13
$\begingroup$

When ATC says "cleared for takeoff", what's the correct answer from the pilot?

$\endgroup$
24
$\begingroup$

This is how FAA recommends (PDF):

A typical takeoff clearance may state, for example, “(Callsign) 123 RNAV to MPASS, Runway 26L, Cleared for Takeoff”.

The expected pilot response is, “(Callsign) 123, RNAV to MPASS, Runway 26L, Cleared for Takeoff”.

$\endgroup$
  • 10
    $\begingroup$ It is probably worth adding that this is true of most ATC instructions : aviation.stackexchange.com/a/288/3573 $\endgroup$ – J... May 19 '15 at 0:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Also, if you're taking-off from an intersection of a long runway (many GA aircraft do), one should always try to mention the intersection for safety. $\endgroup$ – RaajTram Nov 1 '15 at 0:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ And the opposite too - if the majority of the traffic is taking off from an intersection, and you're taking off full length. Always a good idea to give ATC and others situational awareness. $\endgroup$ – Steve Kuo Feb 25 '16 at 1:38
21
$\begingroup$

Same phraseology you're given: cleared for takeoff with your callsign, and if applicable, the runway or instructions ("turn left heading 200" for instance) given in the same transmission. Anything else is nonstandard.

Not on the roll nor on the go nor cleared for departure nor anything else, no matter how cool it sounded when somebody else said it on the radio.

$\endgroup$
  • 17
    $\begingroup$ Note, that bad phraseology regarding take-off clearance strongly contributed to the worst aviation disaster in history. That's some good reason to stick to the standard. $\endgroup$ – Jan Hudec May 18 '15 at 20:27
  • $\begingroup$ @JanHudec where can I read more about that? $\endgroup$ – Jacob Krall May 18 '15 at 21:48
  • 9
    $\begingroup$ @JacobKrall Here $\endgroup$ – CGCampbell May 18 '15 at 22:01
  • $\begingroup$ @JanHudec: Great tragedy, lots of lessons. $\endgroup$ – mins Oct 2 '15 at 18:54
1
$\begingroup$

Quite simply, you readback the runway identifier and the clearance - exactly like you receive it.

enter image description here

or

enter image description here

In case you get other instructions in connection with the takeoff clearance, you need to read those back as well.

enter image description here

Note that you should not read back any wind information given, since it is just that - an information - not a clearance or instruction.

ICAO Document 9432, section 4.5

$\endgroup$
-1
$\begingroup$

Usually for Singapore (WSSS) where we follow the ICAO procedures,

T: Singapore 117, wind 170 at 7, cleared for takeoff RWY 20C.
A: Singapore 117, *winds copied*, cleared for takeoff RWY 20C.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Hello NatIsrael972, welcome to Aviation.SE! Should SIA117 also state their callsign in the reply? I believe that is standard ICAO procedure. The reason is that it allows the controller to identify possible callsign confusion and identify a wrong aircraft accepting the clearance. As happened here for example. $\endgroup$ – DeltaLima Oct 15 '15 at 7:54
  • $\begingroup$ @DeltaLima Yes, you are correct. I edited the answer for conformity. $\endgroup$ – SentryRaven Oct 15 '15 at 8:11
  • $\begingroup$ NatIsrael, your use of WSSS_TWR makes me assume you come from the simulation world? Possibly VATSIM or IVAO? $\endgroup$ – SentryRaven Oct 15 '15 at 8:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm not sure what the "winds copied" is for $\endgroup$ – Steve Kuo Feb 25 '16 at 1:39
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ "Winds copied" is definitely NOT standard ICAO phraseology. Also, the pilot should end their transmission with their callsign when responding to another message, not start with it. $\endgroup$ – J. Hougaard Oct 16 '16 at 19:29

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.