Timeline for How do pilots manage to remember ATC instructions?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
31 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 6, 2017 at 19:49 | comment | added | Noah Krasser | I still have big problems in just reading back the most easy things. Once I forgot my pen and paper. It was just the QNH and runway I should turn downwind to and I messed it completely up. Never got it correct. It was so embarassing. Fortunately it was on IVAO and not in real world. | |
| Jun 18, 2017 at 18:21 | history | edited | Simon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 160 characters in body
|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:59 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://aviation.stackexchange.com/ with https://aviation.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| S Nov 12, 2015 at 0:54 | history | suggested | Kevin Reid | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
replace ambiguous “can” here meaning capable, but not permitted, where that is a key distinction.
|
| Nov 12, 2015 at 0:29 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Nov 12, 2015 at 0:54 | |||||
| Nov 11, 2015 at 14:20 | history | edited | Simon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 234 characters in body
|
| Mar 31, 2015 at 21:08 | history | edited | Simon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 3 characters in body
|
| Mar 15, 2015 at 11:11 | history | edited | Simon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 205 characters in body
|
| Feb 26, 2015 at 22:48 | comment | added | reirab | @voretaq7 Yes, it's obviously not designed to replace voice comm entirely, but it is designed to replace voice communication as the primary means of ATC-pilot communication. Good point about read-backs, but at least with the digital system the controller can see the instruction on his screen. That doesn't guarantee that they'll actually re-read it, but it's at least a way they can verify what they sent. | |
| Feb 26, 2015 at 22:26 | comment | added | voretaq7 | @Lohoris The risk of mis-copying instructions is mitigated through the use of readbacks - a key safety feature missing from most of the digital alternatives. (As Simon mentioned, how would you check if the controller mis-enters an altitude - 4500 instead of 3500? With a readback the controller can say "Negative - the altitude is three thousand five hundred", with a digital message you lose the cross-check.) | |
| Feb 26, 2015 at 22:22 | comment | added | voretaq7 | @reirab There are (substantive) objections to that FAA proposal, not the least of which is the loss of mutual situational awareness when pilots don't hear clearances being read to other planes, but that aside the FAA's DataComm proposal does not replace voice radio communication, it supplements it for "routine instructions". | |
| Feb 26, 2015 at 6:43 | comment | added | reirab | @Simon Actually, there are significant advantages to using a digital text-based system rather than voice comm. The biggest is time on frequency. With a digital system, the instructions can be transmitted almost instantly rather than tying up the frequencies for several seconds for the controller to read instruction, then the pilot to read them back (and, as you mentioned, potentially ask for another read from the controller) before the next aircraft can make a request. The FAA plans to implement such a system. | |
| Feb 25, 2015 at 19:10 | comment | added | Simon | @Lohoris There is no more chance of that, than the controller typing in the wrong intersection. You have the possibility of human error at both ends. | |
| Feb 25, 2015 at 12:39 | history | edited | SentryRaven | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Realistic Clearance added
|
| Feb 25, 2015 at 12:10 | comment | added | o0'. | @Simon "always works" != "But this is where the danger creeps in. It is possible, and has happened, that the crew think they heard something but actually, the instruction was different today." You can write down the wrong thing. One is not necessarily better than the other. | |
| Feb 25, 2015 at 12:02 | comment | added | Simon | @Lohoris So you propose to replace a pen and paper, which always works, with extra electronics (both ground and air) with more to go wrong, extra fuel costs, extra maintenance costs and so on. What's not to like ;) | |
| Feb 25, 2015 at 11:51 | comment | added | o0'. | @Simon I didn't mean to suggest to replace radio, just to replace the pen&paper they use to write down radio instructions. | |
| Feb 25, 2015 at 11:45 | history | edited | Simon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 57 characters in body
|
| Feb 25, 2015 at 11:41 | comment | added | Simon | @Lohoris It's not that simple. Radio works really well (so why replace it?) and one of the really important benefits is that it's not just you who hears the instruction and responds. Everyone else hears it too which is important to maintain "situational awareness". I once spent a lot of time looking for an aircraft I knew was (wrongly) heading straight for me at about the same altitude because they ignored the fact that the controller had already told them that the airfield I was at had no "deadside". | |
| Feb 25, 2015 at 9:19 | comment | added | SentryRaven | @Lohoris This is already being done, but only where the instructions do not require immediate action and readback. Check out CPLDC or Pre-Departure Clearances (PDC). This is essentially a digital system which relays information, but does not require immediate action. A clearance you can issue this way, but imagine you would want to instruct a go-around with such a system. This would be too time-critical. | |
| Feb 25, 2015 at 9:16 | comment | added | o0'. | I don't get it. If the pilots have to write them down anyway, it would be much more efficient to just digitally wire and display them… | |
| Feb 25, 2015 at 9:13 | history | edited | Simon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 20 characters in body
|
| Feb 25, 2015 at 7:07 | comment | added | SentryRaven | @Firee Because using emails or SMS is too static, these items can change at short notice. You can receive some clearances through CPLDC, but quick changes are done over the frequency again. | |
| Feb 25, 2015 at 6:45 | comment | added | Firee | Why can't they just email or sms that kind of stuff... or bring it up in a screen like a GPS guide in the car. is it asking too much? | |
| Feb 24, 2015 at 22:55 | history | edited | fooot | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Improve image reference, link to answer about Airbus table
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 22:54 | history | edited | Simon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 353 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 22:51 | vote | accept | GalibShahab98 | ||
| Feb 24, 2015 at 22:49 | history | edited | Simon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 353 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 22:38 | history | edited | Simon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 137 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 22:29 | history | edited | Simon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 137 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 22:23 | history | answered | Simon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |