Altimeter Question

Hi,

In article ,
wrote:
International maritime radio license procedures...

Umm...this is rec.aviation.xxxx

Andy

On Apr 22, 10:13*pm, Andy Hawkins wrote:
Hi,

In article ,
* * * * * wrote:

International maritime radio license procedures...

Umm...this is rec.aviation.xxxx


Was the mayday relay message I posted more efficient and/or clearer
than the aviation version? Being licensed in both aviation and
maritime R/T, my choice would be the maritime format of distress
messages.

Cheers

Hi,

In article ,
wrote:
Was the mayday relay message I posted more efficient and/or clearer
than the aviation version? Being licensed in both aviation and
maritime R/T, my choice would be the maritime format of distress
messages.

It might be more efficient and clearer, but isn't necessarily something a
listening pilot would be expecting to hear, which is the point of
standardised phraseology.

Andy

In article 2b88b90d-4c8f-4ec7-a888-059da6b31b64
@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com, says...
On Apr 22, 10:13*pm, Andy Hawkins wrote:
Hi,

In article ,
* * * * * wrote:

International maritime radio license procedures...

Umm...this is rec.aviation.xxxx


Was the mayday relay message I posted more efficient and/or clearer
than the aviation version? Being licensed in both aviation and
maritime R/T, my choice would be the maritime format of distress
messages.

As am I - but I would disagree with you. The maritime phraseology -
IMO, is slower and less intuitive (maday relay is a good example).

Over.

--
Duncan

On Apr 23, 9:04*pm, Dave Doe wrote:
In article 2b88b90d-4c8f-4ec7-a888-059da6b31b64
@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com, says...

On Apr 22, 10:13*pm, Andy Hawkins wrote:
Hi,

In article ,
* * * * * wrote:

International maritime radio license procedures...

Umm...this is rec.aviation.xxxx

Was the mayday relay message I posted more efficient and/or clearer
than the aviation version? Being licensed in both aviation and
maritime R/T, my choice would be the maritime format of distress
messages.

As am I - but I would disagree with you. *The maritime phraseology -
IMO, is slower and less intuitive (maday relay is a good example). *

Over.


Yawn

Cheers

On Apr 23, 8:33*am, Andy Hawkins wrote:
Hi,

In article ,
* * * * * wrote:

Was the mayday relay message I posted more efficient and/or clearer
than the aviation version? Being licensed in both aviation and
maritime R/T, my choice would be the maritime format of distress
messages.

It might be more efficient and clearer, but isn't necessarily something a
listening pilot would be expecting to hear, which is the point of
standardised phraseology.



I accept that point, so why not stadardise across maritaime, ham and
air?

Cheers

WingFlaps schrieb:

I accept that point, so why not stadardise across maritaime, ham and
air?

Feel free to send your suggestions to ICAO. In the meantime, stick to
the standard.

Thomas Borchert wrote:
WingFlaps,


Well it's completely redundent, a waste of time and could be confused
with "say again". All you need to do is just repeat the message!


Your opinion is all fine and well. However, the gold standard on this is ICAO. As
Andy says, "I say again" is ICAO standard phraseology per Annex 10 Volume II
(http://www.caa.govt.nz/ICAO/Annex_10..._Cmp_Stmt.pdf).

For the US, check the Pilot Controller Glossary as the definitive and official
source for phraseology. Under "I", you'll find:

I SAY AGAIN- The message will be repeated.


This is how it should be:

Mayday relay, mayday relay, mayday relay, (station 3x), Received
mayday (distress station) (distress message reproduced), mayday


And the source for that is?



ICAO Annex 10, Volume 2, part 5.2, Distress Communications.
The rules come from ITU Radio Regulations.

--

Tauno Voipio
tauno voipio (at) iki fi

Tauno,

Mayday relay, mayday relay, mayday relay, (station 3x), Received
mayday (distress station) (distress message reproduced), mayday


And the source for that is?



ICAO Annex 10, Volume 2, part 5.2, Distress Communications.
The rules come from ITU Radio Regulations.


Actually, distress communications seems to be part 5.3. I could not
find any wording to the effect quoted above. Could you point me to it?


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

On Apr 18, 4:56 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Andy Hawkins wrote :



Hi,

In article ,
Bertie the wrote:
They don't use any of the Q codes in the US. QNH is one of the few
still in use around the rest of the world, the rest are pretty much
archaich. You stil occasionally hear QFE in the UK, but no airlines I
know of are using it anymore since modern airplanes aren't designed
around their use (QFE settings on the altimeter **** up the computers
since the computer is anticipating a QHN setting to run a bunch of
other devices in the airplane, of which pressurisation is the most
relevant) Very occasionally you hear QSY which is "see you, I'm going
to talk to someone else" and QDM almost never nowadays, but it used
to be relatively common and it's Mag direction to a station. And even
less used QDR which is the Mag radial from a station. I think the
Maritime world might use a lot more of them still, though.

The UK PPL syllabus still teaches QNH, QFE (the military use it here,
and some civil airfields will give it in the initial response). QDM,
QDR and QTE (true bearing) are also taught. QDM is on the R/T
'practical' test generally.

But, like sticking to imperial measurements, I think you stand alone.
Britain is still clinging to a number of archaic aviation terms (you
still gotta know which direction to go whatever you choose to call it!)
One of my favorites is the "Pan" call. Nobody uses that anymore except
you guys. I had an entertaining few minutes in Germany listening to some
Nigel making one of these a few years back. It went something like this.
The Nigel Skipper is played Terry Thomas and the German controller by
Hardy Kruger in this re-creation.

Boffo Air 2234 "Rhine, Boffo 2234, PAN PAN PAN"
ATC "Station calling?"
BA 2234 "Rhine this is Boffo 2234, PAN PAN PAN"
ATC. "Boffo 2234, pass your message"
BA 2234 "Rhine, this is Boffo 2234, PAN PAN PAN"
ATC, "Boffo 2234, say again?"
BA2234 "Rhine, this is a PAN call from Boffo 2234"
(at this point you can almost hear the Boffo skiper thinking "bloody
foreigners"
ATC, "Boffo 2234, are you declaring an emergency?"
BA2234 "Negative Rhine, Boffo 2234 is making a PAN call"
ATC, -silence-
BA 2234, Rhine, we have a pasenger having a heart attack, we're mkaing a
PAN call"
ATC, "Boffo 2234, do you wish to declare an emergency?"
BA 2234 "Nega- Oh, yes, yes, we're declaring an emergency, we'd like to
divert to Frankfurt immediatly. "
ATC, roger 2234, fly heading 330 and descend now to FL 150"

No ****, this really happened. I think it actually took longer than
this. The Brit captain just wouldn't let go....

I'm not sure but I think it was Thomas Cook.

Bertie

Nice. It reminds me of this funny commercial: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmOTpIVxji8