CFII badgering me about radio communication, reading back too much

mtuomi said:
That is what I did. The RT was roughly something like
"8VT, where are you going?"
"Towards Captree Bridge, as instructed"
"That puts you flying straight against oncoming traffic, traffic 11 o'clock a cessna, why are you not departing from downwind?"
"traffic in sight, because you told me to turn straight on course"
"yes but all departures have to be from standard pattern"

I decided tower freq is not the right place to argue with someone clearly having a bad day, so I ended up with "request early frequency change to talk to Kennedy", and got no answer...

I believe the controller was wrong with his statement. Just like Ron said, I need to do just as I am told. I cannot assume "on course" means "right downwind departure then on course".

No avoiding was needed, I had traffic in sight and it was not a factor, I kept flying a straight line.
Click to expand...

Do you have a rule at your airport to that effect? Ex., at KTMB, no departure turns below 1000' so even if my clearance on take-off included "right turn on course approved" I know that I still cannot turn before 1000'.
 
mtuomi said:
That is what I did. The RT was roughly something like
"8VT, where are you going?"
"Towards Captree Bridge, as instructed"
"That puts you flying straight against oncoming traffic, traffic 11 o'clock a cessna, why are you not departing from downwind?"
"traffic in sight, because you told me to turn straight on course"
"yes but all departures have to be from standard pattern"

I decided tower freq is not the right place to argue with someone clearly having a bad day, so I ended up with "request early frequency change to talk to Kennedy", and got no answer...

I believe the controller was wrong with his statement. Just like Ron said, I need to do just as I am told. I cannot assume "on course" means "right downwind departure then on course".
Click to expand...
I'm looking at the A/FD entry for KFRG and it says nothing about "all departures have to be from standard pattern". I suggest calling the Tower Chief and asking about that while the tape is still available. If they really want "all departures...to be from standard pattern", they need to put that in writing in an FAA publication like the A/FD. Otherwise, they need to tell the controllers to issue that as an instruction to every single VFR departure, and most importantly, not say "on course" if they want a downwind departure.
 
Yes if you are not learning get a new CFII. I had to fire 2 bad instructors before finding a decent one.
 
TMetzinger said:
As mentioned before, the FRG tower has an attitude, and DON'T get along with NY approach.
Click to expand...
Their problems with the NY TRACON aren't the issue here. As for their attitude, if you dealt with many of the pilots of questionable competence with whom they are inundated on a daily basis, you might get an attitude, too. Think about the twitch Inspector Dreyfus gets every time the name "Clouseau" is mentioned in the Pink Panther movies. But that does not excuse the conduct of the controller in this instance, and that's why I suggested calling the Tower Chief to ensure this point is clarified with the controller involved.
 
With regards to that tower problem -- I would immediately file an ASRS report and then I would be calling the tower supervisor to figure out how they expect people to read their minds.
 
timwinters said:
"Understand" sure but bad advice on Roger and Wlco. Both have their proper place and time and, when used properly, reduce radio traffic. Though someone saying "roger wilco" sounds like a tool IMO. :wink2:



Agree with this. LiveATC.net is a good place to start.
Click to expand...

bobmrg said:
"Roger, WILCO" is redundant. Roger means "I have received all of your last transmission." WILCO means "I have received your message, understand it, and will comply."

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

Henning said:
My favorite is always "over & out" "Well, which is it?" :rofl:
Click to expand...

Excellent question. Which is it? They mean contradictory things.

Oh, and to add fuel to the fire, I heard an FAA spokesman in the radio this morning refer to runways and the tarmac. Argggghhhhh!!!!
 
One more log on the fire, strictly for instrument pilots: On page 2-3 of the Instrument Flying Handbook it says "It is good practice for pilots to verbally confirm that they have changed codes or pushed the ident button."
For some reason, this does not come up for VFR pilots in the PHAK or AFH.

Bob Gardner
 
Here is the departure procedure FRG want for noise abatement.
http://www.republicairport.net/images/Noise-Abatement1a.gif

They are a pain in the a at that airport. But still if the OP feels he is being badgered about this, this is his feeling. None of us are in the cockpit to make the decision of is the CFII giving instruction or badgering.

OP I don't know what school you are using, but if you need input about a new CFII, send me a PM I might be able to give you some advice.
 
TommyG said:
Here is the departure procedure FRG want for noise abatement.
http://www.republicairport.net/images/Noise-Abatement1a.gif

They are a pain in the a at that airport. But still if the OP feels he is being badgered about this, this is his feeling. None of us are in the cockpit to make the decision of is the CFII giving instruction or badgering.

