timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
Winner!
Tree? Fife?
- Thread starter RobertSubnet
- Start date
Winner!
Sluggo63
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2013
- Messages
- 1,927
- Display Name
Display name:
Sluggo63
This is one of my biggest pet peeves. It's embarrassing, and unprofessional. Then it usually ends with the US based pilot getting indignant on the radio that the controller "can't speak English." He's probably right... so, keep it standard ICAO and you'll have less problems.
The controllers overseas are "English Proficient" but that has a totally different meaning than we think it does. It's only "English Proficient" in standard controller verbiage. That means they know the numbers 0-9 and "hundred," "thousand." No "-teens," etc. That's why altitudes should be given as single digits... "One-five thousand, four hundred" not "Fifteen point four."
Add to that marginally proficient foreign controllers speaking to marginally proficient national airline pilots in their local language (I'm looking at you, China) and it becomes a confusing mess on the radio. Mo' standard...mo' better...
Like this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmameGLKoic
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
Captain
Final Approach
Yeah, I flew with a guy to Providenciales (I think) and Miami Center cleared us down to FL050. He gets on the radio and reads back "down to five thousand" (emphasis his) and snorts to me like ATC is the biggest idiot. I pull out the chart and show him the transition level is 3,000 (or whatever, I'm not looking it up...but FL050 was right).
Guess he sorta felt dumb...
Guess he sorta felt dumb...
Sluggo63
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2013
- Messages
- 1,927
- Display Name
Display name:
Sluggo63
If you want to read a good accident study where ATC/Pilot phraseology is primarily to blame, look at the 1989 Flying Tigers Line "Tiger 66" accident in Kuala Lumpur.
There were a lot of errors, but what finally got them was that ATC cleared them to descend "two four zero zero" (2,400'), but the crew interpreted this a descend "to four zero zero" (400'). They hit a hill at 430'. These guys were pretty screwed up going into the whole approach phase, but if ATC had used descend "two thousand four hundred" they would probably still be around.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2Pi8EuTcAc
There were a lot of errors, but what finally got them was that ATC cleared them to descend "two four zero zero" (2,400'), but the crew interpreted this a descend "to four zero zero" (400'). They hit a hill at 430'. These guys were pretty screwed up going into the whole approach phase, but if ATC had used descend "two thousand four hundred" they would probably still be around.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2Pi8EuTcAc
roncachamp
Final Approach
So the crew believed they were cleared down to 400' MSL. I can't help but wonder what distance above the surface they thought that would provide.
Larry in TN
En-Route
It has been many years since I read that accident report but I believe that the crew was quite fatigued which likely played a role in their loss of situational awareness on the perceived altitude assignment.
petrolero
Pattern Altitude
Best point in this thread so far: Sierra sounds like zero. Definitely! That one makes perfect sense and I can see it being a problem on occasion.
And I understand that the 'th' sound is not easy for everyone or even existent in some languages. That doesn't mean that those who do speak English need to deliberately alter the word "three" to make it "tree". What does that help? If a non-native speaker says "tree" because otherwise it comes out "sree" then so be it. But why would a native or experienced ESL speaker do that? It's not as if they aren't understood otherwise.
Five sounds like nine? How ****ty are your radios*? Even if it did, changing it to "fife" doesn't make it any better. Changing nine to niner or five to fiver would makes it better, and we do the former. But why do both "fife" AND "niner"? But not change zero to nil or sierra to... skeeter or shamalamadingdong or something.
Someone must have gotten a PhD by coming up with "tree" and "fife".
*Someone is going to say some crap about HF or the radios of yore and I'm going to call bravo sierra... but go ahead and use "tree" and "fife" on HF or on your crystal radio if it pleases your HAM radio soul.
And I understand that the 'th' sound is not easy for everyone or even existent in some languages. That doesn't mean that those who do speak English need to deliberately alter the word "three" to make it "tree". What does that help? If a non-native speaker says "tree" because otherwise it comes out "sree" then so be it. But why would a native or experienced ESL speaker do that? It's not as if they aren't understood otherwise.
