In order to be succinct, to follow procedures and avoid more talking on the radio, when there is no conflicting traffic, then nothing (concerning information about other aircraft that may or may not be flying in the area) is given to the pilot after the usual runway, wind, altimeter spiel. The term 'no reported traffic' is only used when a pilot then asks if there is any traffic... which is redundant since the point of not including other aircraft is so the pilot isn't overloaded with info about other aircraft that are not going to affect them in any way.

So because you use up less radio time, I am left wondering if you forgot about traffic and ask, to which you reply...."no reported traffic". Overall effect...more radio time used. At least with me.

pelmet wrote:So because you use up less radio time, I am left wondering if you forgot about traffic and ask, to which you reply...."no reported traffic". Overall effect...more radio time used. At least with me.

you are the exception to the rule. overall, radio time is saved.

Generally if there's no reported traffic, and you're not working multiple sites, there's no need to save 2 seconds of radio time.

grimey wrote:Generally if there's no reported traffic, and you're not working multiple sites, there's no need to save 2 seconds of radio time.

regardless, it's not our procedures.

[quote="thatdaveguy"]

you are the exception to the rule. overall, radio time is saved.[/quote]


Seeing as there is no reported traffic, who cares about saving radio time. Perhaps the reason for this thread(CADORS report) needs to be reviewed. The statement that "it is not our procedures" is something that many people believe in.

I'm sure most FSS will agree with me that it can be a bit annoying when someone asks me if there is any traffic, i think "were they not listening?" . But the fact of the matter is if you don't feel comfortable with our procedures ask away. But i can gaurantee you that no FSS is going to start volunteering "no reported traffic". I can imagine the flack we would get from our TS's and managers if we did. Personally i rarely have someone ask me if there is traffic but if they do i go by the manops rule in thsi case stating "no reported traffic" but what i'm really thinking is "None in the advisory...none now"

bigfssguy wrote:I'm sure most FSS will agree with me that it can be a bit annoying when someone asks me if there is any traffic, i think "were they not listening?" . But the fact of the matter is if you don't feel comfortable with our procedures ask away. But i can gaurantee you that no FSS is going to start volunteering "no reported traffic". I can imagine the flack we would get from our TS's and managers if we did. Personally i rarely have someone ask me if there is traffic but if they do i go by the manops rule in thsi case stating "no reported traffic" but what i'm really thinking is "None in the advisory...none now"

it is pretty annoying. what's worse though is when somebody asks for a specific update on a cessna 172 outbound in an entirely different direction and they are still 5 minutes to landing. if they had been monitoring the MF they'd know he wasn't a concern, yet it's like he's accusing me of not passing relevant traffic "BUT I HURD HIM HE MUST BE TRAFFIC!!11"

thatdaveguy wrote:

bigfssguy wrote:I'm sure most FSS will agree with me that it can be a bit annoying when someone asks me if there is any traffic, i think "were they not listening?" . But the fact of the matter is if you don't feel comfortable with our procedures ask away. But i can gaurantee you that no FSS is going to start volunteering "no reported traffic". I can imagine the flack we would get from our TS's and managers if we did. Personally i rarely have someone ask me if there is traffic but if they do i go by the manops rule in thsi case stating "no reported traffic" but what i'm really thinking is "None in the advisory...none now"

it is pretty annoying. what's worse though is when somebody asks for a specific update on a cessna 172 outbound in an entirely different direction and they are still 5 minutes to landing. if they had been monitoring the MF they'd know he wasn't a concern, yet it's like he's accusing me of not passing relevant traffic "BUT I HURD HIM HE MUST BE TRAFFIC!!11"

Ya but i would rather them ask and be sure, than them just trundle onto the runway in front of a 737. I know it can be a pain and it annoys me too at times but neither of us are infallible. I know i make mistakes from time to time, like i tell my trainees "a mistake doesn't become a problem until you refuse to correct it".

Pelmet:

Seeing as there is no reported traffic, who cares about saving radio time. Perhaps the reason for this thread (CADORS report) needs to be reviewed. The statement that "it is not our procedures" is something that many people believe in.

You shouldn't make the assumption that people have not spent a lot of time considering this.

Alright, let's approach this from another angle. You want ATS to use a term to advise you that they have done what they are required to do (scan their strips and look for any aircraft that have reported positions and intentions that may conflict with you) and verbally state the fact. Ok, how is that better than not saying anything after the usual runway, wind altimeter spiel? Legally I am sure we would be liable for any errors either way. Bottom line is that having an extra phrase would not change the error of missing traffic information.

The phrase 'no reported traffic' is not in our procedures for advisories because it's been worked out over years of radio work that it's unnecessary.

Pelmet:

who cares about saving radio time

Generally anyone who takes radio work seriously.

Alright, let's approach this from another angle. Let's say we start using the phrase 'no reported traffic' at the end of our advisories. Pilots get used to hearing it and make the correct assumption it means that whatever traffic there is in the area, none will conflict with them.

once again we see another statment made from a guy with no true aviation back ground. which is why ATC when discusing what pilots are thinking should ask a pilot what they might be thinking.

How do you know it's been worked out over decades did you see it or did you here it?

I heard that NAC is starting next week on all the same routes but this time with all 1900's

KAFUFO... once again we see another statement made from a guy with no knowledge about another person's true aviation back ground.

Aviation college, military flight training, I still have my PPL and 15 years in 'the biz' of ATS...
I gotta wonder what you think is a 'true' aviation background.

You really need to troll harder, nobody listens when you make dumb statements

once again we see another statment made from a guy with no true aviation back ground. which is why ATC when discusing what pilots are thinking should ask a pilot what they might be thinking.

How do you know it's been worked out over decades did you see it or did you here it?

KAFUFO...I thought people were just picking on you. Was I ever wrong. You go looking for it.

It has to assumed in an advisory that when no traffic is being passed, that means there is no pertinent traffic. It is stated in FS MANOPS that if you are queried regarding any traffic and there is none, the phraseology is "no reported traffic".

As for it having been worked out for decades, that's exactly how the procedures become what they are today and how they get changed tomorrow.

Pardon my ignorance but I just wanna confirm something as long as we're talking about this. At an MF when an a/c is preparing to depart, does FSS give their mandatory traffic advisory on your first call when you're leaving the apron for the taxiway, or on your next call when youre leaving the apron to position on the runway?

Traffic should be given in the initial advisory. So after your initial call to establish comms, you say who and where you are, and what your intentions are, and you should be given a full advisory at that point (runway, wind, altimeter, traffic, and any other relevant info). An update will be given whenever it's asked for, or whenever it's appropriate.

Pilots actually call entering the runway where you are?

Well it's YMM it's gotten pretty happening. Lots of people even call holding short alpha requesting traffic advisory (again).

The times, they are a-changing:

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... 3&start=25

Indeed, hopefully we can keep our good guys, but I know one of the pretty excellent specialists there is taking his cross-training in IFR so I guess that means he'll be in Edmonton with centre =(

Don't all leave us!