OP I don't know what school you are using, but if you need input about a new CFII, send me a PM I might be able to give you some advice.
Click to expand...

Where is that published?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
 
TommyG said:
Here is the departure procedure FRG want for noise abatement.
http://www.republicairport.net/images/Noise-Abatement1a.gif
Click to expand...
...and the noise abatement procedures are mentioned in the A/FD entry for KFRG (although only to tell pilots to call the airport manager for details -- not always possible). However, that web page goes on to say:
The program is a voluntary effort on the part of aircraft operators. Noise abatement measures in no way take precedence over air traffic control instructions.
Click to expand...
So, even if one knows those procedures, a tower instruction overrides them, and the tower said "on course". And that's why I would like to hear what the Tower Chief has to say about this.
 
Last edited:
bobmrg said:
One more log on the fire, strictly for instrument pilots: On page 2-3 of the Instrument Flying Handbook it says "It is good practice for pilots to verbally confirm that they have changed codes or pushed the ident button."
For some reason, this does not come up for VFR pilots in the PHAK or AFH.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

I always read back a change of squawk as I'm dialing it in, I only ident when requested.
 
I wasn't the OP, I just hijacked the thread for a bit :)
Perhaps I should start a new thread about the ATC oddities but...

FRG seems to have one controller that always has a bad day. Most others are perfectly fine.
Another example of this same controller...

"8VT, 2 east from Captree, information something, inbound, full stop"
"8VT, join left downwind"
".....left downwind what runway sir? 8VT"
"The one it says on the ATIS, you should listen to it"
"confirm left downwind rwy 19?"
"Yes thats what the ATIS says"

AFAIK, the controller always has to specify which runway to approach. Leaving out that information is simply unprofessional, I think.

Perhaps I should call the Tower Chief after these events after all...
 
mtuomi said:
I wasn't the OP, I just hijacked the thread for a bit :)
Perhaps I should start a new thread about the ATC oddities but...

FRG seems to have one controller that always has a bad day. Most others are perfectly fine.
Another example of this same controller...

"8VT, 2 east from Captree, information something, inbound, full stop"
"8VT, join left downwind"
".....left downwind what runway sir? 8VT"
"The one it says on the ATIS, you should listen to it"
"confirm left downwind rwy 19?"
"Yes thats what the ATIS says"

AFAIK, the controller always has to specify which runway to approach. Leaving out that information is simply unprofessional, I think.

Perhaps I should call the Tower Chief after these events after all...
Click to expand...

Sounds like that guy is really trying to get fired. Not saying the runway and telling the pilot he should have listened to the ATIS, and not say it again in that transmission, it's unjustifiable.
 
Henning said:
I always read back a change of squawk as I'm dialing it in, I only ident when requested.
Click to expand...

Yes, but the point I was addressing was whether pushing the button was acknowledgement enough versus a verbal acknowledgement plus the button push. IFH says the latter.

Bob
 
bobmrg said:
Yes, but the point I was addressing was whether pushing the button was acknowledgement enough versus a verbal acknowledgement plus the button push. IFH says the latter.

Bob
Click to expand...

Yeah, I though that was interesting, and on a crowded frequency seems to be a reasonable response.
 
bobmrg said:
Yes, but the point I was addressing was whether pushing the button was acknowledgement enough versus a verbal acknowledgement plus the button push. IFH says the latter.
Click to expand...

I guess the latter would have the advantage of letting the controller know that the correct aircraft was following the ident instruction.
 
Hate to resurrect an old thread, but I want to say I appreciated all this feedback, and I did end up switching to a different CFII.
 
If you and the controller did it right on your initial taxi instruction, you should already know if you were cleared to cross 22 or not, and there is no need to re-confirm what you already have been told and acknowledged.
Click to expand...

Ron is of course correct, but since I have this mental picture of being squashed like a bug under the wheels of an A380 or AN226 I always reconfirm runway crossing clearances as I approach the runway I think I'm cleared to cross. Houston Hobby is a nightmare in this respect, what with all the rampaging SW 737's that run around there at 30 knots.

Also, I thought it was required to read back altimeter settings and to acknowledge traffic call outs.
 
JimNtexas said:
Ron is of course correct, but since I have this mental picture of being squashed like a bug under the wheels of an A380 or AN226 I always reconfirm runway crossing clearances as I approach the runway I think I'm cleared to cross. Houston Hobby is a nightmare in this respect, what with all the rampaging SW 737's that run around there at 30 knots.
Click to expand...
A better method would be to write down all hold short instructions and refer to your notes rather than wasting bandwidth on the radio (assuming the channel is busy as usual). Of course if you're really not certain it's better to ask but if everyone had to ask before crossing any runway every time things would slow down at many airports.
 
timwinters said:
I'm sure I'll be in the minority on this one, but when I get to runway 22, especially if it was a relatively long taxi to get there, I stop, look, and confirm that I'm cleared to cross. Things may have changed in the 10 minutes it took me to get there. The controller may have forgotten about me, ground and tower may not be adequately communicating with each other, etc.

