C172heavy From Canada, joined Aug 2004, 107 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 2 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 2625 times:
Just got back on LiveATC.net feed, and heard exchange between departure and a Jazz flight. Jazz called in with "Jazz eighty-six sixty-six" and ATC corrected him, using "Jazz eight six, six six". (controller was very good about how he handled it). They talked briefly about how the new rule was ridiculous, pilot sounded pissed off about it.
I presume that Canada's Department of Transportation has mandated that all callsigns be voiced as single digits rather than double digits: six six rather than sixty-six. Anyone know if this rule is continent- or worldwide, and when it was put into enforcement?
TrappedInMKG From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 4 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 2 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 2563 times:
My experience with ATC is limited to GRR and Lansing, but they ALWAYS use "double digits" for flight numbers. It's not "Comair 6-1-7-9", it's "Comair Sixty-One Seventy-Nine"... In fact, I don't remember the last time I heard someone say "Northwest 4-7-3-6" or something like that.
That being said, it's usually limited to flight numbers. A common occurrence on GRR ATC is "expect flight level one-zero thousand one-zero minutes after departure..."
Loggat From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 669 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (10 years 2 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 2548 times:
I've never heard of anyone having a beef with the laziness of pilots or controllers on this subject. This is either something really new, or that particular controller had some official hovering over his workstation (or a 4 foot pole rammed up his arse).
Certainly in the US, I have not been chastised, saying Eighty Fifty Five instead of Eight Zero Five Five.
When there are two similar callsigns on frequency, I have heard the controller enunciate clearly, the numbers he is trying to convey... "Waterski Seven Nine Six Five..." Never just for the sake of it though.
There are 3 types of people in this world, those that can count, and those that can't.
C172heavy From Canada, joined Aug 2004, 107 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 2 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 2537 times:
Don't think this was the controller being anal. After Jazz 8666 called in, the controller said "I don't want you in trouble and I don't want to be in trouble either, so Jazz eight six six six,.......". Jazz came back with the readback and ended with "...Jazz EIGHT, SIX, SIX, SIX." Then some friendly chatter between the two on the new "stupid" rule, and how someone in government must have too much idle time on their hands.
Meister808 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 973 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (10 years 2 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2438 times:
I was taught in ATC class that standard terminology for flight numbers was to read them in groups of 2 digits, such as thirty-five forty-three (3543) or five seventy-one (571). Anything other than that and we got yelled at for using the wrong terminology. They were very clear on that, and that was less than a year ago.
Twin Cessna 812 Victor, Minneapolis Center, we observe your operation in the immediate vicinity of extreme precipitation
Newark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 29
Reply 8, posted (10 years 2 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2431 times:
At EWR, I frequently hear the double-digit flight numbers. With the frequent CO Express flights coming in all the time, and all with 4 digit flight numbers, it would probably be very tedious to say each one in single digits.
Lincoln From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3887 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (10 years 2 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2404 times:
I thought that I had read somewhere (NTSB/FAA document or something) that the "grouping" of digits was strongly prefered for speed and comprehension vs. single digits, especilly in congested airspace.
Time how long it takes to say (clearly), for example:
Northwest Twelve Thirty-Four
United Eighty-Seven Seventy-Seven
Delta Five Thirty-Five
Northwest One Two Three Four
United Eight Seven Seven Seven
Delta Five Three Five
... And also notice that the comprehension of the first set is higher (and time taken to comprehend is less) than the second (especially with something like "United 8666" where you have a digit repeated several times). The other advantage is that it's much harder to "loose" a digit:
If someone was busy and heard "United Eight Seven Seven Seven" plus some static or other noise on the transmission it's quite possible that one of those "Seven"s would disappear and they would hear it as "United Eight Seven Seven"... Not so easy with "Eighty-Seven Seventy-Seven"
... But there's probably a good reason for it (or maybe the controller was undergoing an evaluation and didn't want to be seen as "cutting corners" or something)
CO Is My Airline of Choice || Baggage Claim is an airline's last chance to disappoint a customer || Next flts in profile
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4121 posts, RR: 27
Reply 10, posted (10 years 2 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2384 times:
It's gotta be a Canadian thing... everytime we go to Canada they're doing that stuff. The funny thing is it is so inconsistent between pilots and ATC. We don't do it that way in the US and haven't heard of any new rules in phrasology.
ZBBbird From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 58 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (10 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2348 times:
I'm sure I remember reading in the study guide for my radio license that you were supposed to pronouce numbers singly. That is something I will have to check on now as it will bug me till I know for sure.
Ts-ior From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 3560 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (10 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2322 times:
In English it is better and more eligible to separate each number saying two-two-seven-nin'a for example where as in French it is easier to say Quarante-Six Quatre-Vingts instead of separating each digit...
10MID From Singapore, joined Aug 2004, 198 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (10 years 2 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2221 times:
The FAA's guidance for numbers is set out in the Aeronautical Information Manual, Chapter 4, Section 2.
Airline callsigns are grouped - eg Skywest ninety five thrity five
N number callsigns are single digits - eg Boeing seven seven seven uniform alpha, which may be abbreviated when initiated by the controller to the perfix and the last 3 numbers/letters, eg Boeing seven uniform alpha.
This applies to the US, though, and most other countries, possibly with a few exceptions, use single digits.
Go to Mexico and it's even more confusing. Sometime they'll use grouped numbers, sometimes single digits and sometimes a combo - eg FedEx two seven thrity six.
Kfllcfii From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3324 posts, RR: 29
Reply 17, posted (10 years 2 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2094 times:
Excerpt from the FAA Air Traffic Controller Handbook 7110.65:
2-4-20 Aircraft Identification:
2. Air carriers and other civil aircraft having FAA-authorized callsigns. State the call sign followed by the flight number in group form.
"Group Form" is the pronunciation of a series of numbers as the whole number, or pairs of numbers they represent rather than pronouncing each separate digit. The use of group form may, however, be negated by four-digit identifiers or the placement of zeros in the identifier.
"Eastern Metro One Ten"
"General Motors Thirty Fifteen"
Air carriers and other civil aircraft having FAA authorized call signs may be pronounced using single digits if necessary for clarity.
"United Five One Seven"
"United Five Seven Zero"
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."