Radio phraseology

[Big Pistons Forever]

Assuming that things are not too busy I always try to check out of a freq with " good day/good night" and start with a "good morning/afternoon/night". I also make a point of thanking a controller that went the extra mile to make thing easier/better for me.

Obviously you don't want to tie up the airwaves when it is busy but I see no reason you can't be polite as well as professional.

Not included in the approved is the phrase "check remarks". Used judiciously when responding to informational ATC transmissions I think it is a good way to confirm to ATC that you have understood what they are saying without reading it back

Finally there is a disconnect between the what all the books say and what I would consider is now considered an almost universal best practice.

When calling ATC start with your call sign and when replying to ATC finish with your call sign

eg

You: ABC request lower

ATC: ABC descend 5000

You: Descend 5000 ABC

[airway]

When calling ATC start with your call sign and when replying to ATC finish with your call sign

eg

You: ABC request lower

ATC: ABC descend 5000

You: Descend 5000 ABC

Why?

You are supposed to start any transmission with your call sign, so the receiving station knows the correct aircraft is replying at the start of the message (which could be long), rather than at the end. (I think the station you are calling may be left out if you have already established communications).

Also, as an aside, I think it is best to read back any clearance with the same wording and in the same order it was given to you.

[Pop n Fresh]

I agree with the concept. Seems like a good way to express, "I got it and will descend to 5000 without talking to you until later."

I tend to start with who I'm calling. "Meigs field, flux capacitor equipped Piper Cub, Charlie Foxtrot - X-ray X-ray X-ray. At 5500 feet approximately 8 miles to the south inbound for landing."

[Big Pistons Forever]

When calling ATC start with your call sign and when replying to ATC finish with your call sign

eg

You: ABC request lower

ATC: ABC descend 5000

You: Descend 5000 ABC

Why?

You are supposed to start any transmission with your call sign, so the receiving station knows the correct aircraft is replying at the start of the message (which could be long), rather than at the end. (I think the station you are calling may be left out if you have already established communications).

Also, as an aside, I think it is best to read back any clearance with the same wording and in the same order it was given to you.

Because the first part of a transmission is often garbled or cut off particularly when it is very busy

Eg

ATC: ABC turn right 250

You: ABC turn right 250

What everyone on the freq hears: Squeel urn right 250.
So now everybody on the frequency is wondering if that transmission was for them

But if we do it the "industry standard" way

ATC: ABC turn right 250

You: Turn right 250, ABC

What everyone on the frequency hears: Squeel right 250, ABC
Everybody listening now knows that the partially blocked transmission was from ABC so they can ignore it.

[B-rad]

Notice that "roger" "wilco" "over" "break" and "out" are all in there but "copy" and "break break" is not. I suspect that "copy" is not in there because it means the same thing as "roger" to most people. So you might as well just use "roger".

There is a note that I quoted above that explains "While it is not practical to set down precise phraseology for all radiotelephone procedures.....Appendix [A] contains a list of words and phrases that should be used where applicable."
By this it implies that there are other accepted terms that are not listed. BREAK BREAK however is listed in the CAP413 and I have copied it below. Ref:CAP413 standard words and phrases 2.18, table 8, page 9

BREAK
Indicates the separation between messages.
BREAK BREAK
Indicates the separation between messages transmitted to different aircraft in a busy environment.
NOtE: The phraseology “BREAK BREAK” may be confused with an instruction to an aircraft formation and should be used with caution.


From further research what I can gather on the term COPY (aside from being meant as literally writing something down) can be used when a third party has received a message or a general broadcast that was not directly spoken to them. For example if your relaying a message through a middle man but the message happened to be heard by all you could say GABC COPIES.
As far as I can tell this would be meant as in I have heard and understood the message also. I guess you could use it if traffic is being passed along and rather then FSS speaking to every individual you could "COPY" the traffic advisory since "ROGER" would not be the appropriate term to use if you were not being spoken to. So ROGER is a direct message received and COPY is for an indirect message received.
I think this is a very unofficial summary tho and I have no reference to back it up so it's hearsay at this point.