"57D confirming cleared to cross 22."
Click to expand...

I do the same thing.
 
Henning said:
My favorite is always "over & out" "Well, which is it?" :rofl:
Click to expand...

I have a buddy who said that in flight school (Navy) and the instructor went ballistic. He told me he did it on purpose (Marine instructor who was known to be a screamer) and the instructor stopped his rant half way through and said "you did that on purpose, didn't you.". We laughed and laughed.
 
JimNtexas said:
Ron is of course correct, but since I have this mental picture of being squashed like a bug under the wheels of an A380 or AN226 I always reconfirm runway crossing clearances as I approach the runway I think I'm cleared to cross. Houston Hobby is a nightmare in this respect, what with all the rampaging SW 737's that run around there at 30 knots.

Also, I thought it was required to read back altimeter settings and to acknowledge traffic call outs.
Click to expand...

Acknowledge both. Altimeter read back is a DOD requirement.
 
ScottVal said:
Hello-
I've been working on my IR, and have about 15 hours of hood time so far. In my last lesson my CFII suddenly started badgering me about repeating too much stuff to ATC. He refused to be specific about what he was talking about, and simply said I should refer to the AIM. I looked at the AIM (Chapter 4, Section 2), but it does not say what should be repeated and what should not be repeated.

I realize that certain things should be repeated, such as a clearance to take off on a certain runway, or an instruction to fly a specific heading. Other things don't need to be repeated, like a complex advisory of some kind, and in those cases, "roger" will do, or maybe a short phrase indicating the most important part.

Other areas are ambiguous, like if a controller gives you an altimeter setting, do you read back the setting, or just say "roger"?

If ground control tells you to taxi to runway 36 via A and K crossing runway 22, when you get to runway 22 do you ask for clearance to cross, or do you assume you are cleared to cross? Or do you advise him when you are about to cross, so he can confirm you are cleared? As I approach the crossing for runway 22, I say "Am I cleared to cross 22?" and then the controller would say "cleared to cross 22," and then I would repeat "cleared to cross 22," and then my CFII might yell at me for talking too much.

I figure, better safe than sorry, it's better to repeat something unnecessarily than not repeat something with should be repeated. And if my CFII yells at me, so be it.

I just wanted to vent about these things and see if ya'll want to share your thoughts.
-Scott
Click to expand...

If a controller gives an altimeter setting, you need to acknowlege the call, read back all clearances.
 
Is altimeter setting readback requirement in the FAR? I always read it back but I've seen videos where it doesn't get read back and the controller doesn't ask for the readback.
 
fiveoboy01 said:
Is altimeter setting readback requirement in the FAR? I always read it back but I've seen videos where it doesn't get read back and the controller doesn't ask for the readback.
Click to expand...

It's not a read back requirement although I think most do. If you fly in the military it is a read back requirement to approach but only under certain cases.
 
fiveoboy01 said:
Is altimeter setting readback requirement in the FAR? I always read it back but I've seen videos where it doesn't get read back and the controller doesn't ask for the readback.
Click to expand...
Some people just acknowledge with "Roger" or their callsign. I like to readback the numbers, however it is not a requirement
 
I didn't think it was required, but it's always good to make sure I'm not wrong!
 
JimNtexas said:
...Also, I thought it was required to read back altimeter settings and to acknowledge traffic call outs.
Click to expand...

I did a search on "read back" and "readback" in the AIM, and couldn't find any mention of reading back the above items. (Of course, you do need to acknowledge the transmission.)
 
ScottVal said:
Hello-
I've been working on my IR, and have about 15 hours of hood time so far. In my last lesson my CFII suddenly started badgering me about repeating too much stuff to ATC. He refused to be specific about what he was talking about, and simply said I should refer to the AIM. I looked at the AIM (Chapter 4, Section 2), but it does not say what should be repeated and what should not be repeated.

I realize that certain things should be repeated, such as a clearance to take off on a certain runway, or an instruction to fly a specific heading. Other things don't need to be repeated, like a complex advisory of some kind, and in those cases, "roger" will do, or maybe a short phrase indicating the most important part.

Other areas are ambiguous, like if a controller gives you an altimeter setting, do you read back the setting, or just say "roger"?

