ATIS Decode

G

Greg H

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Apr 10, 2019
Messages
5
Display Name
Display name:
Greg
Hi,
A question regarding the meaning of US ATIS’s.
The other day I was flying into Honolulu...

The ATIS stated,

LNDG/DEPG RWYS 4/8 EXP ILS OR VISUAL APCH.

Does this mean (or imply) that;

a) Runways 4 and 8 are BOTH being used for Landing AND Departures
or,
b) Runway 4 is being used for Landings and Runway 8 is being used for Departures

Is there an official government document that would explain the exact meaning of every phrase used in an ATIS?

Thanks,

Greg (in Australia)
 
Basically it means you'll be landing to the East on one of the four depicted runways.

[Edit: @Ryanb busted me on East or West]
 
Last edited:
Well, actually, no.

It means you will land to the east.

In Australia, and many other countries, the ATIS will specifically say which runways are in use for T/Os and Ldgs.

My question is, are both runways in use for T/Os & Ldgs or are they split as per the “/“ symbol in the broadcast.

ie. 4 for LDG and 8 for DEPARTURE
 
Ravioli said:
Basically it means you'll be landing to the West on one of the four depicted runways.
Click to expand...
Huh?

Landing on either runway would be easterly (RWY04 or RWY08).

Don’t quote me on this, but a departure runway will only be given if it’s different from the landing runway.
 
Greg H said:
My question is, are both runways in use for T/Os & Ldgs or are they split as per the “/“ symbol in the broadcast.
Click to expand...

There are FOUR runways... the ATIS doesn't indicate which will happen. Item A in your original post is most accurate.
 
Greg H said:
Hi,
A question regarding the meaning of US ATIS’s.
The other day I was flying into Honolulu...

The ATIS stated,

LNDG/DEPG RWYS 4/8 EXP ILS OR VISUAL APCH.

Does this mean (or imply) that;

a) Runways 4 and 8 are BOTH being used for Landing AND Departures
or,
b) Runway 4 is being used for Landings and Runway 8 is being used for Departures

Is there an official government document that would explain the exact meaning of every phrase used in an ATIS?

Thanks,

Greg (in Australia)
Click to expand...

Don't know about Australia, but it would be (a) in the U.S.

As far as a source, I would say grammar conventions which would suggest the word "respectively" should be used if it was (b).
 
Rule 1. Landings runways.
Rule 2. Departure runways only if different from landing runways.
Exception 1. Landing runway may be omitted if it is runway to which an advertised instrument (not VA) approach is being made
Rule 3. This is one f the most abused rules in the 7110.65.

Most controllers copying learn what they hear others say which is not the way to teach or learn. As a result the phraseology squally goes something like this....

“ILS 13 approach in use, landing and departing runways 13 and 18.”

This should be...
“ILS Runway 13 approach in use landing runway 18”

Landing runway 13 is implied because of the advertised ILS. The additional landing runway 18 is advertised. Since 13 and 18 are both being used for landings departures off 13 and 18 are implied and need not be given.

The official government document you seek is JO 7110.65x Chapter 2 section 9.

tex
 
"Most controllers copying learn what they hear others say which is not the way to teach or learn."

On the contrary, the phraseology used by ALL controllers is governed by FAA Order 7110.65, the controller's Bible. They are trained to use "booK" phraseology, and controllers have quarterly sessions with quality control specialists during which their transmissions for the preceding quarter are reviewed for compliance. This can be a pocketbook issue for a sloppy controller, who will be decertified and require additional training.

Bob Gardner
 
bobmrg said:
"Most controllers copying learn what they hear others say which is not the way to teach or learn."

On the contrary, the phraseology used by ALL controllers is governed by FAA Order 7110.65, the controller's Bible. They are trained to use "booK" phraseology, and controllers have quarterly sessions with quality control specialists during which their transmissions for the preceding quarter are reviewed for compliance. This can be a pocketbook issue for a sloppy controller, who will be decertified and require additional training.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

Monthly now Bob. I am one of those "quality control specialists." :)
 
Bob,

They are supposed to teach it correctly and many do. Far too many do not and allow some of the poor phraseology when they fill out the -25 training report. This the poor phraseology is perpetuated from generation to generation because if an instructor has bad habits he will almost certainly pass those down to his trainee.

