"Any conflicting traffic..." Is A Stupid Thing To Say

[goingnowherefast]

So the guy had to listen to you make the same call on 122.8 and 126.7, then again on Kenora radio on 122.1 before he could replied to you? 126.7 is the area frequency. 122.8, 123.2 (or whatever) is the local frequency for specified airports. Nobody in Red Sucker, Pikangikum, Norway House, Shamattawa, Sandy Lake, Lac du Bonnet, Poplar Hill, Pine Dock, Bloodvein or BFN cares that your landing "runway 26 Red Lake in 15". Your wasting time, and on the wrong f---n frequency.

Any conflicting, get the hell out of my way, I'm on a rant!

[awitzke]

Well if you listen up it's what the majority of the aircraft do. Including North Star, Wasaya, Bearskin, us, Skycare etc. Maybe the float guys are different.

We were up in Sachico, so no. I made the call on 23.2 and 26.7. Being at 3500' no one from Pine Dock or Lac du Bonnet can hear me anyways. Coming into Red Lake usually make a quick call on 22.8 giving track and time to the field before switching to Kenora 15 or so minutes back. Considering there's a lot of float traffic outside the 5NM ring around the airport, hence the quick call on 22.8.

[Rockie]

There's gotta be bigger windmills than this? So much anger...

[awitzke]

Yeah.

[Mr. North]

So the guy had to listen to you make the same call on 122.8 and 126.7, then again on Kenora radio on 122.1 before he could replied to you? 126.7 is the area frequency. 122.8, 123.2 (or whatever) is the local frequency for specified airports. Nobody in Red Sucker, Pikangikum, Norway House, Shamattawa, Sandy Lake, Lac du Bonnet, Poplar Hill, Pine Dock, Bloodvein or BFN cares that your landing "runway 26 Red Lake in 15". Your wasting time, and on the wrong f---n frequency.

Normally I would agree with you on this but the YRL and YXL area is a little weird this way. There is an incredible volume of float traffic operating on 122.8, especially on weekends. The float guys don't wan't to hear all the IFR chatter and the IFR guys don't want to hear all the seabirds going from one lake to the next - low level. Is this correct? No, but that's just the way it is out there as it has been for years. When I worked there I only talked on 126.7 if I was passing close to a strip, rest of the time it was 122.8 or the MF. Keep in mind also that lots of those bush guys only have one radio too.

Back to the subject at hand, ACTPA is completely redundant and I chide any FO who utters it. We aren't in the practice area any more kids. If someone has a problem with where you are or where you're going, they'll tell you! That's the whole point of talking on the radio. I also think it's good form to end your call with your registration. Sometimes I zone out from all the chatter and only catch the tail end of calls when I hear a potential conflict. And then it's "Wait! Who was that?" No one wants to sound like a dumb ass on the radio asking who that was so do your fellow aviator a favour.

"Tindi 304 departing Yellowknife, 3,500 Eastbound, Culverson lake next in 15 minutes. Tindi 304"

[Liquid Charlie]

To sum it up for me about 90% of all traffic advisories have too much information on the initial call -- are we not just trying to establish the fact that there is actually traffic that we should be talking to. If there is - now this is where sometimes the conversations get winded but necessary -- but the verbosity of initial calls and enroute blind position reports(from VFR aircraft) loads up the frequencies and to be honest it goes from the ridiculous to the sublime with so many making rapid fire frequency switching calls that no one can understand and it just becomes noise - I would say on a normal day I miss about 50% of calls that either can't be understood or are spit out so fast you only caught about a quarter of what was said -- and flipping between 126.7 and the MF so fast you block a response is just stupid and very poor airmanship and making unnecessary MF calls on 126.7 goes even further to clutter up the frequency -- what's with that -- all I can say is put down your IPhones and stay alert and watch for other aircraft - don't rely on a traffic advisory to keep you safe!!!!

[goingnowherefast]

Well if you listen up it's what the majority of the aircraft do. Including North Star, Wasaya, Bearskin, us, Skycare etc. Maybe the float guys are different.

On busy days, both 22.8 and 26.7 is a jumbled mess of people stepping on each other and nobody can hear anything. This is typically what it sounds like eeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaooooooooooooooaaaaaaaa...(speaking really slowly)any conflicting please advice Perimeter 123....oooooooooooeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaeeeeeeee.

We were up in Sachico, so no. I made the call on 23.2 and 26.7. Being at 3500' no one from Pine Dock or Lac du Bonnet can hear me anyways. Coming into Red Lake usually make a quick call on 22.8 giving track and time to the field before switching to Kenora 15 or so minutes back. Considering there's a lot of float traffic outside the 5NM ring around the airport, hence the quick call on 22.8.

Also, because Pine Dock and Lac du Bonnet are both 22.8. If your going to Sachico, a call on 23.2 and 26.7 is appropriate.
In Red Lake, it is Kenora Radios job to tell you about the beaver that cleared the zone 3 minutes ago near my track. If it might be be a conflict, I`ll try and find him on various frequencies, including 22.8 if needed.

