Frequency change when departing D

[bobmrg]

And that is true as stated. I’m refering to having left the Delta with no continuing radar service. There is no requirement to be on frequency......UNLESS.....UNLESS!!!!!!!

....ATC(tower) is still giving you some form of service such as getting you past inbound traffic, or you have been told to remain on freq, etc.

Notwithstanding that, your relationship with the tower is over when you leave the Delta or Charlie, and no further comment is necessary. As a co troller I do t expect to hear from you again....I don’t have anything else for you ( except as stated above) and you don’t need my permission to change so I don’t expect you to even ask. Most do but it’s unnecessary by rule which is what the question was about.

I hear a lot of newbie controllers tell SVFR departures when that they have left the class D and to maintain VFR. Another example of unnecessary verbiage.

Tex

Given the luxury of time, a tower controller COULD say "It is not necessary to request permission to leave Class D airspace." In the real world, however, time constraints make "Approved as requested" or something similar the response. This just confirms in the pilot's mind the notion that the request was valid, and s/he will do it again. And again. And again. No easy answer.

Bob

 

[bobmrg]

I ask for a frequency change if I'm still in the delta and want a frequency change, other wise no.

Makes sense to me.

Bob

 

[Dave S.]

Given the luxury of time, a tower controller COULD say "It is not necessary to request permission to leave Class D airspace." In the real world, however, time constraints make "Approved as requested" or something similar the response. This just confirms in the pilot's mind the notion that the request was valid, and s/he will do it again. And again. And again. No easy answer.

Bob

Yeah, of course I’m not going to waste MORE time trying to educate pilots. I’m just going to say approved. I’m not going to ignore the request because that would lead to more problems. I’m going to blame the biennial flight review process! Oops! Didn’t mean to open up that can.

There are so many examples of pilots doing things because they are not sure what to do. And there is the real issue. So many little stupid stuff due to the “I’m not sure what to do” disease. Reporting at the outer maker in radar contact, switching freqs when told to resume own navigation, etc. each one is small but it adds up to many pilots being “airworthy” in our system.

Tex

 

[EdFred]

Yeah, it would be world-ending if you wore your CFI hat at the same time as your controller hat.
"No need to request" is a whopping 1 second transmission in a class D environment. The horror!

 

[Dave S.]

Yeah, it would be world-ending if you wore your CFI hat at the same time as your controller hat.
"No need to request" is a whopping 1 second transmission in a class D environment. The horror!

I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic. It wouldn’t bother me if you were.

Economy of phraseology is critical. Controllers haven’t got the time to explain themselves or educate pilots on air especially at bigger busier facilities. As I have said in the past, for example, “frequency change approved”. There is only one situation where that is called for. But it has gotten to the point where it is used every time a controller terminates radar service...out of habit. A controller doesn’t care what you do with your radio after termination, and the pilot sure doesn’t need the controllers permission. It may only take a second and a half to say it but multiply that by a thousand or more airplanes a week and now you are wasting significant time and unnecessarily increasing workload. And that’s just that piece of phraseology.

When you add all of the other unnecessary stuff you begin to see a degradation of the the efficient system we should have. There is a real and tangible reason for pilots AND controllers need to stay proficient and on the top of their game.

A controller doesn’t sound impersonal and sometimes curt sometimes because he is rude (although that certainly happens). It’s because he has hundreds of other pilots he has to deal with many counting as two or three due to incompetence or improficiency.

That’s why phraseology is important and why we tend to not explain things except when necessary to help a pilot who doesn’t understand.

We have really gooten of the subject but it’s a good discussion.

Tex

 

[Palmpilot]

It may only take a second and a half to say it but multiply that by a thousand or more airplanes a week and now you are wasting significant time and unnecessarily increasing workload. And that’s just that piece of phraseology.

Another example at my home airport is that students seem to be taught to read back EVERY...SINGLE...WORD. It's a very busy field, especially on weekends, and people try to compensate for the limited frequency time by speaking VERY rapidly. I can hear students struggling with their readbacks, and find myself wondering how they have any attention span left for aviating and navigating (aviate, navigate, communicate).