I too was a QA, PPS, QC, training administrator, cadre instructor and DE. I have had several developmentals fail training due to, among other problems, phraseology. This is one of the biggest problems ATC quality assurance has. And the FAA makes it a big deal. The proof is in the pudding however and all one has to do is listen to an a ATC freq and count the non-standard phraseology.

As I said above, that is the book standard for ATIS concerning runways. And what the op stated that was heard is not standard. Very typical but not standard.

tex
 
Dave S. said:
Bob,

They are supposed to teach it correctly and many do. Far too many do not and allow some of the poor phraseology when they fill out the -25 training report. This the poor phraseology is perpetuated from generation to generation because if an instructor has bad habits he will almost certainly pass those down to his trainee.

I too was a QA, PPS, QC, training administrator, cadre instructor and DE. I have had several developmentals fail training due to, among other problems, phraseology. This is one of the biggest problems ATC quality assurance has. And the FAA makes it a big deal. The proof is in the pudding however and all one has to do is listen to an a ATC freq and count the non-standard phraseology.

As I said above, that is the book standard for ATIS concerning runways. And what the op stated that was heard is not standard. Very typical but not standard.

tex
Click to expand...

From what I gathered from your post Dave is that we share the same opinion regarding the new generation of controllers we are getting today, which were trained by new controllers and so on and so on. It was a LOT different 27 years ago. If you failed a proficiency test, you lost your ratings. The first five questions on the test were separation questions and if you failed any of those, you failed the test. Trainers can only train to just below their own level of competence so the level has fallen a little at a time over the years. Its up to old guys like us to maintain the standards and it isn't easy.
 
I've had some controllers give me some effed up instructions lately. I don't remember it being like this 10+ years ago.

One of the more innocuous ones was "Do you want VFR flight following or IFR flight following?"
 
dmspilot said:
I've had some controllers give me some effed up instructions lately. I don't remember it being like this 10+ years ago.

One of the more innocuous ones was "Do you want VFR flight following or IFR flight following?"
Click to expand...

Hope that was quickly followed by another voice saying "disregard."
 
It's not all bad. My home airport, PAO, has some excellent controllers and lots of trainees. The trainees make their share of mistakes, but they are corrected almost immediately. With over 500 ops a day average on a single runway and sometimes crazy weekends, it's not a place that would countenance sloppy controllers.
 
Dave S. said:
Rule 1. Landings runways.
Rule 2. Departure runways only if different from landing runways.
Exception 1. Landing runway may be omitted if it is runway to which an advertised instrument (not VA) approach is being made
Rule 3. This is one f the most abused rules in the 7110.65.

Most controllers copying learn what they hear others say which is not the way to teach or learn. As a result the phraseology squally goes something like this....

“ILS 13 approach in use, landing and departing runways 13 and 18.”

This should be...
“ILS Runway 13 approach in use landing runway 18”

Landing runway 13 is implied because of the advertised ILS. The additional landing runway 18 is advertised. Since 13 and 18 are both being used for landings departures off 13 and 18 are implied and need not be given.

The official government document you seek is JO 7110.65x Chapter 2 section 9.

tex
Click to expand...

???. So if ILS Runway 13 is the Instrument Approach in use but 13 isn't being used to land on for whatever reason, their only landing on 18, how would you cut the ATIS? At TEB this thing is common. ILS to 6 is the Approach in use but they are landing on 1.
 
First, if the situation is as you say then the ATIS should reglect the correct approach. In this case ILS RY 13 is no the approach in use. The approach in use is ILS RY 13 Circle to Runway 18. On the ATIS this would be stated “ILS RUNWAY 13 Circle to Runway 18 Approach in use”. ( and I don’t recall off hand if the word “to” is correct).

In that case 13 as a landing or departing runway is not given either implicitly or explicitly. 18 is also a departure runway. However there is no rule about this....the assumption being that a landing runway is also usable as a departure runway. In other words there is nothing that requires a landing runway to also be a departure runway or visa versa. The rules I stated above regarding the ATIS only provide for certain usual situations. There could be unusual situations that the simple rule wouldn’t cover.

So most controllers I’ve heard simply state the logically simple statement such as “ILS 13 approach in use, landing and departing RYs 13 and 18.” Not by the book and redundant by the rule, but accurate as to reality and easy to understand.
tex
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top