Pilots draw a lot of our best practices from those who have mentored them along the way. And sometimes they end up with bad habits passed down through the generations of instructor to student, and pilot to mentee.
One AvBrief reader, Karl Richcreek, responded to last week’s Training Aviator newsletter with the following:
“As a military, commercial and private pilot for the last 40 years and 24,000+ flight hours I still learn something new with each training newsletter.
“Now here’s a pet peeve of mine: communication. With a university that has a very large flight program nearby, I get to hear a lot of different things.
“‘On the go.’ What exactly does this mean? Are you taking off, going around, departing the pattern? Can’t find this one in any communications manual. I hear this all the time, and unfortunately I heard this a lot at some of the major airports I used to fly out of.
“‘Taking the active.’ If I’m 10 miles out and I hear this, I have no idea what ‘the active’ is. At most airports there would be two choices, so I guess we’re left to wonder with that call. Years ago the call was ‘position and hold runway XX,’ and that was changed to ‘line up and wait runway XX.’ Why not train pilots to say it properly? It will definitely serve them well when they fly somewhere that has parallel runways.
“‘Any traffic please advise.’ If you just listen to the CTAF for a minute you’ll understand who’s in the pattern and what runway is in use. So now somebody answers that query and the frequency is needlessly blocked for the calls that actually matter.
“Another is a dissertation on the radio of where you’re at, how you’re going to enter the pattern, what your intentions are, and, if the UNICOM shares the frequency, what services you want. Nobody cares. Just state who you are, where you’re at, and make a standard entry into the pattern. Not only is that frequency for the airport you’re arriving at but likely the same frequency for many surrounding airports. Brevity is king!
“To be fair, I definitely don’t blame the students; they’re just doing what the CFI taught them, and the CFI is doing what they were taught. We need to do a better job teaching students proper communication.”
We want to hear from you. What are your pet peeves in pattern comms?
Pet peeve #1 in the greater Wichita area is factory test flights which use the PIC’s company pilot number without stating the type of aircraft. So, for instance “Beech Test 1XX 5 miles south” could be anything from a Bonanza to a T6 military trainer. Beech Test not having stated their type of aircraft, what do I as a local pilot about to enter the traffic pattern in my Cessna 120 plan for, a relatively slow Bonanza or a fast military trainer?
“Final call” from an aircraft that’s departed the pattern & not soon returning. Has ~zero actionable or SA content for listeners. Especially popular among the big flight training ops in southern AZ, it’s being taught/tolerated/made by CFIs on saturated CTAF freqs. Please stop.
Jim previously from SYI?
Nope, but we’re all related somehow.
This is an east coast peeve also. Hear it all the time from the local flight training.
“Another is a dissertation on the radio of where you’re at, how you’re going to enter the pattern, what your intentions are, and, if the UNICOM shares the frequency, what services you want. Nobody cares. Just state who you are, where you’re at, and make a standard entry into the pattern.”
I’ll agree if by “dissertation” you mean a long-winded response that wasn’t thought out. But what is meant by “make a standard entry into the pattern”? That could mean entering on the 45 midfield downwind, but it could also mean overflying the airport first, or a straight-in approach, or while flying a practice instrument approach. I DO want to know those details.
Brevity is important, but being TOO brief is not good.
Totally agree, those are all standard entries into the pattern, just let us all know which one you’re doing. Now if you say “Smithville traffic, I’m a blue RV currently over Center Hill Lake, westbound, maneuvering for the 45 of the active runway, planning a touch and go, any traffic please advise, Smithville traffic”. THAT’S a senseless dissertation.
Agree 100%
“Smithville traffic, Grumman 697, left base 24, Smithville traffic”. Call me a pedant, but repeating “traffic” at the end seems silly. Whereas “Smithville traffic, Grumman 697, left base, 24, Smithville” confirms which airport you’re talking about, and that’s all that’s needed. Two syllables saved!!
+1
If you report approaching from the downwind side of the runway then a 45 degree entry would be standard. If you are approaching from opposite the downwind then overflying the pattern with a turn back to enter on the 45 would be standard.
I’m kinda a cheater on that situation. When you approach from the opposite side of the downwind, you have the best possible view of the total traffic picture. You are looking directly at the airport and all runway and surface traffic. You are looking out at the other 45 and also the downwind. If you overfly this “big traffic flick” , you then end up having to make a blind turn 180 back into the traffic you have already evaluated. Just needlessly exposes you to a different traffic picture then. Take you 45 and downwind traffic picture and jump in behind the appropriate other traffic. Of course, might be so busy that you do have to overfly and return on a 45. I believe in judgement and common sense occasionally. Whether I have any or not.
