![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Captain,
Every pilot/controller understands what 'no joy' means. Uh, not, not at all. Look at my sig: I am from Germany, yet I hold a US pilot certificate. Do you really think every foreigner would understand that phrase? Dream on! OTOH, the correct phrase is in the book - I had to learn it. And I did. Foreign pilots using US airspace is one reason for standard phraseology - and a good one. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thomas Borchert wrote in message ...
Captain, Every pilot/controller understands what 'no joy' means. Uh, not, not at all. Look at my sig: I am from Germany, yet I hold a US pilot certificate. Do you really think every foreigner would understand that phrase? Dream on! OTOH, the correct phrase is in the book - I had to learn it. And I did. Foreign pilots using US airspace is one reason for standard phraseology - and a good one. No offense, but if you heard a pilot telling a controller, after being advised that he had King Air traffic 5 miles, 3 O'Clock "Skyhawk 24A, no joy on the King Air, looking" that you wouldn't be able to figure it out? I fly in a very heavy useage Class B airspace, with lots of international traffic...I have heard Air France pilots (with pronounced French accents) use that phrase before. To be honest, I'd much prefer my student to be looking for the traffic, flying the plane and saying 'No joy on the traffic' (if that is what he knows and has used many times before) than to be trying to think about whether 'Negative contact', 'No contact', 'Traffic not in sight', or 'looking for traffic' is the 'appropriate' response mandated by the AIM. Communication is about the conveyence of ideas and information. And, in standard flying in America, anyway, 'No Joy' is every bit as common as what the AIM says is correct. Used it a bunch, flown with other pilots who have used it a bunch, and never had any problem with somebody understanding the meaning of my phrase. It conveys the intended meaning. I do take your point, but certain words and phrases *do* become de facto 'standard' via their use. Go to any airport with heavy training activity, and you will hear pilots, when queried about what approach they would like to do next say they'd like to 'Shoot the VOR 18', or 'Shoot the ILS to the published missed'. The word 'shoot' is nowhere to be found in the FAA pilot/controller glossary. Would you understand the meaning? I've heard plenty if airline pilot say things like 'We'll take the visual for 18L, please'. That's probably 'nonstandard'. I'm not sure...can't find the 'standard' call in the glossary or the AIM. But I doubt any controller would misunderstand that statement, just as I doubt any controller would not understand 'No joy on the King Air'. It's about common sense. There are issues that affect safety, and there are issues that tend to be nothing more than about being 'right'. On the internet, far more debates seem to be about the latter than about the former. In terms of radio communications, I don't think 'non-standard' communications like 'no joy', 'shoot the approach' or having an approach controller tell the sector about the score of a big game (clearly not in the book, but has happened more than once to me) has anything to do with safety. There are much bigger issues to worry about than whether I should say 'Roger, right turn 220 to join' or 'Affirmative, right turn 220 to intercept the localizer' or 'Right turn 220 degrees to the localizer' is 'technically' the right phrase. If it communicates the meaning, then it has done its job. We can't memorize every 'correct' phrase for every single situation. Common sense will be required. And if applied, I don't think this is any kind of real problem. Cheers, Cap |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thomas Borchert wrote in message ...
