airtraffic

Author Topic: Funny? or Dangerous?  (Read 20277 times)

Offline jbadger10

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Funny? or Dangerous?
« on: October 30, 2014, 09:43:07 AM »
I'm not sure how I feel about this... I get that he was trying to have a little fun, but at what cost could that come at if it could lead to confusion.

I'm at work and don't have the ability to edit. But take a listen at 17:15 for Flagship 3366. Captured from JFK TWR on 10/17.

http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kjfk/KJFK-Twr-Oct-17-2014-1930Z.mp3



Offline svoynick

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: Funny? or Dangerous?
« Reply #1 on: October 30, 2014, 03:28:35 PM »
Edited clip attached (~ 30 sec)

I suppose this is kinda like a football coach going for it on 4th down and 5, down by 3, with 7 minutes left in the game.  If you make it and everything turns out OK, you look clever.  If something goes wrong, you look like an idiot.

Clearly in this case the outcome was that - in spite of the pilot making every effort to obscure the content of his transmission - the controller understood who he was and what he was saying.   The frequency was not super-congested, and it didn't sound like the controller workload was very high (from the radio traffic, anyway...)

Having said that, while I love hearing when a controller and a pilot can share a laugh, I'm not a fan of non-standard phraseology - especially when every part of one's transmission consists of it.  Excusing it by saying, "it wasn't very busy, and she ended up understanding what he meant" just seems to me a little like saying "hey, this approach is like the last hundred, we can afford a little complacency, right?"

And while I haven't yet commented on the specific content of his transmission, as far as judging "how cool he sounds", I have to point out that "Double-3 Double-6 Flagship" has the same number of syllables as "Flagship Thirty-Three Sixty-Six", which was how the other voice from the cockpit ID'd as he confirmed their taxi instructions after landing, later in the archive.   And "Watch out for the turb."   Really?  That just sounds like trying a little too hard.




Offline oregonal

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Funny? or Dangerous?
« Reply #2 on: October 30, 2014, 06:02:55 PM »
I think his non-standard communications and attempt to become one of the JFK or Boston ATC personalities has no place and his company should reprimand him and send him for some human factors training or something.  Not something we should admire.

Offline hayek

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: Funny? or Dangerous?
« Reply #3 on: October 30, 2014, 06:44:58 PM »

Offline kempboeing

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 43
Re: Funny? or Dangerous?
« Reply #4 on: October 30, 2014, 07:18:22 PM »
That pilot comes in and out of JFK very often. Every time he has transmitted over frequency like this and every time the controller has understood it and gotten a kick out of it. He did it a couple weeks ago during a busy period and the controller picked up the transmission with no problem and issued him a clearance. I don't have a problem with it. The pilot has communicated the information he needed too in a creative way. Loves his job you can tell!!!

Offline blakepilot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 51
    • KDAL LiveATC
Re: Funny? or Dangerous?
« Reply #5 on: October 31, 2014, 01:20:48 PM »
I don't have a problem with it so long as the message isn't overly cryptic and there isn't an overload of traffic.  If freq is busy, be clear, concise, and get out of the way.  That's typically a given.  Nothing worse than being on a very busy freq when someone takes forever to get a message across.  It can pose a safety hazard.  However, I know plenty of people, including myself, that like to banter with ATC when time and workload permit.

Also, tower controller knew where the aircraft was, and was expecting the handoff before they called.  It's not like this guy is coming screaming into a non-radar class D airport loaded up with traffic trying to be a hotshot.  By the time he got to tower, he'd been sequenced for many miles, configured for landing, and almost certainly on a stabilized approach with airport environment in sight.  Furthermore, his readback is the most critical part of the transmission, which he repeated "cleared to land 22L."

Offline StuSEL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 259
Re: Funny? or Dangerous?
« Reply #6 on: November 02, 2014, 01:29:22 AM »
All the commotion over this  :?

Pilots have no standardized phraseology requirement. There is no requirement to even read back wake turbulence cautionary advisories. There is no breakdown in comms here whatsoever.

Offline Comfirm31L

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 56
Re: Funny? or Dangerous?
« Reply #7 on: November 02, 2014, 09:11:10 PM »
I've heard him talk like that before...

not a fan.