When is just clicking PTT an acknowledgement?

xyzzy wrote:

Nathan Young wrote:

(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?


A lot of pilots use the double-click of the PTT as an acknowledgement
to a transmission that didn't need to be acknowledged. It is
primarily used as a courtesy to the controller to let them know that
you heard their last transmission - even if a reply wasn't required.

An example: Leaving Class D airspace.
Cherokee 62R: Tower, Cherokee 62R is clear to the North, have a good
afternoon.
Tower: 62R, freq change approved, have a good afternoon too.
Cherokee 62R: key the mike twice.

The key is (pun intended) - there are not many situations where the
double-click is acceptable. Unfortunately, many pilots key the mike
(or use Roger/Wilco), when a proper reply was required. Ie taxi
instructions, hold-short, etc.

Also, at uncontrolled airports to acknowledge friendly chit-chat on the
frequency. I know, it's not supposed to happen but it does

pilot 1: cessna xyz leaving 5 miles out
pilot 2: Joe is that you?
pilot 1: yeah it is, hey jeff
pilot 2: great day to fly, huh?
pilot 1: double click

It's a good way to end those conversations with reasonable brevity and
politeness

Better:
pilot 1: cessna xyz leaving 5 miles out
pilot 2: Joe is that you?
pilot 1: double click
--
Alex
Make the obvious change in the return address to reply by email.

Better:
pilot 1: cessna xyz leaving 5 miles out
pilot 2: Joe is that you?
pilot 1: double click

Best use 122.75
this is the designated frequency for pilot to pilot.
Hank

"alexy" wrote in message
...
Better:
pilot 1: cessna xyz leaving 5 miles out
pilot 2: Joe is that you?
pilot 1: double click

Or even better:

pilot 1: cessna xyz leaving 5 miles out
pilot 2: transmits no social chit-chat on a traffic frequency

(Ignoring of course that even the transmission from "pilot 1" leaves a lot
to be desired)

Pete

Xyzzy,

It's a good way to end those conversations with reasonable brevity and
politeness


Jeeze, don't you see how this is the ultimate irony? You waste precious
time on the frequency with that kind of senseless blathering, and then
care about ending it with brevity? shaking head in bewilderment

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Peter Duniho wrote:

"alexy" wrote in message
...

Better:
pilot 1: cessna xyz leaving 5 miles out
pilot 2: Joe is that you?
pilot 1: double click


Or even better:

pilot 1: cessna xyz leaving 5 miles out
pilot 2: transmits no social chit-chat on a traffic frequency

(Ignoring of course that even the transmission from "pilot 1" leaves a lot
to be desired)



True, but in the real world where I fly this kind of stuff is always
going on on the frequencies. So the double click is a polite way to
end it quickly.

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Xyzzy,


It's a good way to end those conversations with reasonable brevity and
politeness



Jeeze, don't you see how this is the ultimate irony? You waste precious
time on the frequency with that kind of senseless blathering, and then
care about ending it with brevity? shaking head in bewilderment


sorry, missed your ideal of perfection. Like it or not, listen to the
CTAFs on pretty weekend flying days and this goes on all the time. You
can get into a lather over the fact that it's happening, or use the
useful device of the double-click to end conversations you get drawn
into without being rude to the person who started it.

I guess instead of double-clicking to end the conversation I could give
the friendly, garrolous pilot a stern lecture on proper use of the CTAF,
taking up even more time on the frequency. That's probably what you
would do, huh?

Nathan Young wrote:

(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?


A lot of pilots use the double-click of the PTT as an acknowledgement
to a transmission that didn't need to be acknowledged. It is
primarily used as a courtesy to the controller to let them know that
you heard their last transmission - even if a reply wasn't required.

An example: Leaving Class D airspace.
Cherokee 62R: Tower, Cherokee 62R is clear to the North, have a good
afternoon.
Tower: 62R, freq change approved, have a good afternoon too.
Cherokee 62R: key the mike twice.

The key is (pun intended) - there are not many situations where the
double-click is acceptable. Unfortunately, many pilots key the mike
(or use Roger/Wilco), when a proper reply was required. Ie taxi
instructions, hold-short, etc.

Also, at uncontrolled airports to acknowledge friendly chit-chat on the
frequency. I know, it's not supposed to happen but it does

pilot 1: cessna xyz leaving 5 miles out
pilot 2: Joe is that you?
pilot 1: yeah it is, hey jeff
pilot 2: great day to fly, huh?
pilot 1: double click

It's a good way to end those conversations with reasonable brevity and
politeness

"xyzzy" wrote in message
...
I guess instead of double-clicking to end the conversation I could give
the friendly, garrolous pilot a stern lecture on proper use of the CTAF,
taking up even more time on the frequency. That's probably what you
would do, huh?

You could just ignore the "friendly, garrolous pilot" altogether. Why make
a bad situation worse?

I was departing a local uncontrolled airport today and heard a couple of
Cessnas talking to each other while sitting at the run-up area. They wasted
more than a minute of radio time chatting about how they'd switch over to
122.75 after takeoff.

I couldn't understand why they weren't already on 122.75 if they wanted to
sit there and chat.

Pete

Xyzzy,

or use the
useful device of the double-click to end conversations you get drawn
into without being rude to the person who started it.

I prefer to be rude to that one person instead of being rude to all those
others that try to get a useful word in on the CTAF. Not answering is the
solution.


I guess instead of double-clicking to end the conversation I could give
the friendly, garrolous pilot a stern lecture on proper use of the CTAF,
taking up even more time on the frequency. That's probably what you
would do, huh?


See above as to what I would do. Silence is golden.


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

No offense, but I have no beef with this if, like almost anything else
in flying, it is done with common sense. I think most pilots have
enough of this (increasingly rare) commodity to know that they
probably shouldn't do this on the approach frequency into DFW, but on
123.00 at some rarely-used airport where there is no frequencey
congestion, it really isn't a problem.

I fail to see how 'Hey Joe, have a good day' is any more wasted
'bandwidth' or 'time' than the center controller telling me to have a
good day when he switches me over to approach. It's no biggie, and
certainly nothing to get one's panties all in a bunch over. Same with
the use of 'non-standard' replies like 'no joy'. The point of all
communication is to *communicate*. If you understand what I meant by
my specific communication, then it was successful. Every
pilot/controller understands what 'no joy' means. I won't teach it to
my students, but they will eventually pick it up, if they fly
enough...most pilots I know do eventually.

Either way, it's certainly not worth worrying about.

Cheers,

Cap


Thomas Borchert wrote in message ...
Xyzzy,

It's a good way to end those conversations with reasonable brevity and
politeness


Jeeze, don't you see how this is the ultimate irony? You waste precious
time on the frequency with that kind of senseless blathering, and then
care about ending it with brevity? shaking head in bewilderment