Five sounds like nine? How ****ty are your radios*? Even if it did, changing it to "fife" doesn't make it any better. Changing nine to niner or five to fiver would makes it better, and we do the former. But why do both "fife" AND "niner"? But not change zero to nil or sierra to... skeeter or shamalamadingdong or something.
Someone must have gotten a PhD by coming up with "tree" and "fife".
*Someone is going to say some crap about HF or the radios of yore and I'm going to call bravo sierra... but go ahead and use "tree" and "fife" on HF or on your crystal radio if it pleases your HAM radio soul.
roncachamp
Final Approach
On what kinds of occasions do you see that as a potential problem?
denverpilot
Tied Down
*Someone is going to say some crap about HF or the radios of yore and I'm going to call bravo sierra... but go ahead and use "tree" and "fife" on HF or on your crystal radio if it pleases your HAM radio soul.
Has nothing at all to do with Ham Radio. You do know that HF is still quite heavily used for transoceanic flight, right?
Go listen to some of it on LiveATC sometime.
The receivers LiveATC is using are pretty good modern quality stuff. Plenty of airplanes out there not flying with stuff that sounds as good.
Heck, listening in sometimes you even near someone flying something old and trashy that doesn't even have an operational SELCAL and is going to have to fly the entire North Atlantic track with the radio hissing in their headset. Poor dudes...
The phonetic standard is built for the lowest common denominator of audio quality... Which is the HF stuff. You don't design a standard ( nor technically have to use it to be understood ) for the good radio system, you standardize for the bad.
-----
As far as the person who said their co-worker asked if they were in law enforcement, that's doubly funny because the only law enforcement where you'll hear the ICAO phonetic standard is the military.
Civilian law enforcement almost all follows the APCO recommendations to use the police phonetics which are based on "common" first names...
Adam, Baker/Boy, Charlie/Charles, David, Edward, Frank...
Noted above are two commonly changed letters between departments/jurisdictions and we are only to six letters..
It gets worse from there.
And similar differences with Fire and EMT dispatch. X-Ray seems to hold the record for common ground on almost all standards.
But I've always wanted a smart ass dispatch Sergeant to make everyone use "Xylophone". That'd mess with everyone's heads...
Standards are great. Everyone should have their own. LOL
mkosmo
Pattern Altitude
Funny you mention that. I overheard my fuel load this evening on the FBO radio, heard five point zero gallons and thought it was low. If was really nine point zero and I misheard it.
It's not always FIVE vs. NINE that's the problem. I had a controller who said ONE that was very close sounding given the conditions to NINE, but figuring he didn't say NINER resolved that ambiguity.
You can cry about how this is obviated by how great your Garmin radio is, but frankly once you get out of the major megopolis approach control soup, you're often in the static-prone, far from the Center transmitter situation once again. VHF is in fact, WORSE, than HF.
You can cry about how this is obviated by how great your Garmin radio is, but frankly once you get out of the major megopolis approach control soup, you're often in the static-prone, far from the Center transmitter situation once again. VHF is in fact, WORSE, than HF.
petrolero
Pattern Altitude
Not many.
petrolero
Pattern Altitude
Has nothing at all to do with Ham Radio. You do know that HF is still quite heavily used for transoceanic flight, right?
Go listen to some of it on LiveATC sometime.
The receivers LiveATC is using are pretty good modern quality stuff. Plenty of airplanes out there not flying with stuff that sounds as good.
Heck, listening in sometimes you even near someone flying something old and trashy that doesn't even have an operational SELCAL and is going to have to fly the entire North Atlantic track with the radio hissing in their headset. Poor dudes...
The phonetic standard is built for the lowest common denominator of audio quality... Which is the HF stuff. You don't design a standard ( nor technically have to use it to be understood ) for the good radio system, you standardize for the bad.
-----
As far as the person who said their co-worker asked if they were in law enforcement, that's doubly funny because the only law enforcement where you'll hear the ICAO phonetic standard is the military.
Civilian law enforcement almost all follows the APCO recommendations to use the police phonetics which are based on "common" first names...
