Reading Back Every Word: Good Idea, or Going Too Far?

Palmpilot said:
What if the pilot says "passing 4,000 climbing 5,500"?

Is the destination altitude 5,500, or is it 4,000 + 5,500 = 9,500?

You and I know that people usually mean 5,500, but unless and until they remove the "to" from the AIM, the above form of report introduces an ambiguity.
Click to expand...

I would still interpret that transmission to mean you're going to level off at 5,500. Never heard of anyone broadcasting an amount of altitude to add to their current altitude.

If you're IFR and read that back like in your example, it's a given you're going to level off at 5,500 because it's assigned. If you're VFR and stated that the way you did, then I'd say the controller would write 55 on the strip. If you went through 5,500 on up to 9,500, in sure the controller wouldn't care anyway. They'd probably say "what's your final altitude again. I thought you were going to 5,500?"

Can't go wrong by saying: "Leaving 4,000, climbing to maintain 5,500."
 
I just respond to all calls from ATC with "Roger." That way, if they're expecting a specific readback, they'll just tell me.

Not sure why the controllers always seem to have an attitude about it, though.
 
kayoh190 said:
I just respond to all calls from ATC with "Roger." That way, if they're expecting a specific readback, they'll just tell me.

Not sure why the controllers always seem to have an attitude about it, though.
Click to expand...
Serious?
 
Timmer said:
There's only one way to interpret those numbers, AFAIK. You mention altitudes, not amount of change. I have never seen that mentioned in the AIM.
Click to expand...

I've never been able to find the phraseology you recommended in the AIM. That increases the chances that someone might misinterpret it.

I'm not saying it's a very likely misinterpretation, but misinterpreting "to" is not very likely either, because of the conventions that the AIM sets out for how altitudes and flight levels are to be stated. My conclusion from that is that it doesn't much matter which way it's done, so I'm going to continue to follow the AIM on this unless or until it is changed. Your mileage may vary.
 
Velocity173 said:
I would still interpret that transmission to mean you're going to level off at 5,500. Never heard of anyone broadcasting an amount of altitude to add to their current altitude.

If you're IFR and read that back like in your example, it's a given you're going to level off at 5,500 because it's assigned. If you're VFR and stated that the way you did, then I'd say the controller would write 55 on the strip. If you went through 5,500 on up to 9,500, in sure the controller wouldn't care anyway. They'd probably say "what's your final altitude again. I thought you were going to 5,500?"

Can't go wrong by saying: "Leaving 4,000, climbing to maintain 5,500."
Click to expand...

I doubt that either way of saying it is likely to cause a misunderstanding, so I figure I might as well follow the AIM.
 
As a general rule, altitudes, headings, runway information(ATIS, approach info, etc), and hold short instructions. Everything else, depends on why ATC issues it to you. I may give an altimeter because the .65 requires it, or I might give an altimeter because I need it for separation. In the case of the former, I don't need a read back. I will ask for a read back if I need it for separation.
 
Timmer said:
I always try the pattern:

level <alt>
leaving <alt> [climbing|descending] <new-alt>
passing <alt> [climbing|descending] <new-alt>

level <alt> can often just be "<alt>":

"SoCal Approach Cessna 12345 3,500"
"SoCal Approach Cessna 12345 passing 4,200 climbing 5,500"
Click to expand...

Why "leaving" or "passing?"

You're either level or climbing / descending.
 
and please stop saying "OK, Identing now" / "here comes the ident"

Please
 
flyingron said:
Why "leaving" or "passing?"

You're either level or climbing / descending.
Click to expand...

Passing means you're passing through, i.e. you weren't at that level before but just happen to be at that altitude the moment of the call. Leaving means you were maintaining the altitude but are now changing to a different altitude.

ATC wants to know where are you right now and to where are you going.
 
B350ATP said:
and please stop saying "OK, Identing now" / "here comes the ident"

Please
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, when one doesn't acknowledge verbally, sometimes the controller comes back "Tiger 22RL, did you copy 'ident'?" and won't stop until you say something as well as pushing the button. :mad2:
 
B350ATP said:
and please stop saying "OK, Identing now" / "here comes the ident"

Please
Click to expand...
I'll usually say
NY Approach: "Cessna 12345 ident, please"
Cessna 12345: "Ident, Cessna 12345"

I don't think there is anything wrong with that

What about "Cessna 12345 with the flash":D
 
Ron Levy said:
Unfortunately, when one doesn't acknowledge verbally, sometimes the controller comes back "Tiger 22RL, did you copy 'ident'?" and won't stop until you say something as well as pushing the button. :mad2:
Click to expand...
What about keying the mic? Will that suffice? Not saying I do this. See above post for what I do
 
Ron Levy said:
Unfortunately, when one doesn't acknowledge verbally, sometimes the controller comes back "Tiger 22RL, did you copy 'ident'?" and won't stop until you say something as well as pushing the button. :mad2:
Click to expand...

