Confused about taxie terms.
- Thread starter bahama flier
- Start date
ircphoenix
En-Route
No, but highly recommended practices, a wealth of information, AND a best seller!
I just like pointing out that it isn't regulatory. So those best practices are probably really good for 90% of the situations you face... but turns out there's non-standard practices all over the place which don't negatively impact safety which probably run contrary to the AIM.
You know what I do? I accept intersection departures. I do the mic double click for things that don't require a readback. And if I'm number 2 or 3 behind an aircraft holding short, I will say "holding short in sequence." Hell, when landing the other night, the controller made a call to the plane on upwind and cleared them to land. They said "Uhh... we're on the upwind and going to be departing to the north." She then told them to disregard. There was an awkward silence as I was going downwind midfield to abeam. To "correct" her I announced that I was abeam the numbers downwind. She said "thank you for that" and cleared me to land. Pretty sure announcing that I'm abeam the numbers is a non-standard traffic call and her thanking me was tying up the radio unnecessarily. Thankfully everyone went home.
On occasion, I'll even say "checking in... seven thousand five hundred."
OH! One time the approach controller asked me "are you inbound for the special flights rules?" I asked for the mini route southbound, and the approach controller told me he showed the mini route closed. So then I replied "well then I guess I'm inbound for special flight rules!" Then when I was in the SFRA, the chart says to announce your position. Myself and 3 other planes were announcing. I asked the guy behind me if he had me in sight. He said he did. The chart didn't say to talk to anyone else on the frequency. But I did. I'm pretty much a rebel of the skies at this point.
mscard88
Touchdown! Greaser!
Oh the horror! All you wrote I find nothing wrong with. Common sense goes a long ways. Good post man.
ircphoenix
En-Route
Oh the horror! All you wrote I find nothing wrong with. Common sense goes a long ways. Good post man.
Oh. I know you're on my team when it comes to common sense! Just tired of AIM-thumpers. =D
Cooter
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2015
- Messages
- 2,412
- Display Name
Display name:
Cooter
Memphis controllers can be a little testy in my experience.
mscard88
Touchdown! Greaser!
Well as a CFI we have to push the AIM. In all fairness there is a wealth of good info in it. But I understand what you mean.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,597
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
I'm no phraseology nazi either but I agree with ms. While it's not regulatory, the AIM is a standand of good practices that should be taught. In this case, a student should be taught the right way (P/CG) from the get go (primacy). Some of the things I've read on POA about what CFIs have been teaching, leads me to believe there's a lot of technique going on. I fear these techniques are born out of not knowing what the standard is to begin with.
Larry in TN
En-Route
Having each pilot making up his own standards, particularly when it comes to phraseology, does not make the system safer or more efficient. This is particularly true when the pilots making up their own standards do not even know that a recommended standard exists for the situation that they are in.
If a situation requires phraseology which isn't covered in the AIM then do what is necessary in that situation. That is what the AIM tells us to do in 4-2-1(b). Using standard phraseology as much as practical reduces miscommunication, reduces frequency congestion, and increases safety.
If you really want to see the importance of standard phraseology, fly outside the US and Canada. Fly where the standards are different. Where different languages are used with local pilots. Fly where the accents are so heavy you can't make out all of the words used. When you do, as Americans we start out at a disadvantage because the US deviates significantly from ICAO standards. That makes it more difficult for us when we fly abroad as well as for the foreign crews who fly to the US.
Most don't even know they are using non-standard phraseology or procedures. Few have spent any significant time reading the AIM, FARs, and other official sources. Others, as seen in this thread, know the standards, or at least that they exist, but choose to ignore them. Intentional noncompliance is a threat in aviation which is being addressed at the airline level. Here's a good article on the subject.
https://flightsafety.org/asw-article/intentionally-noncompliant/
If a situation requires phraseology which isn't covered in the AIM then do what is necessary in that situation. That is what the AIM tells us to do in 4-2-1(b). Using standard phraseology as much as practical reduces miscommunication, reduces frequency congestion, and increases safety.
If you really want to see the importance of standard phraseology, fly outside the US and Canada. Fly where the standards are different. Where different languages are used with local pilots. Fly where the accents are so heavy you can't make out all of the words used. When you do, as Americans we start out at a disadvantage because the US deviates significantly from ICAO standards. That makes it more difficult for us when we fly abroad as well as for the foreign crews who fly to the US.
Most don't even know they are using non-standard phraseology or procedures. Few have spent any significant time reading the AIM, FARs, and other official sources. Others, as seen in this thread, know the standards, or at least that they exist, but choose to ignore them. Intentional noncompliance is a threat in aviation which is being addressed at the airline level. Here's a good article on the subject.
https://flightsafety.org/asw-article/intentionally-noncompliant/
Last edited:
Larry in TN
En-Route
They are teaching their students what their CFI taught them and what those students will eventually teach their students when they become instructors. Multi-generational tribal knowledge that nobody knows where it came from or why it is done.