When you approach from the downwind side on a 45 you can see the entire pattern as well as any traffic on the ground. Therefore, I don’t think it really matters which direction you approach from; either provides plenty of time and a good vantage from which to view the pattern.
The AFH recommends the following (in order):
Overfly the field 500′ above the traffic pattern (including the higher pattern used by turbine aircraft).Proceed 2 miles past the downwind.Descend to pattern altitude.Turn right back to the field.Enter downwind on the 45.If you follow this entry procedure you’ll be well away from pattern traffic before you descend, and you’ll have the same amount of time to evaluate the traffic picture as you would for a normal 45 degree entry from the downwind side.
No doubt. That’s why the AFH describes BOTH ways to enter from opposite the downwind side. You can either overfly above the pattern, or you can overfly at pattern altitude and enter downwind directly. As you note, the choice should be dependent on the situation. Overflying above the pattern affords a better opportunity to slot yourself in if there are numerous aircraft in the pattern.
Here’s another pet peeve: using aircraft color as a description instead of the last 3 of the tail number.
Unless you’re in a yellow cub or other striking color scheme, it’s almost impossible to actually make out the color scheme of an aircraft from a distance. At least by using the last 3 of the tail number, I can correlate an aircraft’s position on the traffic display to what I see out the window.
And what happens if there are two “blue Cessna”s in the pattern? Sure, there can be two “Cessna 56Y”s in the pattern too, but that is less likely to happen, and if it does, they can use their full tail numbers.
What about “high wing” or “low wing”?
The AIM says report with your type aircraft and tail number. If you say “Skyhawk 12345” I know to look for a high wing. If you say “Cherokee 12345” I know to look for a low wing.
What if I say Venterra 12345, do you know what to look for? LOL. I agree. We all know what the common aircraft types are, but when you have an experimental…
The AIM is a big book of recommendations–nothing in it is mandatory. If, however, you choose to ignore those recommendations and something bad happens, you’ll have to explain why you chose to ignore them. If you’re asking me how I would handle the specific situation you describe I would simply ID myself as “Experimental Venterra 12345.”
👍
As a thought, maybe you should be looking outside instead of your display and you would be able to see the aircraft by color. very few aircraft are painted the same way.
Yea try that when you’re in the pattern with 5 other flight school birds all the same color like the ERAU Cessnas
Nope, I do both and have never been able to distinguish a “Blue-and-White Cessna” from a “Green-and-White Cessna” from more than about half a mile away (if that). And if they are head/tail-on from me (such as in the crosswind or base as I’m approaching the midfield), by the time I can tell their color apart, it’s too late.
I would be willing to bet you a sandwich that you also would not be able to distinguish the color and paint scheme of an aircraft more than a mile or two away.
How about why do we care than an airplane is taxiing from the tie down area or fuel pumps to the active runway….
If it’s a blind taxiway that I can’t see from the end of the runway, I might care if I’m taxiing off said runway. Or if it’s low visibility or at night, I might care where another plane is taxiing.
Sure, I don’t care if I’m in the pattern or some distance away inbound, but other aircraft on the ground might care.
Because the AIM cares. TBL 4-1-1
I believe it is actually 4-2-3.
Situational awareness that an aircraft is in a taxiway is helpful. I’m not interested in some moron Harrison Ford landing on my taxiway while I’m on it, instead of the runway. It’s been known to happen.
AIM Dictates that it be announced. I find it useful and I will do it myself at my homebased Unicom one runway field with fuel pumps across the runway which I cannot see because a hangar blocks the view.
AIM 4-2-3
As Tigger the tiger says: “thats redickerous”
It’s as bad as the CareerCheck kids calling in on a “practice RNAV RWY 05, side step 23” at a single runway uncontrolled field. Who teaches this stuff… lol!!!
We used to have US Marine Corps “abbreviated flight briefing” (more tongue-in-cheek than actual practice but I used it from time-to-time as an aircraft flight leader) that went like this: “Catch up, keep up, shut up, and don’t F-up.” The main points, I think, were to get quickly organized as a flight but mostly to keep the over-the-air chatter concise, standardized, and professional.
