The phrase "With You"

Officially it's "INFORMATION MIKE" though this is one of the few times the informal "with" or "we have" is shorter and just as clear.
 
flyingron said:
Officially it's "INFORMATION MIKE" though this is one of the few times the informal "with" or "we have" is shorter and just as clear.
Click to expand...
Right... but we all know controllers are bound to exactly phraseology. Pilots aren’t.

I don’t see the point in this entire thread.

Signed, Love ATITPPA
 
Of course, don't even get me started on Tally Ho and No Joy.
 
abqtj said:
what's ATiTPPA?

If you want a pet peeve, it's using acronyms assuming the audience knows the definition
Click to expand...

Any Traffic in The Pattern, Please Advise

Several issues with this call:

*Advise what? What stocks to buy? How to find and woo a life partner? Most likely you’ll get some snarky but probably deserved advice about proper radio ettiquete...

*Traffic in the pattern equipped with radios will (should) be making position reports. Listening on CTAF while still out should give a picture of the situation (Runway being used, how busy the pattern is, etc.). ATiTPPA, isn’t needed.

*What if all the traffic in the pattern decides to be super helpful to the newbie who made the call and all “advise” at the same time?

*There may be traffic in the pattern with no radio (NORDO). Hearing no response to ATiTPPA doesn’t mean there is no traffic.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
ATITPPA goes well with Fish Finders.

Not sure how those boats are getting up to seven thousand five hundred feet. Can you imagine how big a reel they're cranking on?
 
ATITPPA was common years ago when most unicoms were answered by someone in the FBO. I heard it a lot back then, even the FBO where I worked did it. Then there was AAS (airport advisory service) at airports with an actual FSS building on them, where the FSS specialist would issue you known traffic, runway, weather/wind information. Used to be enjoyable to take students to an airport with a FSS for a tour. Ah progress I guess.

Personally it doesn't bother me for someone to use the term.
 
Last edited:
It ****ed off someone at the FAA enough that they specifically put it in the AIM to not use AITTPPA. It's an insanely stupid call.
 
Well we know how ****y someone from the FAA can be. "Insanely stupid" call, well that's your call I guess. Doesn't bug me like I said. AIM is advisory also, not regulatory, but I don't teach students to use it, nor do I use it personally.
 
Last edited:
I still think the local CFIs and students who were all identifying as “Harambe One”, “Harambe Two” and “Haramabe Three” in the Denver southeast practice area a couple months ago was the funniest damn thing I’ve heard on the radio in a long time. LOL.

Practice areas are the worst for local landmark lingo-ism...

“Harambe One is over the water tower north to south at 8000”...

Arghhhh.
 
flyingron said:
It ****ed off someone at the FAA enough that they specifically put it in the AIM to not use AITTPPA. It's an insanely stupid call.
Click to expand...
I respectfully disagree, but that’s for another thread at another time.
 
Kritchlow said:
I respectfully disagree, but that’s for another thread at another time.
Click to expand...
Start the thread!!!

tumblr_lndumwiCey1qdh05go1_400.gif
 
I told @Clark1961 that he forgot to say ATITPPA inbound to Alamosa, over the radio even... and said we wished we had brought an audio recorder so we could send it to PoA. :)
 
denverpilot said:
I told @Clark1961 that he forgot to say ATITPPA inbound to Alamosa, over the radio even... and said we wished we had brought an audio recorder so we could send it to PoA. :)
Click to expand...
You guys made so many calls that ya jus’ well call ATITAPA. Sheesh, never heard so much noise at a quiet airport. It kept interrupting my nap...
 
Clark1961 said:
You guys made so many calls that ya jus’ well call ATITAPA. Sheesh, never heard so much noise at a quiet airport. It kept interrupting my nap...
Click to expand...

I told ya that wasn’t me, that was my co-owner. I’zzz just along fer da ride. :)
 
midlifeflyer said:
LOL!

"With you" is one of those non-standard but harmless phrases pilots manage to pick up. It is used by some when reporting in after a change of frequency. It theoretically is telling ATC you are on the frequency, but the actual standard terminology "Skyhawk 1234X. Level at 4,500" (or climbing, or whatever) tells them that. So it actually means nothing at all and is roughly the equivalent of "uhhh..." or "errr..." or "and..." It gets spread around by new pilots thinking it sounds professional.
Click to expand...

I'm with you on that.
 
When Trump institutes user fees to pay down the deficit, his FCC will start charging for every word uttered over the radio. Until that happens, I'll probably continue to say "with you" and "have a nice day" enjoying the free cost of doing so while I can.
 
Witmo said:
When Trump institutes user fees to pay down the deficit, his FCC will start charging for every word uttered over the radio. Until that happens, I'll probably continue to say "with you" and "have a nice day" enjoying the free cost of doing so while I can.
Click to expand...

“Have a nice day” is courteous. “With you” is just plain idiotic.
 
Witmo said:
When Trump institutes user fees to pay down the deficit, his FCC will start charging for every word uttered over the radio.
Click to expand...

They already do. That’s called “spectrum auctions” and has been around for a while now, long before Trump. July 1994 was the first one, and there’s been over 80 of them. (Under Clinton, if it matters, but it doesn’t. They’re all the same oligarchy and have the same friends.)

Completely inappropriate for a regulatory agency charged with proper spectrum management as evidenced by all sorts of auction “winners” both squatting on spectrum unused for over a decade and also simply not paying their bill to the US Treasury. Once the fines start, the companies place transmitters in the spectrum that accomplish literally nothing.

Politicians love to claim the money raised is a good thing, though. Pays for more shenanigans and avoids any requirement of the regulatory agency to actually think about spectrum usage or engineer it properly.