 

[bobmrg]

Another example at my home airport is that students seem to be taught to read back EVERY...SINGLE...WORD. It's a very busy field, especially on weekends, and people try to compensate for the limited frequency time by speaking VERY rapidly. I can hear students struggling with their readbacks, and find myself wondering how they have any attention span left for aviating and navigating (aviate, navigate, communicate).

I blame it on their instructors, who parrot whatever they were taught without doing any research on what is actually required. (I'm not blameless...it took me a good many years and a deep dive into writing books for pilots before the light dawned.) Many instructors are not aware of, or never heard of, the 7110.65 that is the controller's bible. If you know what a controller is REQUIRED to say (there are no phraseology requirements for pilots) it gets a lot easier to anticipate what comes next. Many instructors gloss over Advisory Circulars, where pilots can learn in plain English what the regulations say in lawyer-speak.


Bob

 

[midlifeflyer]

Given the luxury of time, a tower controller COULD say "It is not necessary to request permission to leave Class D airspace." In the real world, however, time constraints make "Approved as requested" or something similar the response. This just confirms in the pilot's mind the notion that the request was valid, and s/he will do it again. And again. And again. No easy answer.

Bob

I've actually heard it said. And there was little luxury of time. It was a very busy Class D and they apparently got tired of hearing requests to leave the frequency when leaving the airspace and may have decided the few extra words were going to pay time dividends later.

 

[denverpilot]

I blame it on their instructors, who parrot whatever they were taught without doing any research on what is actually required. (I'm not blameless...it took me a good many years and a deep dive into writing books for pilots before the light dawned.) Many instructors are not aware of, or never heard of, the 7110.65 that is the controller's bible. If you know what a controller is REQUIRED to say (there are no phraseology requirements for pilots) it gets a lot easier to anticipate what comes next. Many instructors gloss over Advisory Circulars, where pilots can learn in plain English what the regulations say in lawyer-speak.


Bob

Preach it brother! LOL!

 

[EdFred]

I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic. It wouldn’t bother me if you were.

Economy of phraseology is critical. Controllers haven’t got the time to explain themselves or educate pilots on air especially at bigger busier facilities. As I have said in the past, for example, “frequency change approved”. There is only one situation where that is called for. But it has gotten to the point where it is used every time a controller terminates radar service...out of habit. A controller doesn’t care what you do with your radio after termination, and the pilot sure doesn’t need the controllers permission. It may only take a second and a half to say it but multiply that by a thousand or more airplanes a week and now you are wasting significant time and unnecessarily increasing workload. And that’s just that piece of phraseology.

When you add all of the other unnecessary stuff you begin to see a degradation of the the efficient system we should have. There is a real and tangible reason for pilots AND controllers need to stay proficient and on the top of their game.

A controller doesn’t sound impersonal and sometimes curt sometimes because he is rude (although that certainly happens). It’s because he has hundreds of other pilots he has to deal with many counting as two or three due to incompetence or improficiency.

That’s why phraseology is important and why we tend to not explain things except when necessary to help a pilot who doesn’t understand.

We have really gooten of the subject but it’s a good discussion.

Tex

IF you say it to one, he *shouldn't* say it the next 20 times he's in your airspace, and if others are listening they *should* pick up on that, and not say it the next 20 times in your airspace So you don't have to say it a few thousand times a week. Just a few (relatively speaking). And I also said Class D (and yeah, I know there's a few busy ones out there. But *most* class D's are pretty quiet and there's plenty of time to add that in there. And if just a few of all y'all start saying that, maybe it permeates to all the other class D towers. Hell, put it on the ATIS.

 

[denverpilot]

Hell, put it on the ATIS.

Dude. Our ATIS is already like ten minutes long with our “special procedures in effect” because apparently they can’t just put that crap in whatever we’re calling the A/FD these days and expect anyone to read it.

The same special procedures we had ten years ago. LOL.