Radio phraseology
Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, Right Seat Captain, lilfssister
Re: Radio phraseology
The Nav Canada VFR Phraseology. http://www.navcanada.ca/EN/media/Public ... eology.pdf
-
Darkwing Duck
- Rank 6
- Posts: 430
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 7:30 am
Re: Radio phraseology
Has anyone thought to look in the AIM?
Kowalski: Sir, we may be out of fuel.
Skipper: What makes you think that?
Kowalski: We've lost engine one, and engine two is no longer on fire.
Skipper: What makes you think that?
Kowalski: We've lost engine one, and engine two is no longer on fire.
Re: Radio phraseology
I'd strictly reference the Nav Canada document - it's been recently created by the folks who run the entire controlled airspace system in Canada. If it doesn't answer your question then I'd reference the phraseology section of the AIM.
The April, 2015 edition of the AIM still has you saying "ready for takeoff" instead of "ready for departure" when you're holding short of the runway.
Another good point from the Nav Canada document: don't say "with the traffic"; the correct call is "traffic in sight".
The April, 2015 edition of the AIM still has you saying "ready for takeoff" instead of "ready for departure" when you're holding short of the runway.
Another good point from the Nav Canada document: don't say "with the traffic"; the correct call is "traffic in sight".
“No one can realize how substantial the air is, until he feels its supporting power beneath him. It inspires confidence at once.”
-Otto Lilienthal
-Otto Lilienthal
Re: Radio phraseology
How many errors can you spot in the NavCanada document?
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
Re: Radio phraseology
Super !FAF wrote:The Nav Canada VFR Phraseology. http://www.navcanada.ca/EN/media/Public ... eology.pdf
This is what people should be quizzed on for their radio license, not those obsolete questions they are asking now
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Re: Radio phraseology
I find it interesting that when we meet with local NavCanada staff that actually work in the towers, they all tell us *not* to give wake-up calls (ident and type only, then wait for the tower to acknowledge before you call back with your full request). Yet the Phraseology document includes wake-up calls on almost every example.
I wonder if it was updated by someone in an office who doesn't work in a tower or control center.
I wonder if it was updated by someone in an office who doesn't work in a tower or control center.
