Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:50 AM - Re: a couple changes... (Bill Hamilton)
2. 01:51 AM - Re: a couple changes... (Bill Hamilton)
3. 01:51 AM - Re: Calling center (Bill Hamilton)
4. 06:11 PM - Re: engine (Chris Schuermann)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: a couple changes... |
--> Commander-List message posted by: Bill Hamilton <fighterf@ozemail.com.au>
Nico,
All of that, and more, I can't keep a straight face when I hear it all,
with nonsense like "that's a roger". Anybody wasting time like that should
be well and truly roger'd.
The one that really breaks me up is the continual mishearing of
"affirmative" and "negative", leading to things like:
"Confirm that's a negative"
"Negative, that's affirmative"
"Say again that's negative or affirmative"
--- and so it went on for several more minutes, the yarpies (SAA) on the
way from J'burg to Hong Kong, we were coming from Perth to Harare, and were
coming up to Beira. Could't help myself, in a brief lull in the to and fro,
I just said "tell him yes or no".
---- But it reaches a peak with radio operators for local Bushfire Brigades
around here, (and we have had lots of practice in the last two summers in
eastern Australia,) talking to the water bombers, the longest winded
shorthand you will ever hear. Not surprising really, Australian CASA
publishes "recommended phraseologies" that are about 5 times as extensive
as ICAO recommend, and it is about to all be made compulsory.
Thus as simple position ( Australian) report for QF 123 to Sydney will
become: Sydney, this is QF123 position"--- "QF 1213 this Sydney"----"Sydney
QF 123 position XXXX at time yyyy maintaining Flight level ZZZ ( of
thousands of feet, as applicable) estimating next position AAAA at time
BBBB following position CCCC." and where the position is a navaid, spell
out the whole ident, not the name of the place.
Never say it in two words, when you can make it in ten seems to be the policy.
Truth is truly stranger than fiction.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton.
At 09:22 PM 15/05/03 -0700, you wrote:
>--> Commander-List message posted by: "Nico van Niekerk"
><nico@cybersuperstore.com>
>
>Especially if you hear 'roger' and 'over and out'.
>Nico
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Bill Hamilton" <fighterf@ozemail.com.au>
>To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: Commander-List: a couple changes...
>
>
> > --> Commander-List message posted by: Bill Hamilton
><fighterf@ozemail.com.au>
> >
> > All,
> > I guess this comes into the frame as part of the "decision making
>process"
> > of the pilot in command, the word are there to be used if necessary.
> > " If it works for you------ etc".
> > Listening to the RFSS operations around Australia, it sound like all the
> > training videos are black and white aviation movies of the '40's, to the
> > degree that they even say "over" on the phone.
> > Cheers,
> > Bill Hamilton
> >
> >
> > At 11:53 AM 15/05/03 -0400, you wrote:
> > >--> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com
> > >
> > >In a message dated 05/15/03 04:05:15 Pacific Daylight Time,
> > >fighterf@ozemail.com.au writes:
> > >
> > >
> > > > "over" is a bit of a hangover
> > >
> > >I have to smile at this. I find "over" is making a come back, at least
>here
> > >in the U.S., where many calls to ATC go unanswered because the controller
>is
> > >"on the land line." (To whom? Wife? Bookie? Divorce attorney?)
> > >
> > >I noticed a celebrity guest copilot end his transmission with "over"
>after 3
> > >calls to check in at Flight Level and received an immediate response when
> > >other crews did not.
> > >
> > >So I've began an experiment ... and it works! If ATC doesn't respond to
>an
> > >initial call and I hear other crews check in with no response, I'll call
> > >again and end with "over," and get them to respond straight away.
> > >
> > >Something about that antiquated word strikes a primal chord in all of us
>who
> > >have memories (or at least have seen movies) with someone desperately
>calling
> > >Saipan on HF amid static and squeals ...
> > >
> > >Wing Commander Gordon
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: a couple changes... |
--> Commander-List message posted by: Bill Hamilton <fighterf@ozemail.com.au>
All,
This reminds me of another one I always wanted to say, but never got the
chance, by the time I got a command, the rules had changed.
For may years Australia had a unique 200 mh DME, and an IFR pilot had to be
individually endorsed on all navaids separately.
