appropriate. The AC asked; the controller answered; the
AC wasn't sure whether he heard "four" or "forty" (although it should have
been painfully obvious), and so the controller clarified his original
answer.


If there had been 40 knots of wind it would have been issued as "four zero",
not "forty".


Most likely but it wouldn't be the first time I've heard nonstandard phrasing.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com