Adam, Baker/Boy, Charlie/Charles, David, Edward, Frank...
Noted above are two commonly changed letters between departments/jurisdictions and we are only to six letters..
It gets worse from there.
And similar differences with Fire and EMT dispatch. X-Ray seems to hold the record for common ground on almost all standards.
But I've always wanted a smart ass dispatch Sergeant to make everyone use "Xylophone". That'd mess with everyone's heads...
Standards are great. Everyone should have their own. LOL
I think it was on the TV show Psych where a cop used "tsunami" for the letter T. I thought that was pretty good.
Anyway I think I was the one who posted about HF, not BigBadLou. Yes transoceanic flights use HF and I that's why I figured someone would mention it. And by all means, if you find yourself on such a flight... use "tree" and "fife" if you think it will help. I maintain it won't make any help any more than speaking slowly, using the normal phonetic alphabet, and enunciating.
It won't hurt nor help in the CONUS on VHF either and overall it's no big deal. But neither do I believe it's necessary - even on HF. Talking strictly about "tree" and "fife" here, mind you.
I know. I'm a reckless maniac.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Crazy.
I wasn't arguing the need for it. Simply explaining the reason for the season, with the standard. HF usually sucketh mightily.
I wasn't arguing the need for it. Simply explaining the reason for the season, with the standard. HF usually sucketh mightily.
Timbeck2
Final Approach
Actually QNH means "Query: Nautical Height" and is expressed in millibars. We have a chart that converts the altimeter to millibars for our British pilots who come to train here in Arizona. We agreed a few years ago just to give them our altimeter and let them convert it to QNH.
Hank S
En-Route
I had trouble on the phone today understanding a price quote at work. Couldn't tell if he said "one" or "nine" thousand dollars . . . Until I asked for clarification. He should have said "niner thousand," it would have been easier.
Timbeck2
Final Approach
One thousand would definitely be easier for me.
denverpilot
Tied Down
If you were buying, send a check for $1000.
If you were selling send an invoice for $9000.
I don't see the problem here.
If you were buying, send a check for $1000.
If you were selling send an invoice for $9000.
I don't see the problem here.
Reminds me of when I took the 13 WPM code test for the General Class ham license. (This was back in the days when the FCC still gave the tests themselves.) Before handing in my copy, I was looking through it to see if I had achieved the required one minute of continuous copy. Unfortunately, the only section where I did had a character in the middle that I had not written clearly enough to determine whether it was an "S" or a "5". I decided to hand it in without removing the ambiguity, in the hope that the official checking it would interpret it to be the correct character. It worked!
Actually QNH is just letters. "Nautical Height," "Newlyn Harbor," and "Not Here" are commonly ascribed meanings to the NH, it's officially without meaning.
The response to QNH? is given in whatever units altimeter settings are commonly given in. In the US that would be inches of mercury, most other places, millibars.
Larry in TN
En-Route
From the Pilot/Controller Glossary:
QNH− The barometric pressure as reported by a particular station.
QNH, QNE, and QFE refer only to the barometric reference being used, not the units.
Timbeck2
Final Approach
When I was stationed in England, the controllers there didn't read OUR pilot/glossary. I should write them all a letter and tell them they're wrong.
Larry in TN
En-Route
QNH is a term used over most of the world whether the country uses inches, mb, or both.
- Joined
- May 11, 2010
- Messages
- 20,703
- Location
- Charlotte, NC
- Display Name
Display name:
Snorting his way across the USA
Back when I learned military radio communications (same ICAO phonetic alphabet) the official pronounciation was "tree" and "fife".
But nobody ever actually said it that way.
But nobody ever actually said it that way.
Captain
Final Approach
Navy from '91 to '97 we all used tree and fife. I worked in CIC and spoke on radios a lot.
- Joined
- May 11, 2010
- Messages
- 20,703
- Location
- Charlotte, NC
- Display Name
Display name:
Snorting his way across the USA
I spoke on the radios a lot as well, Army, Infantry squad leader and battalion level ops sergeant (S2 and S3 staff.)