A ‘crack from the peanut gallery’: Regarding the point of “nobody cares of what your intentions are,” as an airport line technician at a busy GA airport, I do care if you’re transient about how long you’re staying at the airport because your length of stay (quick turn or RON…remain overnight…will dictate the parking spot to where you’re marshalled and parked. So, in the interest of brevity and efficiency, to not force our customer service representatives to ask over UNICOM, and to help out us lowly line techs, I recommend transients state, without being asked, what their intentions are.
Right on Barry. As one who used to call in, I knew that the more concise info I could impart without totally hogging the frequency, the more expeditious the quick turn would be.
Advisory Circular (AC 90-66C) contains this information. Read it. Know it. Use it.
THIS!! ^^THE ONLY COMMENT YOU SHOULD READ^^ As soon as i saw the title to this “commentary” I knew it was going to devolve into yet another “crusty high time pilot” bitching about “low time pilots” and stories from the old days I don’t care about. I find it weird the author didn’t even reference this AC so new students could have a solid foundation based on an actual up-to-date publication instead of random observations. Always reference the publications to keep you on course!
IMO pilots landing at civilian non-towered airfields should not fly an overhead approach except under special circumstances like if there’s an air boss.
I heard a pilot call “xx miles out for the initial”. I didn’t know what he meant and I still don’t know what altitude he overflew the runway centerline upwind. I spoke with him on the ground and he and another pilot with military experience agreed i should know what it means.
Of the pilots I asked about this about half don’t know what it means. Decades of experience, airline experience… they don’t know what it means. The ones with military experience know what it means.
Isn’t it incumbent on the speaker to use language the listener will understand? Why are you talking if not to be understood?
Isn’t it incumbent on pilots to enter the pattern in a way familiar to others? Why are you using a pattern entry that will confuse other pilots? I think I know the answer… because it’s fun, saves time, and you are reliving your youth.
The “Overhead” maneuver mentioned above is common at our field, and we spend time briefing everyone we talk to and at safety seminars about how it works. If you’re not familiar, please refer to a document we should all know well, the AIM, specifically Paragraph 5-4-27, Overhead Approach Maneuver. It’s 2 paragraphs and explains it completely, including the standard language every pilot should understand.. Safe and efficient, and like you said, good fun for the right aircraft. Study up, give it a try
+1
“ On the go.”
“‘Taking the active”
“‘Any traffic please advise.”
As a pilot with much fewer hours, I know exactly what these mean, and I appreciate every one of these calls.
“Another is a dissertation on the radio of where you’re at, how you’re going to enter the pattern, what your intentions are”
Those of you who make this call-THANK YOU! It’s nice to know if you’re 10 miles outs vs 2 miles. I like knowing that you’re setting up for 29 vs 11. I like knowing that you’ll be a full stop vs touch and go. KEEP UP THE GREAT COMMS!
AIM 4-1-9(g)(1) and AC 90-66B_CHG1 10.3.1 both state:
Pilots stating, “Traffic in the area, please advise” is not a recognized Self-Announce Position and/or Intention phrase and should not be used under any condition.
Just don’t use that phrase, ever.
Which airport is it for? Multiple nearby airports are likely using the same frequency.
Who responds in which order?
What, exactly, are they supposed to “advise”?
What do you do if no one responds? There could be legally-operating NORDO aircraft “in the area”, so a lack of response certainly doesn’t mean there isn’t any traffic.
Hi there Gary,
I bet we could come up with hundreds of transmissions that are “not recognized”, but that does not make them useless.
As far as “which airport” is it for, then the confusion lies not with “please advise”, but with basic airport announcements.
A legally operating NORDO is legally operating whether or not someone ask “please advise”.
As for order, the same order that any and all radio transmissions are made.
As for “what are they advise”- no one is required to. But , how about something like-“This is NYZ, we’ve got 3 in the pattern, one NORDO, and winds are favoring 11, but we’re using 29 and are about to swing it around”.
But this one is specifically called out as something not to do, in two separate documents. So the FAA apparently really does not want pilots to use this phraseology.
The problem is that the phrase is open-ended. There is nothing included in the phrase to coordinate who responds, when, and about what. What happens if NYZ and NAB both try to respond at the same time?
Everything you mentioned in the possible response should have already been learned by simply listening on the frequency.
New pilots, take heed.
This topic usually comes up about twice a year, either just before Oshkosh or just after, during a slow news cycle. It’s one of the more contentious subjects in general aviation, right up there with the argument over whether you’re supposed to call it “AirVenture” or “Oshkosh.”
Don’t worry about it, and get past any mic fright.