Uh, not, not at all. Look at my sig: I am from Germany, yet I hold a US pilot certificate. Interesting - I am curious why? Costs? Living in the US? Originally from US? -Nathan |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Nathan Young" wrote in message om... Thomas Borchert wrote in message ... Uh, not, not at all. Look at my sig: I am from Germany, yet I hold a US pilot certificate. Interesting - I am curious why? Costs? Living in the US? Originally from US? -Nathan Could it be that it is about three times as much to get a German ticket? Same with ground (driver's) tickets. We had a German exchange student that was not allowed to drive while here, but a couple weeks before he was to go back, we taught him to drive, and got his license. Almost free. Cost of a couple K, over there. -- Jim in NC |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
B-58 Hustler History: http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/
- "Captain Wubba" wrote in message om... Thomas Borchert wrote in message ... Captain, Every pilot/controller understands what 'no joy' means. Uh, not, not at all. Look at my sig: I am from Germany, yet I hold a US pilot certificate. Do you really think every foreigner would understand that phrase? Dream on! OTOH, the correct phrase is in the book - I had to learn it. And I did. Foreign pilots using US airspace is one reason for standard phraseology - and a good one. No offense, but if you heard a pilot telling a controller, after being advised that he had King Air traffic 5 miles, 3 O'Clock "Skyhawk 24A, no joy on the King Air, looking" that you wouldn't be able to figure it out? I fly in a very heavy useage Class B airspace, with lots of international traffic...I have heard Air France pilots (with pronounced French accents) use that phrase before. To be honest, I'd much prefer my student to be looking for the traffic, flying the plane and saying 'No joy on the traffic' (if that is what he knows and has used many times before) than to be trying to think about whether 'Negative contact', 'No contact', 'Traffic not in sight', or 'looking for traffic' is the 'appropriate' response mandated by the AIM. Communication is about the conveyence of ideas and information. And, in standard flying in America, anyway, 'No Joy' is every bit as common as what the AIM says is correct. Used it a bunch, flown with other pilots who have used it a bunch, and never had any problem with somebody understanding the meaning of my phrase. It conveys the intended meaning. What you say is absolutely true. Until a near mid-air causes your recorded conversation to become an item of interest at your hearing. Then you would have been better off if you had used standard terminology so the ATC toad can't put the blame on you for any misunderstanding that caused a problem I have a good friend who used to use phrases like "Barker 69 coming at you at 350" when contacting a new center and establishing contact at FL 350. He used many other non-standard phrases he thought were cute. He failed to make a descent crossing with a near mid-air and at his hearing they played the tapes of all his conversations with center. He admitted later that, even to himself, his terminology sounded flippant and presented a picture of a "playboy" flying airplanes. He ended up with 2 weeks "on the beach" without pay. I do take your point, but certain words and phrases *do* become de facto 'standard' via their use. Go to any airport with heavy training activity, and you will hear pilots, when queried about what approach they would like to do next say they'd like to 'Shoot the VOR 18', or 'Shoot the ILS to the published missed'. The word 'shoot' is nowhere to be found in the FAA pilot/controller glossary. Would you understand the meaning? I've heard plenty if airline pilot say things like 'We'll take the visual for 18L, please'. That's probably 'nonstandard'. I'm not sure...can't find the 'standard' call in the glossary or the AIM. But I doubt any controller would misunderstand that statement, just as I doubt any controller would not understand 'No joy on the King Air'. It's about common sense. There are issues that affect safety, and there are issues that tend to be nothing more than about being 'right'. On the internet, far more debates seem to be about the latter than about the former. In terms of radio communications, I don't think 'non-standard' communications like 'no joy', 'shoot the approach' or having an approach controller tell the sector about the score of a big game (clearly not in the book, but has happened more than once to me) has anything to do with safety. There are much bigger issues to worry about than whether I should say 'Roger, right turn 220 to join' or 'Affirmative, right turn 220 to intercept the localizer' or 'Right turn 220 degrees to the localizer' is 'technically' the right phrase. If it communicates the meaning, then it has done its job. We can't memorize every 'correct' phrase for every single situation. Common sense will be required. And if applied, I don't think this is any kind of real problem. Cheers, Cap |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Nathan,
why? Costs? Living in the US? Originally from US? I got my glider and powered glider certificate here (separate here), then started to travel to the US a lot on business and pleasure. Managed to squeeze in the training for the ASEL certificate, got it and converted it to a German ASEL license. This was more cost effective, too. I still fly in both countries - in the US whenever I get a chance. It's just so much cheaper, and the scenery in most places I need to travel to is hard to match. Next is Scottsdale, AZ, in February. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|