Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 21, 2014, 04:02:14 PM
Home Help Login Register      
News: LiveATC.net Flyers Released!  Please click here to download & print a copy and be sure to post at an airport near you!


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Aviation
| |-+  Pilot/Controller Forum (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  standard phraseology
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Down Print
Author Topic: standard phraseology  (Read 15278 times)
tyketto
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 913


« Reply #30 on: April 12, 2012, 06:38:55 PM »



Preferrable, not required. Big difference. With that, you still have not answered my question.

Please cite where pilots are REQUIRED to use absolute phraseology,
1. You are mistakenly attributing something to me that I haven't said.
   a. Preferable has one r, not two.
2. That is not a question. And if it was, then you are answering my question with a question, which really isn't an answer at all.
 
So I repeat;

Quote
Please show me, with credible citations (ie- FAA, FAR, AIM), where the use of non standard phraseology is condoned.

Until then, lets summarize;

-The use of standard phraseology is a best practice.
-The FAA, (AIM), FlightSafety, AOPA and even NASA state that non standard phraseology should not be used.
-The above references have also documented incidents of where the use of non standard phraseology have caused problems.
-Some of the above references were written by pilots.
-Air traffic controllers themselves have emphasised the importance of using standard phraseology.
-The claim that using non standard phraseology during busy periods saves time is false.
-The excuse that it is frequently used despite the above does not make it right.

Where does the AIM state that pilots are REQUIRED to use standard phraseology?

Emphasizing does not mean Required.

Please list all documents the FAA has, sections included, where pilots are REQUIRED to use standard phraseology.

We are waiting.

BL.
Logged
dave
Site Founder
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3648



WWW
« Reply #31 on: April 12, 2012, 07:15:38 PM »

OK, that's enough.  This topic is spinning around and around.

I participate in a lot of FAA (and other) Safety Seminars and a lot of pilot training activities.  I have nearly 700 hours flying in the National Airspace System and countless thousands of hours listening to air traffic communications in every type of airspace there is, with every type of traffic level you can imagine occurs in the real world.  I have spoken to many CFI's, some DPE's, and many air traffic controllers on this subject and many others.

Let's just all agree that the use of standard phraseology is a good idea.  We can't live in the wild west just because someone jumps up and down and says that it is OK to do whatever you want when the right thing to do is not *required*.

Similarly, if a pilot slips every now and then and uses slightly non-standard (by the book) but commonly used (on the air all the time) phraseology that is clearly in the daily vernacular, chances are overwhelmingly high that safety is not being compromised.  But it is also true that excessive use of non-standard phraseology - especially terms that are not in the daily vernacular of pilots and controllers - can lead to reduced or compromised safety.  That is not good, in general.

I don't think this needs further discussion.  So let's cut out all the parochial attitudes and the personal attacks and get on with our lives.


 

Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!