If you were not endorsed and current you couldn't use the aid.
The were requirement to demonstrate DMW homing and a "DME Approach" ( no
other aid)
Qantas aircraft only had "international" DME, and refused to waste time and
money flying procedures every six months, that we would never use.
Thus, none of us were "DME endorsed", something that was quaintly ignored
outside Australia.
And what did I never get the chance to do: When ATC came up, QFXXX, say
your DME", I could legitimately, in fact I should strictly legally reply, "
Sorry, can't tell you, I'm not DME endorsed". ---- from somebody with 400+
pax flying in close formation.
Cheers all,
Bill Hamilton.
At 11:34 AM 16/05/03 -0400, you wrote:
>--> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com
>
>In a message dated 05/16/03 05:05:49 Pacific Daylight Time,
>crunk12@bellsouth.net writes:
>
>
> > My standard modus operandi for those situations is to reply, "Sorry, I was
> > on the land line".
> >
>
>That's terrific!
>
>Some day I'll have the courage to say, "Thank you for calling (Falcon _____
>/ Commander _______ ). Your call is very important to us. No one is in to
>take your call right now, but if you leave your Center name, frequency and a
>brief message, we'll get back to you as soon as we can. Again, thank you for
>calling and wait for the beep."
>
>Have to pick the right Center ... Albuquerque would like it, but I think
>Cleveland will just hang up and not leave a message.
>
>Wing Commander Gordon
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Calling center |
--> Commander-List message posted by: Bill Hamilton <fighterf@ozemail.com.au>
Bill,
Didn't you have in flight reverse on the inboards of your DC-8's, that used
to give them spectacular flexibility versus our 707's.
And from the depths of the memory banks ( I was the S/O, the Captain had
never even been an F/O, let alone such a lowly form of life as a S/O).
Early morning Sydney, in the days of one short runway and one very short
runway, available only to a 707 if the runway was dry.
"Is the runway dry"
"The footpath around the tower is dry"
"OK, requesting radar vector to land on the footpath at the bottom of the
tower"
and on another occasion, same Captain and same S/0 ( me)
We were held up very high, well beyond getting a 707 down without an orbit.
After some discussion about the height and distance.
Tower "Can you get down alright from there?"
Captain " I can get down all right, but what am I going to do with my
bloody aeroplane and passengers."
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton.
At 05:57 AM 17/05/03 -0400, you wrote:
>--> Commander-List message posted by: "Bill Bow" <bowing74@earthlink.net>
>
>You picked my favorite approach facility(SoCal now). After 12 years of
>flying UPS DC-8's into ONT. One controller asked me to hold 250K to Petis
>NDB, cleared for the ILS 26L. I advised him I could hold the 250 to Petis
>but there would be no chance of impacting the planet anywhere near the
>Ontario airport.("The 8" was a little challenged without speedbrakes)
>
>bilbo
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <MOEMILLS@aol.com>
>To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: Commander-List: Calling center
>
>
> > --> Commander-List message posted by: MOEMILLS@aol.com
> >
> > Gents:
> >
> > As my voice gets older I have noticed that always starting each
>transmission
> > with "and," and the use of words such as tallyho, Roger, wilco, over, and
> > "with you" work much better than they did 20 years ago, although the fraze
> > "Roger Wilco, over and out" does not seem to get me any points with
>approach
> > when they give me long winded instructions, and advise me to call
>Hawthorne
> > tower.
> >
> > I agree with always being courtious to ATC. Several years ago Ontario
>(CA)
> > approach told me to "hold in right turns and expect call back in 20
>minutes"
> > when I called and asked permission to "clip the corner of their ARSA".
> >
> > Moe Mills
> > N680RR
> >
> >
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Commander-List message posted by: Chris Schuermann <cschuerm@cox.net>
Bill Bow wrote:
> I got all there was to get out of that engine, before it would have
> quit. It was supposed to have 800 hours on it.
Sad to hear that Bill. At least now you'll have a "known" engine
hanging out there when you get done. Stories such as yours were what
got me in gear to write that article a while back explaining that it's
not uncommon for engines to not reach anywhere near TBO... Are you going
back with factory new jugs or having yours re-worked?
Chris
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|