When is just clicking PTT an acknowledgement?

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 =---

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 =---