Identify Ground Facility on Subsequent Calls?

RingLaserGyroSandwich

RingLaserGyroSandwich

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Feb 6, 2019
Messages
409
Location
Annapolis
Display Name
Display name:
RingLaserGyroSandwich
Here is a script from a recent flight departing from Lee within the Washington DC SFRA, intending to depart the SFRA:

Me: "Potomac [Approach], Bugsmasher 1234 off of Lee." (technically I left off "approach")
Potomac: "N1234, radar contact, proceed on course outside Bravo, Baltimore altimeter 2992."
Me: "Proceed outside Bravo, 2992, Bugsmasher 234."​

A few minutes later, I departed the SFRA and didn't immediately get contacted by Potomac, so I called them up to prompt them:

Me: "Bugsmasher 234 outside the SFRA"
<20 seconds of silence>
My Instructor: "Potomac, Bugsmasher 234 outside the SFRA"
Potomac: "Uh, N234, Squawk VFR, frequency changed approved."
My Instructor: "Squawking VFR, Bugsmasher 234."​

The conversation was pretty normal except for whatever reason Potomac was busy when I called them up the second time and didn't catch my transmission. However, the instructor pointed out that I likely had the problem because I didn't start my transmission with "Potomac." Is his thinking common?

On first call-up, I always identify the ground facility, as I did in the script. However, on subsequent call-ups to the same controller, I just state my call sign and then my request. The AIM chapter on radio communications seems to say that identifying the ground facility on subsequent call-ups is "optional," so neither of us are necessarily incorrect per AIM guidance.

My thinking for why I would want to omit the "Potomac" in the second portion of the script above is that omitting it implies to the controller I'm not a fresh new person calling them up. By starting with my call sign, it's telling them I'm someone who has already established comms with them. If I start my call with "Potomac," then the controller's first thought is probably, "oh, who is this new person?"

What are your thoughts? What do the controllers on PoA think?
 
Last edited:
Are you sure the instructor wasn't joking? Who else would you be talking to?

The controller was "on the landline", "offline coordinating", received two calls at once, zoned out, didn't realize you wanted a response...take your pick.
 
RingLaserGyroSandwich said:
Here is a script from a recent flight departing from Lee within the Washington DC SFRA, intending to depart the SFRA:

Me: "Potomac [Approach], Bugsmasher 1234 off of Lee." (technically I left off "approach")
Potomac: "N1234, radar contact, proceed on course outside Bravo, Baltimore altimeter 2992."
Me: "Proceed outside Bravo, 2992, Bugsmasher 234."​

A few minutes later, I departed the SFRA and didn't immediate get contacted by Potomac, so I called them up to prompt them:

Me: "Bugsmasher 234 outside the SFRA"
<20 seconds of silence>
My Instructor: "Potomac, Bugsmasher 234 outside the SFRA"
Potomac: "Uh, N234, Squawk VFR, frequency changed approved."
My Instructor: "Squawking VFR, Bugsmasher 234."​

The conversation was pretty normal except for whatever reason Potomac was busy when I called them up the second time and didn't catch my transmission. However, the instructor pointed out that I likely had the problem because I didn't start my transmission with "Potomac." Is his thinking common?

On first call-up, I always identify the ground facility, as I did in the script. However, on subsequent call-ups to the same controller, I just state my call sign and then my request. The AIM chapter on radio communications seems to say that identifying the ground facility on subsequent call-ups is "optional," so neither of us are necessarily incorrect per AIM guidance.

My thinking for why I would want to omit the "Potomac" in the second portion of the script above is that omitting it implies to the controller I'm not a fresh new person calling them up. By starting with my call sign, it's telling them I'm someone who has already established comms with them. If I start my call with "Potomac," then the controller's first thought is probably, "oh, who is this new person?"

What are your thoughts? What do the controllers on PoA think?
Click to expand...
It helps to start it out with an attention getter. They aren’t use to you initiating a transmission by just starting with your call. Acknowledging a transmission from them is of course different. The thing in the AIM says you can omit the name of the facility. So ‘approach’ would be just fine. No need for Potomac.
 
