A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

When to acknowledge ATC



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 5th 05, 10:52 PM
Newps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Andrew wrote:
ATC says "radar contact, 20 miles south of XYZ, proceed on course". Do
you acknowledge this transmission?


Yes.


How about when ATC says "altimeter
setting 2992" on your first contact after a handoff? Does this require
acknowledgement?


No, none is desired either.


In the past, I've acknowledged such things if the controller was not
busy. But I've heard all kinds. Some people read back the altimeter
setting.


Worst of the bunch.

I've even heard people reading back the "radar contact"
message. I feel that this is a waste of bandwidth.


Yes.

However, I don't
know what ATC prefers. Do they want read back for everything,


No.


or should
we shut up as much as possible?


Pretty much.

  #2  
Old May 5th 05, 10:57 PM
Paul Tomblin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In a previous article, Newps said:
How about when ATC says "altimeter
setting 2992" on your first contact after a handoff? Does this require
acknowledgement?


No, none is desired either.


However, some Canadian controllers, if you don't read it back, will give
it to you again. But other Canadian controllers say it's not required.
You can't win.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Knuth is definitely the ******* something from hell. I just admire him
from a distance, it's safer.
-- Peter da Silva
  #3  
Old May 5th 05, 11:36 PM
Andrew
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I was flying through Chicago last night, VFR outside class B. The
controller was busy. When he said "01U radar contact, xx miles from yy"
I decided to not say anything back. He was busy talking to many
airplanes. A few minutes later, he repeated the "01U radar contact, xx
miles from yy". I guess he wanted an acknowledgement, even though he
was busy.

  #4  
Old May 5th 05, 11:44 PM
Jim Burns
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I've found that in the Midwest, they like a response even if they are busy.
I've found that down south when they are busy, they want you to keep quiet.
I try to go with the flow but realize that you don't know what the flow is
on initial call up.
Jim

"Andrew" wrote in message
ups.com...
I was flying through Chicago last night, VFR outside class B. The
controller was busy. When he said "01U radar contact, xx miles from yy"
I decided to not say anything back. He was busy talking to many
airplanes. A few minutes later, he repeated the "01U radar contact, xx
miles from yy". I guess he wanted an acknowledgement, even though he
was busy.



  #5  
Old May 5th 05, 11:46 PM
Happy Dog
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Andrew" wrote in message

I was flying through Chicago last night, VFR outside class B. The
controller was busy. When he said "01U radar contact, xx miles from yy"
I decided to not say anything back. He was busy talking to many
airplanes. A few minutes later, he repeated the "01U radar contact, xx
miles from yy". I guess he wanted an acknowledgement, even though he
was busy.


He *needs* an acknowledgement.

moo


  #6  
Old May 6th 05, 05:26 AM
Chris Schmelzer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article . com,
"Andrew" wrote:

I was flying through Chicago last night, VFR outside class B. The
controller was busy. When he said "01U radar contact, xx miles from yy"
I decided to not say anything back. He was busy talking to many
airplanes. A few minutes later, he repeated the "01U radar contact, xx
miles from yy". I guess he wanted an acknowledgement, even though he
was busy.



Just respond back something like 7-sierra-papa...just last of your tail#
is sufficient typically

--
Chris Schmelzer, MD
Capt, 110th Fighter Michigan ANG
University of Michigan Hospitals
Ann Arbor, MI
  #7  
Old May 6th 05, 03:56 AM
Peter R.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Newps wrote:

In the past, I've acknowledged such things if the controller was not
busy. But I've heard all kinds. Some people read back the altimeter
setting.


Worst of the bunch.


Tough cookies. You're getting it read back because that's my memory
aid.

--
Peter


















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  #8  
Old May 6th 05, 06:27 AM
Peter Duniho
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Newps wrote:

In the past, I've acknowledged such things if the controller was not
busy. But I've heard all kinds. Some people read back the altimeter
setting.


Worst of the bunch.


Tough cookies. You're getting it read back because that's my memory
aid.


It's better than just a memory aid (though that's useful too). A readback
of information like that is critical to air safety. No big deal if you get
the last digit wrong, but if you mess up something to the left of the
decimal, that's serious business. Best to check and make sure you heard it
right the first time.

A controller that thinks it's dumb to read back the altimeter setting is
probably not even listening to the readback. Obviously in that situation,
the readback is useless. But other controllers aren't so inconsiderate.

Of course, as the FAA has recently decided, if ATC fails to correct an
incorrect readback, the pilot is still to blame for whatever happens
subsequently. It's no wonder at least one controller has such a blasé
attitude about the issue. He's safe, dumb, and happy sitting in his chair,
while the pilot takes all the risk.

Pete


  #9  
Old May 6th 05, 01:13 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

It's better than just a memory aid (though that's useful too). A readback
of information like that is critical to air safety. No big deal if you
get the last digit wrong, but if you mess up something to the left of the
decimal, that's serious business. Best to check and make sure you heard
it right the first time.


Altimeter settings don't tend to vary a great deal from one controller to
the next. If you're issued one that differs by more than a few points from
the previous then it's a good idea to check on it.



Of course, as the FAA has recently decided, if ATC fails to correct an
incorrect readback, the pilot is still to blame for whatever happens
subsequently.


The FAA never made any decision like that or changed the requirements for
controllers to verify readbacks.


  #10  
Old May 6th 05, 05:45 PM
George Patterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

Altimeter settings don't tend to vary a great deal from one controller to
the next. If you're issued one that differs by more than a few points from
the previous then it's a good idea to check on it.


I rarely get an altimeter setting from a controller anyway. I make a point of
picking up the setting from AWOS stations in flight and from ATIS before arrival
or departure. As long as you tell the controller you have the ATIS, about the
only time they'll give you the setting is as a gentle notice that you don't seem
to be flying at the altitude at which you're supposed to be.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What F-102 units were called up for Viet Nam Tarver Engineering Military Aviation 101 March 5th 06 03:13 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.