poor radio ed

[Skyracer]

Re: poor radio ed

I was saying that my radio verbiage is a habit pattern that I have developed over many cycles of the gear handle, and simply switching who owns the airplane I'm flying in isn't going to change that habit pattern.

Sure hope those habit patterns don't have you depending on the yellow handles in your next life.

[f1-69]

Re: poor radio ed

habbit or not, there is still right and wrong,and the wrong part is that when you are flying in the civilian world the other 85% dont know what the hell your saying,you will have to change, i mean your not going to be doing 3 mile initals with an over head break in your united 737 are you. I do love and respect what you guys go through for our country ,but you need to understand that the average banner tow pilot has 2000, he may not be able to do what you do with an f-whatever ,but you prob couldnt do what he does with a supercub, so its not a measurment but a retrospect you might want to think about. again much love for what you do

[supercub]

Re: poor radio ed

Randy.......Thanks for your service to our country.......it's greatly appreciated. Right, wrong, or whatever.......one thing we all have in common on here........we all love to fly. I think the original posting was "poor radio ed".........I posted some of my thought and pet peeves.....not worth getting into a pi#$ing contest over it.......unless you want to meet over Black Rock at eight three hundred feet......whopppppppps, I mean eight thousand three hundred feet and see who gets the first tally ho........or no joy. Happy flying.
Brian

[comancheflyer]

Re: poor radio ed

OK ... I'll add my list of phrases that makes me grind my teeth when I hear them.

1. Tower clears him for take off and he answers 'rolling' - Tower guys love this I'm sure
2. ATC asks if have traffic in sight and he answers 'roger' - All roger means is that he heard and understand the question. How about using affirmative or negative
3. ATC requests an altitude report and he answers '7.5' - This guy really wishes he could fly in those flight levels in his Cessna 150 I guess ...
4. I know I have more but these or the ones that I hear everytime I fly

I wonder if any of these guys ever took a gander at that AIM section of their FAR/AIM

[Randy Haskin]

Re: poor radio ed

Sure hope those habit patterns don't have you depending on the yellow handles in your next life.

I've never heard of anyone that makes "ejection" any part of their in-flight decisionmaking tree or part of their habit patterns.

It is a last resort when all other options are exhausted and the only alternative is to ride it in to the smoking hole.

Every pilot I know, myself included, bases their judgment and decisionmaking on making takeoffs=landings to the max extent possible.

[Randy Haskin]

Re: poor radio ed

habbit or not, there is still right and wrong,and the wrong part is that when you are flying in the civilian world the other 85% dont know what the hell your saying,you will have to change

I'm open to being "wrong", because certainly I don't know everything, but I'm still trying to locate where it says those two phrases mentioned above are "wrong".

Again, the FAA Pilot-Controller Glossary is not regulatory. Is there something in 14 CFR that I'm missing?

It's fine if you want to bash on somebody for "wanting to sound like Top Gun", but there is a significant difference between technique and procedure. Unless it is written down somewhere and is regulatory in nature (which makes something "procedure")...then it is "technique".

You can criticize someone's techniques that you don't agree with, but there is no such thing as a "right" technique and a "wrong" technique.

[Randy Haskin]

Re: poor radio ed

the average banner tow pilot has 2000, he may not be able to do what you do with an f-whatever ,but you prob couldnt do what he does with a supercub,

No question about that. Nobody this side of Bob Hoover can do it all, and people are good at what they have experience in.

[f1-69]

Re: poor radio ed

sorry randy this really wasnt about you I was just useing what you said as an example,dont know how it got to you.it wont come from me anymore.but ........regalatory or not have a reason for saying things like ""and " as well as aaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh when you dont know what to say.again that is not aimed at you unless you do these.tooooodlees

[tow-3]

Re: poor radio ed

as to the 7 point 5, im guilty as charged. but as i am only at a "point" while climbing or descending it just shortens up the time on the radio, and at 23,600 i would be calling fl236 any way. what I hate is 1. people announcing that they are taxiing for takeoff at an uncontrolled field. unless you are back taxiing on a runway i really don't care. i can look out the window while taxiing. 2. people that give a speech about their whole life story to center trying to get flight following on a clear and sunny day and tying up the freq while i'm trying to check in so i can climb and stop burning large amounts of jet-a at low altitude. 3. people that dont have a clue what they are doing and where thy are going trying to fly in A,B,or C airspace. I love general aviation, but when playing with the big boys in A,B or C if you cant run with the big dogs stay off the porch.

[MRussell]

Re: poor radio ed

You know what I hate? I hate it when people know nothing of (or are too lazy to bother with) punctuation or capitalization on the Internet.

And, what's wrong with "...with you..." ?

[split-s]

Re: poor radio ed

You know what I hate? I hate it when people know nothing of (or are too lazy to bother with) punctuation or capitalization on the Internet.

Owing most of my life's wages to a semester of typing classes on an actual typewriter, I have to second your opinion. But let's not get distracted.

So, who was this "Roger" fellow anyway? A question for Gunny Ermey.

$

[Randy Haskin]

Re: poor radio ed

And, what's wrong with "...with you..." ?

It's meaningless -- a waste of words better spent on something that actually describes who you are or what you're doing. Of course you're "with them", otherwise you wouldn't be talking to them on that frequency.

I can't think of a single radio call where that phrase is necessary or appropriate.

As always, this is only technique though. "With you" is just bad technique. It's the aviation world's "ain't" IMHO.

[split-s]

Re: poor radio ed

According to Wikipedia:

"Roger" was the U.S. military designation for the letter R (as in received) from 1927 to 1957.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_p...oice_procedure

If anybody wanted chapter and verse, this might be a good place to start.

$

[R080]

Re: poor radio ed

This takes the prize for the most ridiculous thread of the year.

[Lockheed Bob]

Re: poor radio ed

Agree about the thread. I guess we can always get the FAA/NTSB to straighten this out if we all live another 100years. Over & out. Sounds more like a umpire calling you out at a baseball game.