Anyway, I know your fresh out of flight school, you are just beginning to learn the real world now. My anger is not directed at you. It`s the 3000 hr guys who should know better.

I also think it's good form to end your call with your registration. Sometimes I zone out from all the chatter and only catch the tail end of calls when I hear a potential conflict. And then it's "Wait! Who was that?" No one wants to sound like a dumb ass on the radio asking who that was so do your fellow aviator a favour.

"Tindi 304 departing Yellowknife, 3,500 Eastbound, Culverson lake next in 15 minutes. Tindi 304"

And I thank you for it! How all radio calls should be. Short, concise, and relevant. No wasted time on frequency. If I am conflicting, I`ll say "Traffic GABC just departed Culverson for Yellowknife, I will level 3000 to stay under Tindi 304". Done, disaster averted, all in about 10 seconds.

[B208]

What is wrong with the following call on 126.7? when making a position report?...

Traffic on 26.7 this is Piper Navajo GABC, currently on the descent out of 6500 for 3000...30 north of Mukluk Sk, estimating the field in x minutes. Conflicting, 26.7/22.8 ABC. (Notice I said estimating the field, not wheels down at...)

FTB

It's too verbose.

"Mukluck area traffic Navajo GABC 30 North Muckluck leaving 6500 for 3000 estimate Muckluck in 5 minutes."

[awitzke]

On busy days, both 22.8 and 26.7 is a jumbled mess of people stepping on each other and nobody can hear anything. This is typically what it sounds like eeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaooooooooooooooaaaaaaaa...(speaking really slowly)any conflicting please advice Perimeter 123....oooooooooooeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaeeeeeeee.

.........

Also, because Pine Dock and Lac du Bonnet are both 22.8. If your going to Sachico, a call on 23.2 and 26.7 is appropriate.
In Red Lake, it is Kenora Radios job to tell you about the beaver that cleared the zone 3 minutes ago near my track. If it might be be a conflict, I`ll try and find him on various frequencies, including 22.8 if needed.

Anyway, I know your fresh out of flight school, you are just beginning to learn the real world now. My anger is not directed at you. It`s the 3000 hr guys who should know better.
.

Yeah I understand what you're saying. I know I have a lot to learn still... this thread actually will give me a few ideas on how to shorten my calls and make them more efficient. You're right on the Kenora thing. To be honest, thinking about it I don't think I've ever heard anyone actually call back on 22.8, and Kenora always gives traffic reports when I first call up. One less call to make.

Perimiter is the worst for those calls. Literally every single plane "conflicting please advise".

[Rowdy]

The west coast is brutal for this too.. Fortunately there are quite a few coast dogs and twin drivers that will chirp at anyone making bone headed, rambling long winded calls on 23.2.. Myself included

Who you are, where you are and where you're going. Calls don't need to be longer than 15-20 seconds. Its busy out there friends!

[Gravol]

Why don't the lot of you write to Websters, Oxford, etc , to remove the word conflicting from the dictionary? You hate long verbose position reports. Stop trying to make a point for the sake of making a point.

A word which directly implies: AC which might HIT ME , give me a shout on _____ so we can deconflict, is far more efficient than giving a short story of your flight plan to everyone. It's absolutely fantastic knowing that someone is at FL 270, and that they are 90 miles out and reciting "High Flight" in both official languages of Canada while taking selfies with that new selfie stick , however, I personally want to know if someone is going to be over a farm, a lake, an obvious landmark, 5 - 10 minutes ahead. A word doesn't replace a good lookout, nor does it replace airmanship.

Here's to conflicting traffic

T

Who you are, where you are and where you're going. Calls don't need to be longer than 15-20 seconds. Its busy out there friends!

15 - 20 SECONDS????? WHAT?

[awitzke]

I see what you're saying, but regardless of whether someone says to let you know if you're conflicting you should do it anyways. Even if someone didn't say please advise, and I knew we were close to conflicting on say an approach into Cat Lake I'd pipe up and figure it out. Just because they don't say "conflicting please advise" doesn't mean I'm not going to say anything?


The bottom line and I think what this thread started about was the words "any conflicting traffic advise" just fills up airtime on the radio because it's implied by having made the position report in the first place.

[AuxBatOn]

The dudes from YMJ the OP heard were probably zipping along at 500'/250kts (or 250'/420kts) at 90 hour TT (or 150 hours TT) with an IP or standards officer in the backseat ready to use the red pen if they miss a single item from the position report. Give them a break, would you?

[iflyforpie]

All of the more reason to eliminate unnecessary, redundant, or just plain dumb phraseology from R/T.

[AuxBatOn]

Really? 3 words is going to make a difference? Get a life! There are far more important and critical things to be worried about in aviation.

[iflyforpie]

Its not three words.... its three (or more) words said over and over and over again thousands of times that may be displacing more vital information. Maybe if you considered that more Canadians die from mid air collisions in uncontrolled airspace than in air combat... and that most of the other airplanes you share the sky with don't have radar, TCAS, or bang seats, you'd show a little more respect.