I've always addressed them with Potomac, but occasionally, their responses are delayed or missed just the same; sometimes they get busy. One time, a whole frequency seemed to go dead; after a few planes tried to check in with no response, I called them up on another frequency to let them know. Sometimes the reverse happens, where they're so busy you can't get a word in edgewise, and when you do, you get "stand by".
Stuff happens, no big deal.
 
I always lead with the Ground Facility name, a habit left over from the days of conversations with two different stations on two individual radios at the same time.
 
Yeah to be clear, I'm not at all concerned about the fact that my call was missed. That occasionally happens and I understand why. My focus is on whether or not to say "Potomac," "Potomac Approach," "Approach," when making a subsequent call-up.
 
I just discussed this issue separately with an airline pilot I know and he had a good explanation. If my non-initial call is an expected report AND is very obvious that I'm a pilot talking to Potomac, then perhaps leaving off the "Potomac Approach" or equivalent at the beginning is okay. However, in any other case, the benefit of starting with "Potomac Approach" is that it helps other pilots realize I'm a pilot talking and not a controller. If I just say "Bugsmasher 123, outside the SFRA" then another pilot might hear that and think I'm a controller talking to Bugsmasher 123 about the fact that they are showing up as outside the SFRA or something like that, so I should have started with "Potomac Approach" or equivalent. Whereas, if I just say "Bugsmasher 123, Lee in sight" then it's obvious that I'm a pilot, not a controller, so it didn't hurt anyone to shorten my transmission by leaving off "Potomac Approach."

I was only thinking about this from the perspective of ATC, but when I put myself in the shoes of another pilot (especially one unfamiliar with the typical local comms), it makes more sense why you would be more inclined to start with "Potomac Approach" or equivalent. This isn't a 2 party chat, only.
 
RingLaserGyroSandwich said:
I just discussed this issue separately with an airline pilot I know and he had a good explanation. If my non-initial call is an expected report AND is very obvious that I'm a pilot talking to Potomac, then perhaps leaving off the "Potomac Approach" or equivalent at the beginning is okay. However, in any other case, the benefit of starting with "Potomac Approach" is that it helps other pilots realize I'm a pilot talking and not a controller. If I just say "Bugsmasher 123, outside the SFRA" then another pilot might hear that and think I'm a controller talking to Bugsmasher 123 about the fact that they are showing up as outside the SFRA or something like that, so I should have started with "Potomac Approach" or equivalent. Whereas, if I just say "Bugsmasher 123, Lee in sight" then it's obvious that I'm a pilot, not a controller, so it didn't hurt anyone to shorten my transmission by leaving off "Potomac Approach."

I was only thinking about this from the perspective of ATC, but when I put myself in the shoes of another pilot (especially one unfamiliar with the typical local comms), it makes more sense why you would be more inclined to start with "Potomac Approach" or equivalent. This isn't a 2 party chat, only.
Click to expand...
Never thought of that take on it. Makes sense.
 
I use the name until two way communication with facility is established. Then it's dropped. When handed off from one sector to another in the same facility, it depends how busy the frequency is. If busy, just the tail number, altitude and any restrictions previously issued. If slow, depends on my mood. If other pilots new to the frequency can't figure out who the controller is based on voice after about 3 transmissions, damn, I hope I'm not in their airspace.
 
First transmission use the location, after that leave it off. They know you’re talking to them. If you ever have the chance, visit an ATC facility. You’ll figure out that there is a lot more going on that pilots don’t see which will answer the question of “why doesn’t he answer me right away.”
 
Timbeck2 said:
First transmission use the location, after that leave it off. They know you’re talking to them. If you ever have the chance, visit an ATC facility. You’ll figure out that there is a lot more going on that pilots don’t see which will answer the question of “why doesn’t he answer me right away.”
Click to expand...
C’mon now. You know that some of the reasons don’t happen when there’s visitors up there:fingerwag:
 
I think Potomac should’ve said “remain outside bravo airspace.” ;)Seriously though, it wouldn’t have mattered if you identified Potomac or not, you either got blocked or they were busy doing something else.
 
