I enjoy listening to ATC on Youtube. You pilots are to be congratulated on your ability to communicate in such a super fast-paced exchange, the details of which are so crucially important to safety! The history and evolution of ATC language is so fascinating. “Niner” came about from the fact that Nine in German means “NO” so a Lufthansa pilot hearing Nine would instinctively hear No. In the phonetic alphabet, “Whiskey” is not used in some Islamic areas where its connotations to alcohol is offensive. Delta airlines call signs include “Delta” so at ATL, “D” is Dixie although some say Dixie originated when Eastern Airlines pilots refused to say competitor Delta’s name.
I’d like to hear your comments and anecdotes with regard to deviations and issues of clarity and intelligibility in the usage of the phonetic alphabet and numbers.

In 47 years of flying including 5 at EAL, never D as Dixie except perhaps as a joke. DL”s call sign is Deltaxxxx, xxxx being the flight number.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

In 47 years of flying including 5 at EAL, never D as Dixie except perhaps as a joke. DL”s call sign is Deltaxxxx, xxxx being the flight number.

The OP is referring to ATL ground using "Taxiway Dixie" instead of "Taxiway Delta" to avoid confusion.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

In 47 years of flying including 5 at EAL, never D as Dixie except perhaps as a joke. DL”s call sign is Deltaxxxx, xxxx being the flight number.

For reference:
A110-23 Taxiway D is referred to as "DIXIE".
https://flightaware.com/resources/airport/KATL/remarks

Back 10 years ago the ATC instruction, "Position & hold on runway XX" changed to, "Line up & wait on runway XX". This was due to the former phrase being mixed up with the common ATC instruction, "Hold your position", which usually refers to taxiway and ramp instructions. This also put the FAA in line with the ICAO standards by making the switch.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... p-and-wait

FLALEFTY wrote:

Back 10 years ago the ATC instruction, "Position & hold on runway XX" changed to, "Line up & wait on runway XX". This was due to the former phrase being mixed up with the common ATC instruction, "Hold your position", which usually refers to taxiway and ramp instructions. This also put the FAA in line with the ICAO standards by making the switch.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... p-and-wait

The previous phraseology was, "N123, Runway XX, position and hold." which was replaced with, "N123, Runway XX, line up and wait." (7110.65, 3-9-4).


There are a lot of examples where controllers will deviate from the standard phraseology to enhance clarity.

For numbers: when issuing altimeter settings, I typically say "double-oh" as opposed to "zero-zero". I found that it made for more hearback-readback errors, whereas I almost never have errors with "double oh". Certain combinations of frequencies can also make it more prone to hearback-readback errors, and sometimes that's dependent on the individual controller's speech rate, pitch, etc. For example, with "one-two-six-point-eight-five", the point and eight can run together, so some controllers may get a bad readback of 126.5. Instead, they might simply say, "Contact XXX on twenty-six eighty-five." Other controllers opt to use ICAO phraseology and say, "one-two-six-decimal-eight-five". I don't have this issue, but I've heard other controllers do both in the interest of clarity and expediency.

For letters: we issue a lot of routes at my facility, and while I will phonetically spell the fixes, I will often say plain letters. "Cleared direct to LOUIE. Lima, Oscar, Uniform, India, Echo. L-O-U-I-E." I'll do that regularly with GA pilots who may not be as proficient with phonetic spellings, or if I'm giving a lengthy route and don't want to have to repeat myself. In both cases I tend to read pretty slowly so that hopefully I only need to read it once. If I'm getting a bad readback, sometimes I'll only spell it out rather than use phonetics. Using phonetics generally works well, but occasionally it can cause pilots to repeatedly mix letters up, whereas simply spelling it in plain language can clear up the issue.

With all of those things, it's just a matter of picking up tricks through experience. Certain number and letter combinations seem to scramble people's brains, so after we have enough trouble with it, we'll try non-standard things to see if it enhances clarity. Reverting to something non-standard isn't necessarily a degradation of safety if it enhances clarity.

atcsundevil wrote:

FLALEFTY wrote:

Back 10 years ago the ATC instruction, "Position & hold on runway XX" changed to, "Line up & wait on runway XX". This was due to the former phrase being mixed up with the common ATC instruction, "Hold your position", which usually refers to taxiway and ramp instructions. This also put the FAA in line with the ICAO standards by making the switch.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... p-and-wait

The previous phraseology was, "N123, Runway XX, position and hold." which was replaced with, "N123, Runway XX, line up and wait." (7110.65, 3-9-4).


There are a lot of examples where controllers will deviate from the standard phraseology to enhance clarity.

