PA 27????

[Illya Kuryakin]

Help me out here. I was given a PA27 as traffic. We all know there's no such thing, right? Well navcan, in their infinite wisdom has decided that an Aztec is a PA27? WTF? An Azrec is a PA23. I know this because I have a wad of flying time on them. According to navcan, the folks who brought you such stupidity as "Chicago tower, this is ABCA, still working CLE centre......." Has decreed the Apache to be a PA23 (which, of course it is) and an Aztec to be a PA27 (which, of course it isn't). WHY?
Illya

[JAHinYYC]

Wikipedia (yeah...I know great source) suggests that PA27 was the development name of the Aztec in 1960 and that it reverted to PA23 when the Apache was retired.

[Illya Kuryakin]

Don't know the years, but
The last Apache had the Aztec tail and 235 a side. PA-23-235
The first Aztec had the same tail, and 236 a side. PA-23-235
A PA27 never rolled off the assembly line.
Apache. PA-23-150/160/180/235
Aztec. PA-23-235/250
Illya

[I_Drive_Planes]

PA23 is the ICAO type designator for the Apache. They use PA27 to differentiate the Aztec despite the fact that according to Piper model nomenclature they are all PA-23s. For whatever reason ICAO uses P28A to designate all 180hp or less PA-28s (Cherokee 235s and Dakotas are P28B) even though there is no airplane in the ICAO list that already uses the designator PA28.

[rxl]

I seem to remember the Aztec PA23-250 having the designation of PAZT for ATC purposes.
Maybe the controller mis-read PAZT as PA27 ?

[trey kule]

why does ATC not advise "Aztec traffic"?

I can recall years ago, when filing flight plans we had to spell out the name of the destination, to avoid an error in the designator. IIRC, we also said. "Piper Aztec, not Piper PA 27 on our intial radio call"
Has all this changed?

As to your original question. Darned if I know, and if ATC advised me of PA 27 traffic I would be asking for clarification.

[Old Dog Flying]

Ther have been a great many screw-ups over the years. Many of the light aircraft were designated as "turbine" powered in the TC Aircraft Designator Handbook simply because the manufacturer called them turbo-charged as in the PA-28-R200T otherwise known as the Turbo Arrow.

With nothing better to do one night while manning YPK Tower, I went through the book, noted all the bloody errors and then wrote a scathing letter to TC Ottawa. Things were changed very quickly.. Most controllers today have no idea what type of aircraft they are looking at..this was brought to light by an instructor at .Cornwall ATC School during an aircraft recognition lesson when I corrected him a few times. Not a bloody clue.

[RexKrammer]

This thread might help...???

http://www.pprune.org/private-flying/10 ... -pa27.html

[Driving Comet]

Search ICAO doc 8643. We have this printed in the cab to use as a reference. If you search the online database it lists a Piper Aztec as PA27, so this isn't a "navcan in its infinite wisdom" thing. I think expecting someone to know they never rolled an Aztec off the line is a little much. If you say you're an Aztec then I'm going to assume you know what you're flying. Also I've never seen a TC aircraft handbook - like I said we use ICAO references.

http://www.icao.int/publications/DOC864 ... earch.aspx

As for most controllers not knowing aircraft today, I can assure you that's not the case where I work. Being good at our job means we have a solid understanding of aircraft and their performance. We are constantly quizing trainees to identify aircraft characteristics and aircraft that are sitting on the ramp.

[linecrew]

why does ATC not advise "Aztec traffic"?

Basically because some controllers don't necessarily know that a PA27 is called an Aztec by us pilot types. The data strip in front of them however would have PA27 on it so that's what they call it. As long as they help keep me safe, I don't care if they simply call it a "twin traffic".

[Old Dog Flying]

Aircraft recognition has always been a problem and when ICAO gets involved one never knows what vegetable soup you might get. After training dozens of controllers over my nearly 50 years in ATC I think that I know what the situation is like ..some were good, others marginal with attitude and others took up a less demanding career field.