[B-rad]

Finally there is a disconnect between the what all the books say and what I would consider is now considered an almost universal best practice.

When calling ATC start with your call sign and when replying to ATC finish with your call sign

eg
You: ABC request lower
ATC: ABC descend 5000
You: Descend 5000 ABC

Big Pistons Forever, I also like the call sign at the end even if its just BC. And actually As far as I know, the correct way for a read back is to repeat the instruction and then finish with your call sign. In the CAP413 this is how they are showing the examples. If you go to Chapter 3 page 3 there is a good example outlined.
https://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP%20413 ... 2021_4.pdf

For calls made on 126.7 I find it helpful when others finish position reports with their call sign because I don't always pay attention and copy their call sign right off the start until I hear something that is relevant to me and then I am needing a way to call them back. So usually finishing with a BC or YZ is quick, replaces the ACTPA while still implying the same thing, and is helpful for me to reply promptly.

[CpnCrunch]

This was discussed here a while ago in a previous thread, but I guess it doesn't hurt to rehash it.

ICAO standard is to read back ATC clearances with your callsign at the end. Canada and USA standard is to always put your callsign at the start. The ICAO change was made a number of years ago to prevent confusion if the start of a transmission gets cut off. I believe most airline pilots use the ICAO version.

Also, the same for AFFIRM/AFFIRMATIVE. Affirm is ICAO, and affirmative is used in Canada/USA. Again it's a change that was made by ICAO a number of years ago, due to possible confusion between "negative" and "affirmative". There's no worry about confusion between confirm/affirm because one is a question and the other is an answer.

[ahramin]

From further research what I can gather on the term COPY (aside from being meant as literally writing something down) can be used when a third party has received a message or a general broadcast that was not directly spoken to them.

Sounds like an example of "learning" standard phraseology by following what you heard someone else make up.

In your example above the correct reaponse would be either nothing, if no confirmation of having understood is required, or ROGER if it was. Either way, COPY would be incorrect.

[B-rad]

From further research what I can gather on the term COPY (aside from being meant as literally writing something down) can be used when a third party has received a message or a general broadcast that was not directly spoken to them.

Sounds like an example of "learning" standard phraseology by following what you heard someone else make up.

Let me write the last sentence of my post again for you.

I think this is a very unofficial summary tho and I have no reference to back it up so it's hearsay at this point.

hear·say/ˈhirˌsā/
noun
information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.

So yes, ahramin, you are right in your judgement.

[airway]

Big Pistons Forever, I also like the call sign at the end even if its just BC. And actually As far as I know, the correct way for a read back is to repeat the instruction and then finish with your call sign. In the CAP413 this is how they are showing the examples. If you go to Chapter 3 page 3 there is a good example outlined.
https://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP%20413 ... 2021_4.pdf
.

OK, so there are pros and cons of saying your call sign first vs. last. I really think that it is 50/50 which one is better, and probably no one really cares which way you do it anyway. There may be other factors that we don't even know about that were used to make the standard. I'm sure ATC has their opinions too.

Just to be clear, it is interesting what the CAP413 or ICAO standard is, but in Canada, we are supposed to comply with the Canadian standard whether it differs from ICAO or not. That is to say your call sign first and include the last 4 letters (or the last 3 if ATC replies with the last 3 previously).

My philosophy is to try to comply with the standard (if I can remember or know what it is ) unless there is a compelling reason not to (i.e. my way is safer).

[ahramin]

From further research what I can gather on the term COPY (aside from being meant as literally writing something down) can be used when a third party has received a message or a general broadcast that was not directly spoken to them.

Sounds like an example of "learning" standard phraseology by following what you heard someone else make up.

Let me write the last sentence of my post again for you.

I think this is a very unofficial summary tho and I have no reference to back it up so it's hearsay at this point.

hear·say/ˈhirˌsā/
noun
information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.