To adequately describe how stupid it is, consider the idea of auctioning off a swath of airspace of a significant size to the highest bidder, then banning any aircraft not authorized in it by the winning bidder, and not requiring the bidder pay immediately at auction end for said airspace nor using it for any aircraft. Then if fines start, fly empty airplanes around in it pretending to use it.
 
Funny how many lower time pilots complain about radio phraseology, yet you can pluck them out of the radio line up right away.

It’s not always the lingo, as much as it iscthe fluency and cadence.
 
Kritchlow said:
Funny how many lower time pilots complain about radio phraseology, yet you can pluck them out of the radio line up right away.
Click to expand...

It’s really rare at the airport or in an airplane. The only place you really see it in any quantity is on the Internet.

@Clark1961 complains to my poor co-owner on-air at empty airports, but that was friends picking on each other for fun. LOL. :)

I do think my co-owner was a tad confused about it since he’s not on the Internet much. Hahaha.

He figured out it was a joke when I responded that we’d be making our ATITPPA call next, if we hadn’t forgotten the recording gear to document it for the Internet to be offended about it. :)
 
Kritchlow said:
Funny how many lower time pilots complain about radio phraseology, yet you can pluck them out of the radio line up right away.

It’s not always the lingo, as much as it iscthe fluency and cadence.
Click to expand...

The problem isn’t lower time pilots, the problem is that “with you” is a demonstration that one has a problem comprehending how the English language works. It makes you sound illiterate.
 
Said “with you” once early in my training (because I heard airliners saying it on LiveATC.net). CFI told me I sounded like an idiot and if I wanted to sound professional this is what to say... haven’t said it since.
 
rocketflyer84 said:
Said “with you” once early in my training (because I heard airliners saying it on LiveATC.net). CFI told me I sounded like an idiot and if I wanted to sound professional this is what to say... haven’t said it since.
Click to expand...
This, a cfi told me nothing says "loser" like a pilot who uses "with you".
 
Rory said:
The problem isn’t lower time pilots, the problem is that “with you” is a demonstration that one has a problem comprehending how the English language works. It makes you sound illiterate.
Click to expand...
Well I don’t personally use the term, however I do here it used from time to time by professional pilots. They do not sound illiterate in my opinion.
 
abqtj said:
what's ATiTPPA?

If you want a pet peeve, it's using acronyms assuming the audience knows the definition :D
Click to expand...
Or ones that really don't exist. Like amu for thousand dollars. That one is used frequently on forums and really makes the user look like a idiot trying to be cool.
 
Rory said:
The problem isn’t lower time pilots, the problem is that “with you” is a demonstration that one has a problem comprehending how the English language works. It makes you sound illiterate.
Click to expand...

Oh c'mon, no it doesn't. I don't do it, I may have here and there, but to call someone illiterate for using it? FWIW I've heard airline pilots use it. Big ****ing deal, who cares.
 
I used to say this all the time because the pilot who got me into aviation said it. I think my first CFI used it too. The only reason I don't any more* is to keep my transmissions more succinct. It's harmless, as was said in the first reply on this thread.

For the same reason, I also used to use "no joy" and "tally" a lot for traffic callouts. Then I learned that a lot of controllers at civilian ATC facilities had no idea what those words meant. Standard phraseology dictates slightly longer replies, but succinctness isn't worth much if the other party doesn't understand you.

*The only exception is sometimes if being told to "change to my frequency", I will come back on the new frequency with "Nxxxxx with you on yyyyy."
 
Paulie said:
Or ones that really don't exist. Like amu for thousand dollars. That one is used frequently on forums and really makes the user look like a idiot trying to be cool.
Click to expand...
Again, I respectfully disagree.

It has been suggested that I start another thread on this. I might, post holidays after everything settles down. I’m a fan of the phrase and truly feel I have a valid defense for it.

I do realize though it’s everyone here (almost) against me.
Truth is I wouldn’t be trying to change anyone’s mind about it, but rather state my reasons for my arguement. I think at least some will at least understand my viewpoint, but not necessarily be changing their mind... and that’s fine.

Just too intense for little old me while I’m still drinking the Christmas bourbon.
 
Rory said:
The problem isn’t lower time pilots, the problem is that “with you” is a demonstration that one has a problem comprehending how the English language works. It makes you sound illiterate.
Click to expand...
Tha problem isn’t lowa time pilots, tha problem be dat “with you” be a demonstration dat one has a problem comprehendin' how tha f**k tha gangsta language works. Dat shee-it makes yo' sound illiterate.
 
azure said:
*The only exception is sometimes if being told to "change to my frequency", I will come back on the new frequency with "Nxxxxx with you on yyyyy."
Click to expand...
That is very close to the AIM recommended phraseology which is "[callsign] on [frequency]" or "[frequency], [callsign]". Just take out the "with you". Reference AIM 4-2-3 d.2.
 
Kritchlow said:
Again, I respectfully disagree.

It has been suggested that I start another thread on this. I might, post holidays after everything settles down. I’m a fan of the phrase and truly feel I have a valid defense for it.

I do realize though it’s everyone here (almost) against me.
Truth is I wouldn’t be trying to change anyone’s mind about it, but rather state my reasons for my arguement. I think at least some will at least understand my viewpoint, but not necessarily be changing their mind... and that’s fine.

Just too intense for little old me while I’m still drinking the Christmas bourbon.
Click to expand...

Simply make your normal position calls (and personally, if the frequency is not busy, I tend to make more of them than the average pilot) and it will be obvious to the other pilot you're in the pattern, or nearing the airport. Why overthink this?

No response to an "ATITPPA" call could also give you false confidence if there's a NORDO renegade buzzing around. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top