There will always be a few old curmudgeons who critique every syllable, pause, and breath somebody makes over the radio. They’ll tell you exactly what you should have said, what you shouldn’t have said, and the precise phraseology they believe you should have used.
Listen, don’t tie up the frequency talking about your feet falling asleep. Keep transmissions concise and relevant. But don’t get so worried about “Can I say this?” or “Am I allowed to phrase it that way?” that you fail to communicate something useful.
If you have something relevant to say that could make the situation clearer or safer, speak up.
Are you having to dodge some clouds coming into the airport and would like a better picture of the airport environment? Say so. Need clarification? Ask.
The purpose of the radio is communication, not demonstrating that you’ve memorized a script.
Use standard phraseology when you know it-but don’t worry when you don’t, plain english is fine. Be concise. Listen before transmitting. Don’t unnecessarily occupy the frequency. But above all, communicate what you think you need to communicate; you are PIC.
Don’t let fear of saying something imperfectly keep you from saying something important because somebody listening from their recliner thinks he’s an FAA representative standing by to report anyone who keys the mic at the wrong time.
Say what you think needs to be said. Then get back to flying the airplane.
Well said Robert.
Well here’s my pet peeve: instruments students spewing out completely irrelevant instrument terminology to a bunch of VFR pilots in the pattern. I think this is not only unhelpful but dangerous. “Mayberry Traffic, N123 is on the RNAV 32 circle to land runway 24, Mayberry.” This basically communicates nothing. And yet you’re barging in on some apparent straight-in path to runway 32, as opposed to a safe pattern approach, for a double whammy of risk factors for a mid-air collision. The FAA should really address this with CFIIs.
I teach instrument pilots to report in as “Mayberry Traffic, (aircraft) 123 is 8 miles South on the RNAV 32, will enter the (left/right) downwind for Runway 24, Mayberry”.
Other instrument pilots will want to know my intentions (because they are likely also practicing some approach at that airport), but it also lets VFR pilots know what I’m doing in a manner that they will understand.
A straight-in approach IS a valid way to enter the pattern, and instrument-rated pilots have just as valid reasons to practice approaches at non-towered airports as VFR pilots have to fly in the pattern. The important part is that the communication is understandable by both the IFR and VFR pilots.
Suggestion to help the VFR traffic: Replace “On the RNAV 32” with “Straight in runway 32, practice instrument approach.”
Except that there may be multiple approaches to the same runway which start out on very different trajectories before the final approach fix.
For a VFR pilot, knowing my distance and cardinal direction is enough, but if I’m flying a precise path following Approach A to runway 32 and another pilot is flying a precise path following Approach B to runway 32, I would want to know that.
Ok, when the two practice approach guys (four people listening on frequency, right?) realize, hey, it sounds like there’s somebody else out here doing a practice approach to the same runway, then you guys coordinate with each other. That’s fine. But remember, the vfr/student pilots in the area won’t have a clue what you’re talking about. Again, that’s fine; that’s between you guys. It’s still incumbent upon ifr users of the airspace to also communicate with the vfr/student pilots in a way they can understand. It not their responsibility to understand ifr-speak. Approach waypoints do not appear on their vfr sectional charts, they’ve never seen an approach chart, or for matter, know what an approach even is.
“RNAV” is not a VFR word so this is still problematic. PPL students don’t understand it, and nor will any old coots who refused to get their IFR done. Your method is still an improvement but the vast majority of instrument students in my area don’t even put in a modicum of effort. They seem to think that everyone around them is IFR and speaks IFR, and I think that’s a blatantly wrong assumption, and dangerous.
At your home base airport it will serve you well to ask a local CFII to increase your situational awareness by showing you those instrument approach waypoints and how they are located on a VFR chart of your local area
As they say a good pilot is always learning
Radio Pet Peeves:
1. “Taxi to the active” especially to ground control at an airport with multiple runways by a pilot based there!
2. Non-standard phraseology for altitude. This one is rampant and seems to be perpetuated by supposedly knowledgeable aviation writers/bloggers/social media types.
3. Overly verbose position reports or initial call-ins to ATC.
Also remember, brevity is key, but so is good communication. It does no good to be brief if someone has to ask you to repeat yourself!
OK – I’ll play….
“Silver Springs traffic, Cessna XYZ will be transitioning your area at 10,000 feet….” OK, first, what you are you changing the area in to? You don’t “Transition” airspace”, you can “transit” it….or or just say that your crossing over the field 5,000 feet above the traffic pattern (or don’t bother with the call….).