The ident flash itself is the acknowledgement. If 30 minutes pass and no Ident, then yes, a verbal query is in order. Squawk Ident does not require readback/verbal acknowledgement

by the way, professional communication is about talking less, not more.

how yall doing approach sundowner 123 with you level 4500 with the numbers over at Happy Town, looking for practice ILS if you can work it in

 
Last edited:
B350ATP said:
and please stop saying "OK, Identing now" / "here comes the ident"

Please
Click to expand...

IIRC, a Center scope sweep takes about twelve seconds (TRACONs sweep faster). That's a long time for a controller to wait for a beacon return to appear, especially when s/he is tracking several targets. There is nothing wrong with "Identing" as you push the button.

Bob Gardner
 
jordane93 said:
What about keying the mic? Will that suffice? Not saying I do this. See above post for what I do
Click to expand...

Not an official means of acknowledgment but I'm sure there are controllers out the who will accept it. For an ident just give callsign and "wilco."
 
jordane93 said:
What about keying the mic? Will that suffice? Not saying I do this. See above post for what I do
Click to expand...

B350ATP said:
The ident flash itself is the acknowledgement. If 30 minutes pass and no Ident, then yes, a verbal query is in order. Squawk Ident does not require readback/verbal acknowledgement
Click to expand...

They gave an instruction, they are waiting for a verbal reply just like assigning an altitude or vector. "Here comes the flash" or something but you need to acknowledge. As Bob said you're looking at around 12 secs with center and about half that time with terminal facilities.
 
Velocity173 said:
They gave an instruction, they are waiting for a verbal reply just like assigning an altitude or vector. "Here comes the flash" or something but you need to acknowledge. As Bob said you're looking at around 12 secs with center and about half that time with terminal facilities.
Click to expand...

Again, squawk ident does not require verbal reply/acknowledgement. The squawk ident action is a communication itself to the ATC facility who requested it.
 
Live ATC and listen to the pros - the good ones at least

Do NOT worry about how much time you are taking. ATC is talking to you and you have regulatory requirements to meet. His being busy is not your problem. But I cna guarantee if there is a dispute, the FSDO will listen to every word you said with a microscope. Best get it right the first time.

If you can rapid fire speech and sound like a 20,000 hour pro, good on ya.
But, I will speak at a normal pace and repeat all the items required - legibly - and once.
If I run off at the mouth and he does not understand my shorthand speech he has to repeat - how does that help him?
 
speaking fast has nothing to do with being professional

being professional = communicate the message successfully without speaking excessively
 
B350ATP said:
Again, squawk ident does not require verbal reply/acknowledgement. The squawk ident action is a communication itself to the ATC facility who requested it.
Click to expand...

FWIW, while this works in the US, it doesn't in other places in the world.

In Asia when ATC request to squawk ident, you are expected to do so and reply back on the radio.
 
B350ATP said:
Again, squawk ident does not require verbal reply/acknowledgement. The squawk ident action is a communication itself to the ATC facility who requested it.
Click to expand...

Again, you've been given an instruction by ATC, IAW 2-4-3 of the .65, it requires a verbal acknowledgement. Just like giving a vector or altitude, just because it's observed doesn't mean the command is acknowledged.

It you're talking receiver only acknowledgement, than yes, ident would be fine...but we're not.
 
Last edited:
When ATC gives me a squawk code, I enter it into the transponder first and then acknowledge the transmission, because if it do the acknowledgement first, I'm afraid I might forget the squawk code before I get it entered. :redface: Today when I did that, the controller went on to talk to a few other aircraft before I made a verbal acknowledgement. As soon as the frequency got quiet, I made my acknowledgement. The controller didn't give any indication of having a problem with this.
 
Palmpilot said:
When ATC gives me a squawk code, I enter it into the transponder first and then acknowledge the transmission, because if it do the acknowledgement first, I'm afraid I might forget the squawk code before I get it entered. :redface: Today when I did that, the controller went on to talk to a few other aircraft before I made a verbal acknowledgement. As soon as the frequency got quiet, I made my acknowledgement. The controller didn't give any indication of having a problem with this.
Click to expand...
I guess everyone's different. I read it back first, partly because I actually remember it better having repeated it once myself. Also, if I've misheard the controller, it gives him a chance to correct me before I enter the code.
 
B350ATP said:
Again, squawk ident does not require verbal reply/acknowledgement. The squawk ident action is a communication itself to the ATC facility who requested it.
Click to expand...

