Question about TRSA - KPSP

On 2008-05-20, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
It would have been significantly more helpful if the PSP ATCT Air Traffic
Manager was aware of correct/current phraseology and procedures and made
sure they were followed at his facility.

Going off on a tangent: The AMD factory is at KEZM, which is also the home
of Middle Georgia College's aviation campus. They've got ATC as well as
pilot and A&P programs. I spent a couple of hours the last time I was there
with the chief air traffic controller and instructor of the school, and he
showed me their tower simulator. Damn, that was nice.

Part of the good stuff about the simulator is that it has simulated air
traffic, settable by the instructor - and the student controls it by talking
just as he would on the radio. Most voice recognition systems have a limited
vocabulary. This one turns that into a featu if the student doesn't use
the proper phraseology, the system doesn't recognize it. I don't know if it
silently ignores it, or returns a "huh?"; I didn't try that - but when I
told it "American 1446, cleared to land runway three two left", it had no
trouble dealing with that. Nifty. Students come out of that class with the
proper language ingrained.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

On Tue, 20 May 2008 17:56:01 -0500, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote in
:

It was incorrect then as well.

In this case my late instructor provided the current terminology in
use at KPSP TRSA in 1996, and still in use today apparently. I see
his instruction as consistent with the vernacular in use, and
appropriate in this situation, despite it being obsolete. If someone
educated KPSP ATC personnel to the change in phraseology, and they
adopted it, I'd feel differently about it.

Perhaps you should phone them (760–318–3820), and point out their
error, or report it to FSDO if you feel so strongly about it.

"Jay Maynard" wrote in message
...

Going off on a tangent: The AMD factory is at KEZM, which is also the home
of Middle Georgia College's aviation campus. They've got ATC as well as
pilot and A&P programs. I spent a couple of hours the last time I was
there
with the chief air traffic controller and instructor of the school, and he
showed me their tower simulator. Damn, that was nice.

Part of the good stuff about the simulator is that it has simulated air
traffic, settable by the instructor - and the student controls it by
talking
just as he would on the radio. Most voice recognition systems have a
limited
vocabulary. This one turns that into a featu if the student doesn't use
the proper phraseology, the system doesn't recognize it. I don't know if
it
silently ignores it, or returns a "huh?"; I didn't try that - but when I
told it "American 1446, cleared to land runway three two left", it had no
trouble dealing with that. Nifty. Students come out of that class with the
proper language ingrained.


By the book the phraseology would be, "American 1446, runway three two left,
cleared to land".

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 May 2008 17:56:01 -0500, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote in
:

It was incorrect then as well.

In this case my late instructor provided the current terminology in
use at KPSP TRSA in 1996, and still in use today apparently. I see
his instruction as consistent with the vernacular in use, and
appropriate in this situation, despite it being obsolete. If someone
educated KPSP ATC personnel to the change in phraseology, and they
adopted it, I'd feel differently about it.


In this case your late instructor provided the incorrect terminology in use
at KPSP TRSA. Perhaps he was as ignorant as the controllers there and
didn't know any better. Instructors that don't make the effort to stay
current should cease instructing.



Perhaps you should phone them (760-318-3820), and point out their
error, or report it to FSDO if you feel so strongly about it.


It's unlikely that I'll ever use PSP. If the pilots that do use it are
content with ATC which uses obsolete terminology and incorrect procedures
that's fine with me.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

By the book the phraseology would be, "American 1446, runway three two
left, cleared to land".

Interesting. I previously hadn't noticed the unusual language order that is
required. I believe the dominant sentence structure in English is subject-
verb-object (SVO). Unless I'm mistaken (probably!) the phrasing of that
imperative is in SOV order. I suppose the FAA has a sound reason for
requiring such an unusual ordering.

On 2008-05-20, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Jay Maynard" wrote in message
...
but when I told it "American 1446, cleared to land runway three two
left", it had no trouble dealing with that.
By the book the phraseology would be, "American 1446, runway three two left,
cleared to land".

That may have been what I told it...that was a few weeks ago, and all I
remembered was that the instructor told me what to say, I said it, and it
worked. It had no trouble dealing with my rather distinctive voice.

I got invited back (the students want pictures with the Tron Guy and his
airplane), and I'll have to ask just how picky it is.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

In regards to the reply..Did you happen to ask him how you should
cancel a voluntary service you hadn't requested and weren't receiving?


The tower "assumes" that you are using the service unless you
specifically ask NOT to. For example after I landed and contacted
ground for a taxi back, they asked my intentions , etc and assigned me
a trasnponder code before I was handed off to tower.





On May 20, 4:05*pm, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in messagenews:daGdnQv2AqLCxa7VnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@earth link.com...



wrote in message
...

The controller I spoke to today specifically said "cancel stage III"
maybe
he is old school.......

Did you happen to ask him how you should cancel a voluntary service you
hadn't requested and weren't receiving?

The proper phraseology, back when the Stage services existed, was
"negative Stage II".

My I key must be sticky, that should be "negative Stage III".

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .

Interesting. I previously hadn't noticed the unusual language order that
is
required. I believe the dominant sentence structure in English is subject-
verb-object (SVO). Unless I'm mistaken (probably!) the phrasing of that
imperative is in SOV order. I suppose the FAA has a sound reason for
requiring such an unusual ordering.


I don't know what the reasoning was, to the best of my knowledge that
phraseology has been unchanged for at least fifteen years. In recent
history the requirements imposed by FAA orders have been void of sound
reasoning.

wrote in message
...

In regards to the reply..Did you happen to ask him how you should
cancel a voluntary service you hadn't requested and weren't receiving?

The tower "assumes" that you are using the service unless you
specifically ask NOT to.


You don't "ask NOT to" use a voluntary service, you decline it. Asking
implies the request can be refused.

I assume when you initially contacted the tower you were squawking 1200.
That should have told the tower controller you hadn't been receiving TRSA
services. If you had been you'd have been on an approach-assigned discrete
code accompanied by a data block showing your callsign and probably type
aircraft and runway assignment.

Yes that is a good point. I guess we can call it TRSA SPAM since we
have to "OPT out." :) They way the controllers handle it is that if
you contact tower they switch you to approch unless you "OPT out."
Just the fact that you are contacting them they then assume you want
TRSA services. I guess if you look at it from a safety point of view
then the "OPT out" method might be in everyones best interest. But
ultimately it is your choice.



On May 20, 6:50*pm, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:
wrote in message

...



In regards to the reply..Did you happen to ask him how you should
cancel a voluntary service you hadn't requested and weren't receiving?

The tower "assumes" that you are using the service unless you
specifically ask NOT to.

You don't "ask NOT to" use a voluntary service, you decline it. *Asking
implies the request can be refused.

I assume when you initially contacted the tower you were squawking 1200.
That should have told the tower controller you hadn't been receiving TRSA
services. *If you had been you'd have been on an approach-assigned discrete
code accompanied by a data block showing your callsign and probably type
aircraft and runway assignment.