“Silver Springs Traffic, Piper UVW is ten miles north, heading west at 9,000 feet” Well, that certainly tested your radio, but tell me why Silver Springs traffic cares – you are well outside the traffic area, not headed to (or from) the field, and your flight will in no way affect anyone in the pattern.
It does seem like CFI’s these days are teaching student pilots that if they haven’t keyed the mic to say SOMETHING in the past three minutes, the wings are going to fall off. It adds to frequency congestion, adds no real value, and anyone that has a radio probably has ADS-B in and out so they know that you’re there. NORDO airplanes aren’t going to hear you anyway. CTAF is assigned to airports – not enroute traffic – so broadcasting your position randomly when ten miles from an airport (unless you are inbound to it) doesn’t mean everyone is going to hear it – they may be tuned to center, approach, or monitoring guard for stray cats….
+1
Realizing there will be different thoughts on this, but looking for the most acceptable (or unacceptable) for safety, clarity & expediency.
Set up:
You’re approaching an untowered N-S runway from the east with active Rw 36 using (published) Left pattern.
Better to announce “… crossing mid-field Rw 36 for a 270° turn to a 45° entry to Left downwind Rw36, (airport), or, announce a 45° entry to the Right downwind Rw36 (airport).
Tnx. JPL
Since the published pattern is a left pattern, that’s what you need to fly. Nobody’s going to be looking for you if you’re flying a pattern opposite of what is charted, and if anything goes wrong, you’re going to be found at fault. The only airports where there should (possibly) be planes flying both left and right patterns to the same runway are towered fields where a tower controller is intentionally managing aircraft in both patterns.
So only your first proposed transmission is correct. Some (not me) might say it’s wordy. But I always figure that I want my intentions to be understood by the lowest common denominator, which might be a student solo pilot. I’d probably say “crossing midfield 36 then a big left turn to enter on the 45, left downwind 36” because I feel like that is even more easily understandable than talking about a 270.
(Or maybe I meant big right turn. Whichever applies.)
…or perhaps just “ .. Right circle back for the down wind to Rw36”. Either way, your points are well taken and I agree with both. And you’re correct in that the only time I’ve heard/used the opposite pattern has been with ATC instruction.
Tnx! JP
At the point that you are still east of the field, giving every detail about how you plan to enter the pattern is probably pointless. Why not simply state “crossing mid-field Rwy 36 westbound to maneuver for pattern entry 36 at xxxx’ “. The correct entry in this scenario is a “tear drop” which means that you continue west PAST the traffic pattern, then do a rt 180 followed by the 45 entry to downwind. You can state the remaining details of your pattern entry as you maneuver. i.e. “xxxx 3 miles west, maneuvering make to the 45 to left downwind 36” etc.
Saying the proper name of a facility on the first call is useless. Miami Center can be just “Center.” “Palm Beach” Approach and “Boca” tower can all be truncated. They know who they are.
Confirming altimeter settings and squawk codes is not mandatory, but is good technique,
Only three readbacks are mandatory: runway assignments, hold short instructions, and LAHSO instructions. Confirming procedures, headings, and altitudes is also good form.
I agree that the facility name is not needed, but adding it in can be helpful (if you know what it is) for two reasons: 1) if you think you’re calling one facility but didn’t change the frequency, calling up with the wrong name when they aren’t expecting you can clue them to tell you you’re on the wrong frequency, and 2) many pilots have a tendency to start talking while they’re keying the mic causing the first half-second or so of their transmission gets cut off, so cutting off the “Boca” part of “Boca Tower” prevents the important part of the transmission being cut off.
You start “truncating” it follows you down the road. When you’re climbing via a SID or descending via a STAR you have to name the procedure. Too many times I hear “Departure this is N123 climbing via”. For the rest of us, via what? Same goes for the descents. It all falls into the SA category.
“Taking the active.” Where are you taking it?
Unfortunately, the pilot’s who need these reminders most are the occasional warriors who do not read these newsletters, or do WINGS, or anything else to stay up to date.
Many years of BSing on the radio with pilots. But as a pilot, the only one that really aggravates me is, “any traffic in the area please advise.” Don’t remember what big school started that….and then it took off. And as others said, if you’re practicing or even doing actual an IFR approach, state your position in VFR pilot terms. VFRs don’t usually have a clue where an instrument approach fix is from their airport. (and many of them are unpronounceable anyhow).