So yes, ahramin, you are right in your judgement.

de·bunk /dēˈbəNGk/
verb
expose the falseness or hollowness of (a myth, idea, or belief).

You started this thread asking questions about standard phraseology. You're getting some good answers.

From further research what I can gather on the term COPY

Suggests that you are having trouble differentiating between the good answers and the junk. Just trying to help point you in the right direction.

By the way here's the Eurocontrol document:

http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/115.pdf

and the All Clear? Toolkit:

http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Toolkit:ALLCLEAR

[B-rad]

I appreciate your help ahramin. Thanks for those links.

The only reason I spoke up about COPY was to show what I had found in regards to where the term might be used and open it up for discussion in case someone else could verify or clear up any truth to it. I thought I was clear that it shouldn't be information to learn from and use without any validation. I took your comment as a bit of an insult and didn't find it helpful. I do think COPY is part of the junk but before I put it in that pile I thought it deserved to be discussed and considered since I have heard it used and perhaps there is something I don't about it.

[ahramin]

Sorry you felt insulted, it wasn't my intention. I hope I've convinced you to file it in the junk category, but if you do find any reference of COPY in the standard phraseology guides, be sure to let us know.

[Rookie50]

Is there one phrase for, "this great lakes winter weather really stinks for piston operators, and its far too early for this". Lol.

Probably not cause we are stuck on the ground....

[Rookie50]

Assuming that things are not too busy I always try to check out of a freq with " good day/good night" and start with a "good morning/afternoon/night". I also make a point of thanking a controller that went the extra mile to make thing easier/better for me.

Obviously you don't want to tie up the airwaves when it is busy but I see no reason you can't be polite as well as professional.

Not included in the approved is the phrase "check remarks". Used judiciously when responding to informational ATC transmissions I think it is a good way to confirm to ATC that you have understood what they are saying without reading it back

Finally there is a disconnect between the what all the books say and what I would consider is now considered an almost universal best practice.

When calling ATC start with your call sign and when replying to ATC finish with your call sign

eg

You: ABC request lower

ATC: ABC descend 5000

You: Descend 5000 ABC

BP +1 to all. Around here when not too crazy, YYZ terminal starts with good morning etc. I reciprocate and say thanks as well -- when there is time.

[Old Dog Flying]

Back in the Dark ages when . and I learned to operate one of them flyin' machines, we didn't need no stinkin' radio. But the "Tally-Ho crap was a hold over from the upper crust Brit pilots of WW2 fame.

After nearly 50 years in ATC both Military and un-Civil you hear just about everything.

Barney

[sidestick stirrer]

And last night I heard the best-ever transmission from a Tower controller.
Airframe and I were chugging around finishing off his Night Rating and Tower misunderstood our desired direction to flight after a touch-and-go, resulting in a long and complicated clearance.
Resolving this took several back-and-forths before Tower said, "Oh, disregard the popping sound as I pull my head out of a dark place!"
Airframe and I tried to reply but all we could muster was laughter...

[Heliian]

Because the first part of a transmission is often garbled or cut off particularly when it is very busy

Eg

ATC: ABC turn right 250

You: ABC turn right 250

What everyone on the freq hears: Squeel urn right 250.
So now everybody on the frequency is wondering if that transmission was for them

Then try not to cut yourself off. But please don't start every transmission with "uhhhhh"

Sometimes acknowledgments come in form of just the call sign.

[Gannet167]

May I add a bit of professional courtesy here as well - prior to keying the mike, particularly after switching to a new frequency, pause, wait for someone to say "ABC read back is correct .... " and if you hear nothing for a brief period, THEN start your transmission. It's not a race to see how fast you can get the radio transmitting after it has just reached the new freq. When you interrupt a dialogue already in play by barging into the freq and stepping on someone, you sound like a j@ckass.

Another point I'd like to suggest is key the mike a half second BEFORE beginning to speak - so that you don't sound like you have turrets, and cut off the first part of what you're trying to say.

