Is the phrase "rolling" useful?

“Rolling” is as useful to ATC as a reply of “position checks” to a radar contact call.
 
asicer said:
In the .mil world is a static takeoff one where you stop somewhere on the runway centerline before takeoff?
Click to expand...

In essence. Static is merely a run up of engines from a stationary position on the runway, to military power (dry thrust, if the distinction is applicable), before releasing brakes [and max AB selection if applicable]. This is of consequence to formations as there is time expended on the runway aligning sight pictures, ensuring lateral separation, and exchange of run-up signals among element members prior to brake release. A 'rolling' takeoff otoh, would have no "line up and wait" portion, just align with runway and light the cans. Wingmen expected to feed the fight in 10 second intervals (or 20 for instrument trail departure) in the same fashion.

asicer said:
I'm often asked if I can "accept an immediate". When I reply with an affirmative, I get "cleared for immediate takeoff". If I'm feeling cheeky, I might read back with "cleared for takeoff, rolling". But mostly I just do the boring "cleared for takeoff" readback.
Click to expand...

It's rather apparent that in .civ parlance, the addition of rolling/immediate/etc is considered immaterial or even extraneous with prejudice, depending on how anal retentive the pedant in question is being. I only speak for .mil facilities accustomed to and/or primarily assigned the task of tactical/fighter-lead-in/fighter training, for which the suffix 'rolling' is recognized to mean something distinct from a static takeoff, with time/separation implications of significance for the tower, and a regular occurrence enough to warrant publishing said communications addendum in the first place. I'm not advocating people appropriate these comm standards for .civ tower use, though I don't think it's a big deal in the spectrum of things to get wound up about.

In the end, there's tons of stuff that colors outside the FAR/AIM on this side of the flying clownshow. I'm certainly guilty of many of these faux pas when switching hats on my time off. Sometimes I have to do a double take (mainly wx mins, but fighter comm is usually another, law of primacy/negative transfer type of thing). No bent metal, no biggie. :thumbsup: Cheers!
 
Pi1otguy said:
We all learned that "with you" is doubly redundant but what about "rolling". When talking to tower, is the declaration that you are "rolling" actually useful?

There are only 2 situations I use this. When the runway isn't visible to the tower or the "go" portion of stop n goes at night.

For example:
Twr: Bugsmasher 12A, runway 34, cleared for takeoff.
Bugsmasher: 12A, cleared for takeoff on runway 34.
(Tower can't see half the runway)
(A moment later)
Bugsmasher: 12A rolling
Click to expand...
It’s useful for identifying morons acting as PIC of an airplane.

PS Don’t forget to mention that you’re “taking the active”. And where you’re taking it so we can go get it back.
 
Velocity173 said:
“Rolling” is as useful to ATC as a reply of “position checks” to a radar contact call.
Click to expand...

Both are just a slang way of replying. Truly nothing wrong with either response imo.

I honestly believe many small airplane guys want to pretend their so perfect, that they use ATC communications as the link.

Just listen to ATC… much is concise, but more is about general jargon & cadence.

I can tell a GA pilot from a pro from his radio calls… and it’s not due to *what* he says.
 
I like when the tower says “no delay” and the plane doesn’t move until their radio call is completed, which includes rolling or “on the roll”.
 
Clear, concise and detailed communication is key on the military side. Everyone in your flight, and if able, everyone in the AOR (area of responsibility) knowing exactly what you are doing and you knowing what they are doing will surely lead to victory. See the 5:58 mark of this aerial combat documentary I found for the level of informational fidelity I’m talking about. It’s disappointing they edited out all of the other similar radio calls though:

Edit: sorry I couldn’t get the time stamped link to work.
 
Last edited:
I hate some of these phrases, but at our non-towered I've had a few occasions that I *WISH* they had used it. Like when the student pilot pulls out and parks on the numbers doing god-knows-what while you complete flying from abeam the numbers, the entire base, and are on final forced into a side step go-around (each time their prop was turning so I know they didn't kill an engine, same for a flat).
 
Launch @ Will
 
RudyP said:
Same... Especially in a jet because it takes a few seconds for the engines to spool so they won't see you move right away, there are a bunch of pre-takeoff switches to flip and sometimes you do a static takeoff - all of that can add time which they don't want you to take in an expedited clearance. Saying "rolling" lets them know I understand the urgency, I've already moved the throttles, will deal with the switches on the roll and will do a rolling takeoff run.
Click to expand...
ATC, esp the tower dude, would have absolutely no idea about the takeoff characteristics of any jet, as jets never land nor take off from controlled airfields.

Thank Orvil and Wilbur you are here to clear up all the confusion about jets not instantly shooting up to fl250
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top