Palmpilot said:
When ATC gives me a squawk code, I enter it into the transponder first and then acknowledge the transmission, because if it do the acknowledgement first, I'm afraid I might forget the squawk code before I get it entered. :redface: Today when I did that, the controller went on to talk to a few other aircraft before I made a verbal acknowledgement. As soon as the frequency got quiet, I made my acknowledgement. The controller didn't give any indication of having a problem with this.
Click to expand...

I don't know too many that would have a problem with it either.
 
jordane93 said:
What about keying the mic? Will that suffice? Not saying I do this. See above post for what I do
Click to expand...
The old "double-click" to acknowledge is something the military does (or at least did when I was flying in the military) in a min-comm environment, but I know of no official FAA guidance which says that's an approved method for acknowledgement. If you asked the FAA about it, my guess is they'd say it does not allow the controller to be sure who gave the acknowledgement, and I've seen/heard plenty of situations on ATC freqs where the wrong party acknowledged an instruction.
 
B350ATP said:
The ident flash itself is the acknowledgement. If 30 minutes pass and no Ident, then yes, a verbal query is in order. Squawk Ident does not require readback/verbal acknowledgement

by the way, professional communication is about talking less, not more.
Click to expand...
Agreed with two caveats. First, you have to make sure enough is said to ensure the message is delivered accurately. Second, some controllers seem to get itchy if you don't at least say "Roger" and your call sign to everything they tell you. No doubt they have their own tales of bad things happening to back their position.
 
Dr. O said:
If you can rapid fire speech and sound like a 20,000 hour pro, good on ya.
But, I will speak at a normal pace and repeat all the items required - legibly - and once.
If I run off at the mouth and he does not understand my shorthand speech he has to repeat - how does that help him?
Click to expand...
There seems to be an obsession with talking fast which is wrong. Controllers and pilots are both guilty of this. A lot of the times, I hear a controller say something like, "Aircraft calling, say again" all because he heard just a fast, jumbled mess of words. Slow down, enunciate, and speak clearly
 
Ron Levy said:
The old "double-click" to acknowledge is something the military does (or at least did when I was flying in the military) in a min-comm environment, but I know of no official FAA guidance which says that's an approved method for acknowledgement. If you asked the FAA about it, my guess is they'd say it does not allow the controller to be sure who gave the acknowledgement, and I've seen/heard plenty of situations on ATC freqs where the wrong party acknowledged an instruction.
Click to expand...
Yea i can see where it can cause confusion, especially if they have a high traffic load
 
Last edited:
Velocity173 said:
Again, you've been given an instruction by ATC, IAW 2-4-3 of the .65, it requires a verbal acknowledgement. Just like giving a vector or altitude, just because it's observed doesn't mean the command is acknowledged.

It you're talking receiver only acknowledgement, than yes, ident would be fine...but we're not.
Click to expand...

Incorrect
 
Ron Levy said:
Agreed with two caveats. First, you have to make sure enough is said to ensure the message is delivered accurately. Second, some controllers seem to get itchy if you don't at least say "Roger" and your call sign to everything they tell you. No doubt they have their own tales of bad things happening to back their position.
Click to expand...

At no point did I say anything to the contrary.
 
azure said:
I guess everyone's different. I read it back first, partly because I actually remember it better having repeated it once myself.
Click to expand...

Another difference between us is that you're probably much younger than me. :D

I regard entering the code into the transponder as the equivalent of writing it down, with the added benefit of killing two birds with one stone.

Also, if I've misheard the controller, it gives him a chance to correct me before I enter the code.
Click to expand...

That's why I did eventually read back the code when the frequency got quiet again.

We all have to manage our own skill sets to get the best result.
 
bobmrg said:
AIM 4-4-7 limits readbacks to those portions of clearances relating to headings and/or altitudes.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

Do Victor Airway assignments and intersection assignment constitute heading info? I read back my clearances pretty much verbatim.
 
B350ATP said:
Again, squawk ident does not require verbal reply/acknowledgement. The squawk ident action is a communication itself to the ATC facility who requested it.
Click to expand...

Unless your ident didn't work, then the controller doesn't know if your TXP is screwed or if you didn't hear them. I just say 'ident 9SA' as I hit it.
 
Ron Levy said:
The old "double-click" to acknowledge is something the military does (or at least did when I was flying in the military) in a min-comm environment, but I know of no official FAA guidance which says that's an approved method for acknowledgement. If you asked the FAA about it, my guess is they'd say it does not allow the controller to be sure who gave the acknowledgement, and I've seen/heard plenty of situations on ATC freqs where the wrong party acknowledged an instruction.
Click to expand...

double click acknowledgement used often in Europe by pilots (not in situations that obviously require read back)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top