When is just clicking PTT an acknowledgement?

Unfortunately when there are numerous aircraft in the vicinity, how is
the controller going to know which aircraft double-clicked and which
clicked by accident?

It really doesn't matter. The response was a courtesy, not operational. I
use it occasionally for things like a radio check at an uncontrolled field
or in response to conversations with controllers that are not associated
with flight.


"Blanche" wrote in message
...
Unfortunately when there are numerous aircraft in the vicinity, how is
the controller going to know which aircraft double-clicked and which
clicked by accident?

Blanche ) wrote:

Unfortunately when there are numerous aircraft in the vicinity, how is
the controller going to know which aircraft double-clicked and which
clicked by accident?

Since the controller is not expecting a reply, an accidental double-click
by another aircraft will do nothing other than make the controller think
his last transmission was acknowledged by the original aircraft.

A mistaken acknowledgement of "Have a good flight" or "here are the current
winds" is harmless.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

And, if you are in a crowded area, your "double-click" would probably "step
on" someone else's communication. If an acknowledgement is not required, it
would seem the best practice would be not to acknowledge, especially in
congested airspace...

"Blanche" wrote in message
...
Unfortunately when there are numerous aircraft in the vicinity, how is
the controller going to know which aircraft double-clicked and which
clicked by accident?

Bill Denton ) wrote:

And, if you are in a crowded area, your "double-click" would probably "step
on" someone else's communication. If an acknowledgement is not required, it
would seem the best practice would be not to acknowledge, especially in
congested airspace...

And once again we see that one procedure does not fit all situations.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Never. There is no way for ATC to know who clicked the mike...maybe the
pilot he was talking to, maybe someone else.

Bob Gardner

"Ben Jackson" wrote in message
news:KBvDb.553661$HS4.4223865@attbi_s01...
Somewhere I read that you should NOT acknowledge transmissions by just
pressing PTT briefly. Now, I had never heard that before, nor done it,
but since then I think I've heard it happen.

Can someone who is familiar with this explain the PTT-ack customs so I
know how to interpret it?

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

You noted: "And once again we see that one procedure does not fit all
situations."

Please allow me to respectfully disagree with your sentiments. A few weeks
ago their was a thread regarding the on-runway collision a few years ago in
the Canary Islands (?). One of the major causes of that collision was the
lack of a standard communications protocol.

Whether one protocol is superior to another for a given situation is totally
irrelevant. The important thing is to have a consistent protocol. A pilot
who normally flies in and out of Podunk Airport and is used to
"double-clicking" would be in bad shape when he headed toward O'Hare. The
"double-click" might be fine at Podunk, but would be totally unacceptable at
O'Hare. The protocol should be designed for O'Hare and other major airports,
then adopted at all other airports.

After all, the double-click that is fine at Podunk would be foreign to a
pilot whose base is O'Hare. And one of the beauties of our system is that on
a given day, most airports will see the majority of their operations
involving aircraft that are not based there. Are they going to know about
the "double-click"?



"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Bill Denton ) wrote:

And, if you are in a crowded area, your "double-click" would probably
"step
on" someone else's communication. If an acknowledgement is not required,
it
would seem the best practice would be not to acknowledge, especially in
congested airspace...

And once again we see that one procedure does not fit all situations.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000
Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption
=---

Bill Denton ) wrote:

Please allow me to respectfully disagree with your sentiments. A few weeks
ago their was a thread regarding the on-runway collision a few years ago in
the Canary Islands (?). One of the major causes of that collision was the
lack of a standard communications protocol.
snip

Bill, returning due respect, IMO this is apples and oranges. As an avid
reader of Don Brown's monthly ATC column on AVWeb, I strive to be a "by the
book" communicator for all required transmissions. Recalling a few fatal
accident reports where poor communication of required transmissions was a
factor in the crash, I am in full agreement with you that standard, brief,
accurate responses for required transmissions is the *only* way to go. It
appears to me that you are misinterpreting my previous posts.

Most likely, you are a more experienced pilot than I, so you know there are
times when ATC will add non-standard phraseology, such as "Have a great
day/flight/Christmas, etc." Instead of clogging the frequency with "And
you have a nice day/Christmas/weekend, too" response, I simply double-
click, which takes all of less than a second of radio time, yet implies
"Thanks/You, too/Etc." This and the wind example are the *only* examples
of when I believe it acceptable to use the double-click response method.

If another pilot happens to start a transmission during the double-click, I
would wager that ATC will not miss a single word of that pilot's
transmission. And, it goes without saying to me that the level of
frequency activity determines if even a response to the "Have a nice day"
is warranted.

If everything were 100% standard, you would not hear ATC use non-standard
communications at all. However, routinely flying into Boston's Logan,
Teterboro, and Baltimore Washington over the last year, I can attest to the
fact that even these busy controllers will sometimes add non-standard, non-
required phrases. Occasionally responding to these *non-standard* (thanks,
have a nice day, have a great flight) phrases with a double-click is, IMO,
an effective communication shortcut. And up until this thread, I thought
it was quite trivial.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

(Ben Jackson) wrote in message news:KBvDb.553661$HS4.4223865@attbi_s01...
Somewhere I read that you should NOT acknowledge transmissions by just
pressing PTT briefly. Now, I had never heard that before, nor done it,
but since then I think I've heard it happen.

Can someone who is familiar with this explain the PTT-ack customs so I
know how to interpret it?


I am a student pilot and don't have a lot of experience, but while
completeing my 3 required full stop landings at a towered airport I
flew to Fort Worth Alliance airport. The tower used the double-click
routinely to confirm my readbacks of his instructions. This let me
know that I had read back correctly and I assume that he would have
repeated his instructions had I read back something incorrectly.

Kenny G.

Peter R. wrote in message ...
Nathan Young ) wrote:

Ie taxi instructions, hold-short, etc.

Really? Every towered airport (mostly in the Northeast US) in which I have
flown states in the ATIS "readback of all hold-short instructions
required." Additionally, I often hear the ground controller repeating a
hold short instruction and requiring the readback be verbatim.

I cannot imagine a ground controller allowing someone to double-click a
response to a hold short instruction.

Well, you cut the Roger/Wilco part of my post out in the response, so
it is a bit out of context. Most controllers aren't going to let a
double-click stand as a readback, but Roger/Wilcos are common.
However poor the practice - it happens regularly, particularly on
ground frequencies at Class D or Cs when they are not busy.

It also happens a lot by IFR pilots who do not seem to be on top of
their game -last weekend I heard a Mooney pilot who was just picking
up an IFR to get into Palwaukee. During the 15 minutes I was on his
frequencies, I heard him misread a clearance twice (leaving out final
destination). It was not caught/corrected by either controller, and
caused some minor headaches for the next controller in line.

-Nathan