Radio Procedure - Runway ID

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...

For a runway like "3" it might make sense to use the leading zero,
simply to avoid confusion with runway "30" -- but for higher numbers I
guess it's dumb, now that I think about it.


How does use of a leading zero avoid confusion with lower runway numbers?

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

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...

For a runway like "3" it might make sense to use the leading zero,
simply to avoid confusion with runway "30" -- but for higher numbers I
guess it's dumb, now that I think about it.


How does use of a leading zero avoid confusion with lower runway numbers?

It adds some redundancy. If there's both a 3 and a 30, and the tower says
"cleared to land runway three zero" but gets blocked right after saying
"three", a US pilot might head for the wrong runway. Under the ICAO rules,
however, the pilot would know that "runway three" is not a correct
designation.

--Gary

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...

It adds some redundancy. If there's both a 3 and a 30, and the tower says
"cleared to land runway three zero" but gets blocked right after saying
"three", a US pilot might head for the wrong runway. Under the ICAO rules,
however, the pilot would know that "runway three" is not a correct
designation.


Now you're introducing non-standard phraseology. In the US, the runway
designator precedes the landing clearance. It's "runway three zero cleared
to land", not "cleared to land runway three zero". If the tower says
"runway three zero cleared to land" but gets blocked right after saying
"three", a US pilot hasn't been issue a clearance to land on any runway.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

Does it matter? Is there a protocol for this?

He's right, there is no leading zero, but most pilots probably feel it's not
worth correcting when they hear it.

I wonder if this is just a regional or international thing.

I've heard the preceding zero used constantly at airports
outside North America (YPPH, YSSY, EIDW, and EHAM in particular), so it
might be something carried over from that.. Just a thought.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.sbcglobal.net/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDUDLjyBkZmuMZ8L8RAnhEAKDRfFXBVqBrcI7xq1pKsY g33UW1VwCgvhrQ
NXqD/JXw4dH6aYWLOsnQoLI=
=E2Ra
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"A Guy Called Tyketto" wrote in message
.. .

I wonder if this is just a regional or international thing.

I've heard the preceding zero used constantly at airports
outside North America (YPPH, YSSY, EIDW, and EHAM in particular), so it
might be something carried over from that.. Just a thought.


Use of a leading zero in runway designations is an ICAO standard that the US
does not follow.

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

"A Guy Called Tyketto" wrote in message
.. .

I wonder if this is just a regional or international thing.

I've heard the preceding zero used constantly at airports
outside North America (YPPH, YSSY, EIDW, and EHAM in particular), so it
might be something carried over from that.. Just a thought.


Use of a leading zero in runway designations is an ICAO standard that the
US does not follow.

Yup. And if you google-map satellite photos of Canadian airports, you'll see
leading zeros painted on the 1-9 runways, unlike in the US.

--Gary

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

"A Guy Called Tyketto" wrote in message
.. .

I wonder if this is just a regional or international thing.

I've heard the preceding zero used constantly at airports
outside North America (YPPH, YSSY, EIDW, and EHAM in particular), so it
might be something carried over from that.. Just a thought.


Use of a leading zero in runway designations is an ICAO standard that the
US does not follow.

Please provide a reference for that.

"Casey Wilson" N2310D @ gmail.com wrote in message
news:Z_X3f.209$t12.133@trnddc03...

Please provide a reference for that.


International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Annex 14, Volume I,
Aerodromes

In most cases, the leading zero probably doesn't hurt except to take
more airtime.

At your runway, however, "zero two" could easily be confused with "two
zero," which as you know is the opposite end of the same runway. Most
listeners will understand where you are and where you're going, but
watch out for that student pilot on his solo cross country who's about
to join the downwind for a right-hand runway 20 pattern!

"rps" wrote\

At your runway, however, "zero two" could easily be confused with "two
zero," which as you know is the opposite end of the same runway.

How could you do that? Zero has two syllables, and two has only one, plus
they sound nothing alike!
--
Jim in NC