If ground control tells you to taxi to runway 36 via A and K crossing runway 22, when you get to runway 22 do you ask for clearance to cross, or do you assume you are cleared to cross? Or do you advise him when you are about to cross, so he can confirm you are cleared? As I approach the crossing for runway 22, I say "Am I cleared to cross 22?" and then the controller would say "cleared to cross 22," and then I would repeat "cleared to cross 22," and then my CFII might yell at me for talking too much.

I figure, better safe than sorry, it's better to repeat something unnecessarily than not repeat something with should be repeated. And if my CFII yells at me, so be it.

I just wanted to vent about these things and see if ya'll want to share your thoughts.
-Scott
Click to expand...

get a scanner or get on LiveATC and listen to the approach controllers and the enroute ARTCC guys. Or go park at a towered field and listen to clearance, ground and tower. A busy towered field.. airliners.. military..

If you are up burning VFR holes in the sky, do flight following and listen to the other traffic on channel while you are flying.

While you may also risk picking up some bad habits/slang phraseology you will also get a good idea of what is expected.

Use the AIM for standardized phrases. Keep it BRIEF. The minimum amount of information that indicates you have understood your instructions or clearance, or that indicate your compliance.

And while it is kind of dated, look up Don Brown's columns in the archives of AvWeb.. he had a lot of good information on the how/what/why of ATC communications and why the system is the way it is.
 
I adopted the technique of telling ATC who I was, where I was and what I wanted to do. I would say "Denver approach, this is 54DW, 20 miles to the west requesting IFR descent through clouds to clear below".

It was more than they wanted at once. The guy told me to just call in with tail number and location and the words "with a request". Then he gets me a squawk code and puts me in his system. Then he gets back to me to accommodate my request. My method was too much information at one time (although it did seem to work). Do it in two steps, ATC says.

Anyway, just a heads up.
 
That really depends on how busy they are IMO. If they aren't I'll give all the info right away. If they sound backed up I'll keep the initial call up restricted to my tail number and wait for them to reply.
 
fiveoboy01 said:
That really depends on how busy they are IMO. If they aren't I'll give all the info right away. If they sound backed up I'll keep the initial call up restricted to my tail number and wait for them to reply.
Click to expand...

But the controller might be handling multiple frequencies or on a landline. The only time I give everything on initial callup is to a simple Class D tower since less info is necessary.
 
ScottVal said:
Hate to resurrect an old thread, but I want to say I appreciated all this feedback, and I did end up switching to a different CFII.
Click to expand...

Good to hear what you did, and interesting to see how discussions that had died out can be easily reignited. :)
 
coloradobluesky said:
I adopted the technique of telling ATC who I was, where I was and what I wanted to do. I would say "Denver approach, this is 54DW, 20 miles to the west requesting IFR descent through clouds to clear below".

It was more than they wanted at once. The guy told me to just call in with tail number and location and the words "with a request". Then he gets me a squawk code and puts me in his system. Then he gets back to me to accommodate my request. My method was too much information at one time (although it did seem to work). Do it in two steps, ATC says.

Anyway, just a heads up.
Click to expand...


The controller falling behind the power curve and bad user interface on their automation (controllers were able to handle this type of call up just fine when they used paper strips, they'd write and then ignore you for a sec and it's all there when their attention returned to the strip) isn't a good reason to change it. Better to fix the keyboard to brain interface.
 
dmspilot said:
But the controller might be handling multiple frequencies or on a landline. The only time I give everything on initial callup is to a simple Class D tower since less info is necessary.
Click to expand...


The removal of D-side controllers to save money isn't a reason to change behavior.
 
If things are busy on frequency and there's no ambiguity as to the controller's instructions to you, a "Wilco, [callsign]" readback is great. Assuming of course that it's not a hold-short instruction, landing/takeoff clearance, etc.

Tower: "Cherokee 8-6-Bravo, enter right traffic runway 1-6, you're following a Skyhawk two miles ahead of you and report over the cement plant."

You: "Wilco, 8-6-Bravo."
 
atcpeter said:
If things are busy on frequency and there's no ambiguity as to the controller's instructions to you, a "Wilco, [callsign]" readback is great. Assuming of course that it's not a hold-short instruction, landing/takeoff clearance, etc.

Tower: "Cherokee 8-6-Bravo, enter right traffic runway 1-6, you're following a Skyhawk two miles ahead of you and report over the cement plant."

You: "Wilco, 8-6-Bravo."
Click to expand...

On my initial callup to Norcal Approach today, the frequency (120.1) sounded unusually busy, and the controller told me to stand by. I wasn't sure whether a reply was wanted, but after a few moments of silence on frequency, I just said "wilco."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top