RingLaserGyroSandwich said:
Here is a script from a recent flight departing from Lee within the Washington DC SFRA, intending to depart the SFRA:

Me: "Potomac [Approach], Bugsmasher 1234 off of Lee." (technically I left off "approach")
Potomac: "N1234, radar contact, proceed on course outside Bravo, Baltimore altimeter 2992."
Me: "Proceed outside Bravo, 2992, Bugsmasher 234."​

A few minutes later, I departed the SFRA and didn't immediately get contacted by Potomac, so I called them up to prompt them:

Me: "Bugsmasher 234 outside the SFRA"
<20 seconds of silence>
My Instructor: "Potomac, Bugsmasher 234 outside the SFRA"
Potomac: "Uh, N234, Squawk VFR, frequency changed approved."
My Instructor: "Squawking VFR, Bugsmasher 234."​

The conversation was pretty normal except for whatever reason Potomac was busy when I called them up the second time and didn't catch my transmission. However, the instructor pointed out that I likely had the problem because I didn't start my transmission with "Potomac." Is his thinking common?

On first call-up, I always identify the ground facility, as I did in the script. However, on subsequent call-ups to the same controller, I just state my call sign and then my request. The AIM chapter on radio communications seems to say that identifying the ground facility on subsequent call-ups is "optional," so neither of us are necessarily incorrect per AIM guidance.

My thinking for why I would want to omit the "Potomac" in the second portion of the script above is that omitting it implies to the controller I'm not a fresh new person calling them up. By starting with my call sign, it's telling them I'm someone who has already established comms with them. If I start my call with "Potomac," then the controller's first thought is probably, "oh, who is this new person?"

What are your thoughts? What do the controllers on PoA think?
Click to expand...

Your instructions were on course, remain clear Bravo and you guys are so impatient you are making a second call <20 seconds? Patience weed hopper.
 
Timbeck2 said:
First transmission use the location, after that leave it off. They know you’re talking to them. If you ever have the chance, visit an ATC facility. You’ll figure out that there is a lot more going on that pilots don’t see which will answer the question of “why doesn’t he answer me right away.”
Click to expand...
Just to be clear, are you saying my speech in the example in the OP is fine, or are you saying for second+ transmissions to shorten "Potomac Approach" to "Approach"? I think it's the former but I want to avoid making a bad assumption. Thanks in advance, appreciate the advice.

@Clip4 I think you misunderstood the script.
 
RingLaserGyroSandwich said:
Just to be clear, are you saying my speech in the example in the OP is fine, or are you saying for second+ transmissions to shorten "Potomac Approach" to "Approach"? I think it's the former but I want to avoid making a bad assumption. Thanks in advance, appreciate the advice.

@Clip4 I think you misunderstood the script.
Click to expand...

Not really. Potomac knew what you transmitted. Smack your CFIs hand off the mic button.
 
RingLaserGyroSandwich said:
Just to be clear, are you saying my speech in the example in the OP is fine, or are you saying for second+ transmissions to shorten "Potomac Approach" to "Approach"? I think it's the former but I want to avoid making a bad assumption. Thanks in advance, appreciate the advice.

@Clip4 I think you misunderstood the script.
Click to expand...

you should have said Potomac Approach the first time then approach thereafter but it really doesn’t matter. A lot of pilots call us up with “tower.” If they’re on my frequency, I assume they meant my tower. It’s not like I’m going to correct them.
 
Once communication is established you can leave off the location by the book. As far as I'm concerned, you could call me Atlanta, or center, or just use your callsign and say what you want to say. Just don't call me approach.:D
 
PastZTL said:
Once communication is established you can leave off the location by the book. As far as I'm concerned, you could call me Atlanta, or center, or just use your callsign and say what you want to say. Just don't call me approach.:D
Click to expand...
Yup, you guys know who you are. You don't need me reminding you.
 
PastZTL said:
Once communication is established you can leave off the location by the book. As far as I'm concerned, you could call me Atlanta, or center, or just use your callsign and say what you want to say. Just don't call me approach.:D
Click to expand...

I did call ATL approach ZTL this weekend. Also, if you were working Saturday I was the plane with the Emergency descent into RHP.
 
EdFred said:
I did call ATL approach ZTL this weekend. Also, if you were working Saturday I was the plane with the Emergency descent into RHP.
Click to expand...
I've been gone a couple of years. Spent a lot of years there and got to work with some of the most capable controllers in the NAS. I was proud when I got there and proud when I left.

Glad you made it through your emergency ok (I presume since you can type)!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top