I applaud the new guys for asking these questions and trying to be better. Speaking on the radio can require quite a bit of mental effort early in flying training. It is literally like learning a new language, complete with it's own vocabulary, syntax and grammar structure. Throw a bit of widely used but unofficial slang and it gets confusing.Students are already task saturated and this leads to the push to talk button becoming a "push to think" button. A very effective solution for this is to rehearse the radio calls you're going to use and expect, while on the ground at 1G and 0 Kts.

[pianokeys]

.

[Big Pistons Forever]

What would most of you say when you've landed and cleared the active? Sometimes I say "down and clear of runway xx" or "vacated runway xx". Which is the proper one to use?

Keep in mind I'm flying Diamond 20s...

Uncontrolled = "Sumplace Radio/Traffic, ABC clear of Runway" if there is only one runway, or " Sumplace Radio/Traffic, ABC clear of runway XX" if there is more than one runway

Controlled = Ground ABC (taxiway letter designator) for (destination). eg "Ground ABC, Alpha for the North ramp".

[B-rad]

I think those are all good ways to say it.

Usually I just say "ABC clear of the active, Sumplace" if it's uncontrolled and for controlled the same as mentioned by Big Pistons Forever.
The structure of who you are, where you are, and what you're doing can't be beat.

Ground ABC, Alpha for the North ramp

[AirFrame]

And last night I heard the best-ever transmission from a Tower controller.
Airframe and I were chugging around finishing off his Night Rating and Tower misunderstood our desired direction to flight after a touch-and-go, resulting in a long and complicated clearance.
Resolving this took several back-and-forths before Tower said, "Oh, disregard the popping sound as I pull my head out of a dark place!"
Airframe and I tried to reply but all we could muster was laughter...

We were doing a round robin from YNJ to YXX to YCW, and after landing at YXX we wanted to exit the runway, taxi back, and then depart for YCW. I *thought* I asked for a turnout to YCW, but in hindsight I am still not 100% sure I didn't get it mixed up and ask for YNJ by mistake. I had decided that it must have been my error, so I was about to call up and apologize for making the wrong request when he said that.

Almost as good as the tower interaction I had with YVR Harbour when one of the US carriers was parked in English Bay one year. Someone on Harbour frequency said that it looked long enough to do a touch-and-go on and asked if Harbour knew if there was any chance the carrier would allow it? Harbour said that they doubted it but said they were welcome to contact them on xxx frequency. I was passing over Lion's Gate bridge at the time so I piped up and said "That sounds like fun, I'd like a shot at the carrier too!" to which Harbour replied "Good luck! And bad choice of wording..."

[white_knuckle_flyer]

It's a pIty that "TALLY-HO!" isn't in the approved list.

I do use "over and out" occasionally when talking to a ground station like an FSS and want to end the call, though...seems to make sense....especially with flight watch in the US -- where the call can take half an hour (so it seems ) if one doesnt cut it off....

The term 'over' indicates to the other party that you are passing the conversation 'over' to them. The term 'out' means you are terminating the conversation. (getting out of it i suppose). This all would make the term 'over an out' contradictory, which is why it never was an actual used radio term. At least that is what my military radio operator training had to say on the subject.

I don't see anything contradictory about "over and out." The primary use of "over" is to convey that your transmission is finished ( perhaps similar to "STOP" in a telegram ). The secondary function is to convey that you are still present and listening to any response. When you use the phrase "over and out" you are therefore conveying that your transmission is over and that you are no longer listening. This would supersede the additional meaning that you are awaiting the other party to respond.

If anything, I could see how "over and out" is redundant as opposed to contradictory. However, a monosyllabic word like "out" could so easily go unnoticed, and therefore the phrase "over and out" would be preferable.

My take, anyway.

[ahramin]

I don't see anything contradictory about "over and out."

From CAP 413

OUT* This exchange of transmissions is ended and no response is expected.
OVER* My transmission is ended and I expect a response from you.