I once made up a Power Point disc after photographing every General Aviation aircraft that might operate from our busy airport only to have it thrown in the garbage by the UOS because "we don't need this crap now that we have radar".

[Illya Kuryakin]

why does ATC not advise "Aztec traffic"?

Basically because some controllers don't necessarily know that a PA27 is called an Aztec by us pilot types. The data strip in front of them however would have PA27 on it so that's what they call it. As long as they help keep me safe, I don't care if they simply call it a "twin traffic".

Actually, "light twin" traffic would be a good way to go.
And....I say again, there IS no such thing as a PA27! Now that's how to confuse the issue, give them a type that just isn't! Don't buy it? Pull out a type certificate for the Aztec. It's a PA23.
Illya

[linecrew]

And....I say again, there IS no such thing as a PA27! Now that's how to confuse the issue, give them a type that just isn't! Don't buy it? Pull out a type certificate for the Aztec. It's a PA23.
Illya

I don't think anyone is arguing that the type certificate says what it says, its the ICAO 4 character naming convention they are stuck with that's at fault.

The same can be said for the Q400, which to ICAO is a DH8D...there no such thing as a D-model Dash 8 either (similarly the -100 & -200s are DH8A and DH8B respectively and the longer -300 is a DH8C). So maybe cut the voice on the radio a little slack. If they happen to know their aircraft types then they may say "Aztec" but it's not part of their training to 'know' that. You could always try to contact ICAO to see if they might change the ident for the good ol' Aztec.

[RexKrammer]

And....I say again, there IS no such thing as a PA27!

Ah, but there is! ICAO says that the abbreviation for a flight progress strip for a Piper Aztec is a PA27. Get over it. You're aware of this nomenclature, and so should be capable of realizing what you're looking for when a controller passes traffic to you as a "PA27" and not specifically "Aztec"

[Lotro]

Actually, "light twin" traffic would be a good way to go.

+1

Last I checked the purpose of passing traffic is to establish visual separation.

When I got my PPL no one taught me the difference between an Aztec, Twin Commanche, Apache, Seminole, Navajo or Seneca or for that matter the difference between a Cherokee, Arrow, Dakota, Warrior, or a Single Commanche. How about a Champ, Cub, Taylorcraft, Citabria or American Champion?

I don't think TC mandates aircraft recognition as a module in PPL ground school do they?

"PA27" is technically correct per ICAO, Aztec is also correct. I'd argue that "light twin" is most useful.

[oldtimer]

I wonder if the differences between various type designators can be for the differences in landing fees or user fees in various countries plus the possible seating capacity for Crash Fire Rescue purposes.
There is also a difference between various Merlin/Metro airplanes. A pilot's PPC endorsement will say SW3 for all short bodied Merlin 3/Fairchild 300 aircraft with an MTOW of 11,500 lbs (maximum seating for 9 passengers plus crew) and a Merlin 4/Metro2 aircraft (maximum seating capacity of 15 or 19 passengers plus crew) with a MTOW of 12,,500 lbs. An SW4 is the Metro 3 aircraft (19 plus crew) and an SW5 is the Metro 23 aircraft (19 passengers plus crew) which makes a difference in the Canadian PPC and training program for commercial air operators because there are slight differences in each type. But that is what TC calls the aircraft and as far as I can determine it seems to have some influence on what ATC uses to identify the various types.
But what does ATC/Nav Canada use to identify the various aircraft?
When I was flying, ATC would often refer a Metro 2 as a Merlin but a Metro 3/23 was usually a Metro. (No mention as to what the pilots called the airplane)
Then there is the question of the Metro 3 aircraft. The Metro 3 can have a MTOW of 14,500 lbs which makes it a light aircraft for wake turbulance seperation but the Metro 3 can also have a MTOW of 16,000 lbs which makes it a medium cagtegory airplane. It would be virtually impossible to visually identify the differences.