[goingnowherefast]

I give the military guys a bit of a break. They don't fly 800hrs a year to gain the experience. When they do fly, their focus is on life and death, kill or be killed. I'd rather the SAR pilots be better at searching then acing every radio call they ever makes. It's still annoying and frustrating, but is understandable.

[AuxBatOn]

Its not three words.... its three (or more) words said over and over and over again thousands of times that may be displacing more vital information. Maybe if you considered that more Canadians die from mid air collisions in uncontrolled airspace than in air combat... and that most of the other airplanes you share the sky with don't have radar, TCAS, or bang seats, you'd show a little more respect.

TCAS, radar and bang seats (or the lack thereof) has 0 to do with this. I have never heard 126.7 so congested in southern SK to say I am not able to get what I need said on the radio. Please don't try to over-dramatize the use of the words by insinuating people die as a result.

How many crashes were directly (or indirectly) attributable to those 3 words? I bet it's probably 0. Get of your high horse. Keeping a good look out is far more important than getting upset about those 3 words... Don't want to hear them? Turn your radio off or stay on the ground. Because some don't like it doesn't mean it's unacceptable. It is in no standard I know of that says you shall not use "any conflicting traffic" during a position report.

[awitzke]

One problem I recall having seen when flying around Vancouver was people using the phrase and then in essence stopping a "lookout" for traffic themselves. The phraseology itself puts the onus on other aircraft to let you know they might conflict vs. you keeping a watch out yourself.

[AuxBatOn]

Really? Because I say to contact me if you think you'll hit me, you think I stop looking out? Pretty weak argument.

[timel]

I have to add, 126.7 has become a headeach on busy days.

- Some people do report their position report every two minutes
- Some jam the frequency to tell you that they have you in sight even if there is no possible conflict
- Some give you useless position names nobody know the existence
- Many don't even listen before speaking so they cut everyone or they makes you repeat because they never really listen to anyone
- Some decide to say hi to their buddy while it is not the right time

Remove all of that, life is good.

[Shiny Side Up]

The dudes from YMJ the OP heard were probably zipping along at 500'/250kts (or 250'/420kts) at 90 hour TT (or 150 hours TT) with an IP or standards officer in the backseat ready to use the red pen if they miss a single item from the position report. Give them a break, would you?

Then lets go up the chain and how does one deal with standards officers if they're the ones to blame. Is there a General somewhere who this memo could get sent to? And why do they get a break on this, are these kids supposed to be the cream of the crop, the best our nation has to offer or has the recruiting standard been dropped? AFAIK, this is a new military thing. Any ex- forces guys I know don't use it, why has this crap crept in?

Its not three words.... its three (or more) words said over and over and over again thousands of times that may be displacing more vital information. Maybe if you considered that more Canadians die from mid air collisions in uncontrolled airspace than in air combat... and that most of the other airplanes you share the sky with don't have radar, TCAS, or bang seats, you'd show a little more respect.

And let it be said that ACTPA, isn't the only bad thing about most of these radio calls. While itself is annoying its only the tip of the wretched kinds of calls being made which have all sorts of useless, pointless and quadruple redundant crap in them. So your average call that ends with ACTPA, isn't just 1.5 seconds and 3-5 words too long, its 20 plus seconds and a whole paragraph of words too long. Don't kid yourself that its something little.

There are far more important and critical things to be worried about in aviation.

Not sure about you, but reducing my chances of getting into a mid-air collision is pretty up there on my list of priorities when I'm flying. Having a comm radio that gives even 5% more useful information is worth bitching about.

[timel]

Just curious, any reason why you would monitor 126.7 at FL270?
Over FL180 I would stick with ATC and monitor 121.5, less noise...

[AuxBatOn]

Then lets go up the chain and how does one deal with standards officers if they're the ones to blame. Is there a General somewhere who this memo could get sent to? And why do they get a break on this, are these kids supposed to be the cream of the crop, the best our nation has to offer or has the recruiting standard been dropped? AFAIK, this is a new military thing. Any ex- forces guys I know don't use it, why has this crap crept in?

Perhaps you don't understand how training works. Students are trained and evaluated to a standard. An instructor teaches techniques to achieve a standard. A standards officer will verify the performance of a student meets a published standard (in the form of rules, approved SOPs, training standards, etc) irrespective of techniques employed.

In this case, there is no standard out there that says not to use conflicting traffic, therefore the Standards Officer cannot fault a student for saying it during a position report. He could, however, nail a student for forgetting the altitude in the call as it is a published procedure.

Not sure about you, but reducing my chances of getting into a mid-air collision is pretty up there on my list of priorities when I'm flying. Having a comm radio that gives even 5% more useful information is worth bitching about.

Oh, so now these words now cause mid-air collisions. Interesting. Please refer me to a single instance where these words led (directly or indirectly) to a mid-air.

[digits_]

Today for exampl today a PC12 and I figured it all out for timing as we were showing the field at the same time. I didn't say "conflicting traffic, BDN." He was just listening and made a call out to me. Simple.

If only it could always be like that ... usually it then continues with:

"Cheeeeeck, have you in sight there"
- "ok have a good one"
"you too see ya"
- "*click*"