For numbers: when issuing altimeter settings, I typically say "double-oh" as opposed to "zero-zero". I found that it made for more hearback-readback errors, whereas I almost never have errors with "double oh". Certain combinations of frequencies can also make it more prone to hearback-readback errors, and sometimes that's dependent on the individual controller's speech rate, pitch, etc. For example, with "one-two-six-point-eight-five", the point and eight can run together, so some controllers may get a bad readback of 126.5. Instead, they might simply say, "Contact XXX on twenty-six eighty-five." Other controllers opt to use ICAO phraseology and say, "one-two-six-decimal-eight-five". I don't have this issue, but I've heard other controllers do both in the interest of clarity and expediency.

For letters: we issue a lot of routes at my facility, and while I will phonetically spell the fixes, I will often say plain letters. "Cleared direct to LOUIE. Lima, Oscar, Uniform, India, Echo. L-O-U-I-E." I'll do that regularly with GA pilots who may not be as proficient with phonetic spellings, or if I'm giving a lengthy route and don't want to have to repeat myself. In both cases I tend to read pretty slowly so that hopefully I only need to read it once. If I'm getting a bad readback, sometimes I'll only spell it out rather than use phonetics. Using phonetics generally works well, but occasionally it can cause pilots to repeatedly mix letters up, whereas simply spelling it in plain language can clear up the issue.

With all of those things, it's just a matter of picking up tricks through experience. Certain number and letter combinations seem to scramble people's brains, so after we have enough trouble with it, we'll try non-standard things to see if it enhances clarity. Reverting to something non-standard isn't necessarily a degradation of safety if it enhances clarity.

I use tree and fife with foreign pilots a lot.

atcsundevil wrote:

FLALEFTY wrote:

Back 10 years ago the ATC instruction, "Position & hold on runway XX" changed to, "Line up & wait on runway XX". This was due to the former phrase being mixed up with the common ATC instruction, "Hold your position", which usually refers to taxiway and ramp instructions. This also put the FAA in line with the ICAO standards by making the switch.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... p-and-wait

The previous phraseology was, "N123, Runway XX, position and hold." which was replaced with, "N123, Runway XX, line up and wait." (7110.65, 3-9-4).


There are a lot of examples where controllers will deviate from the standard phraseology to enhance clarity.

For numbers: when issuing altimeter settings, I typically say "double-oh" as opposed to "zero-zero". I found that it made for more hearback-readback errors, whereas I almost never have errors with "double oh". Certain combinations of frequencies can also make it more prone to hearback-readback errors, and sometimes that's dependent on the individual controller's speech rate, pitch, etc. For example, with "one-two-six-point-eight-five", the point and eight can run together, so some controllers may get a bad readback of 126.5. Instead, they might simply say, "Contact XXX on twenty-six eighty-five." Other controllers opt to use ICAO phraseology and say, "one-two-six-decimal-eight-five". I don't have this issue, but I've heard other controllers do both in the interest of clarity and expediency.

For letters: we issue a lot of routes at my facility, and while I will phonetically spell the fixes, I will often say plain letters. "Cleared direct to LOUIE. Lima, Oscar, Uniform, India, Echo. L-O-U-I-E." I'll do that regularly with GA pilots who may not be as proficient with phonetic spellings, or if I'm giving a lengthy route and don't want to have to repeat myself. In both cases I tend to read pretty slowly so that hopefully I only need to read it once. If I'm getting a bad readback, sometimes I'll only spell it out rather than use phonetics. Using phonetics generally works well, but occasionally it can cause pilots to repeatedly mix letters up, whereas simply spelling it in plain language can clear up the issue.

With all of those things, it's just a matter of picking up tricks through experience. Certain number and letter combinations seem to scramble people's brains, so after we have enough trouble with it, we'll try non-standard things to see if it enhances clarity. Reverting to something non-standard isn't necessarily a degradation of safety if it enhances clarity.

One late evening I was cleared on the BNYRD6 departure, but instead of the usual “boneyard 6” the controller said “bunny road 6.” From then on whenever I would see BNYRD I couldn’t see it without saying bunny road to myself. The one time I subsequently said it in a readback one slow evening, the lady on the other end did not seem to appreciate it.

In 34 years of commercial operation ATC phraseology has undergone minimal change. What has changed is the volume of traffic with radio activity increasing exponentially. At the same time ATC controllers have gotten better even with a more demanding workload. It always amazes me how they can direct that dance of metal while lining us up for sidesteps 4 abreast. The stress level has to be high with zero margin for error. Think about it, how many accidents have been caused by ATC vs pilot error or a mechanical? That speaks volumes in itself.

Heathrow Director frequency at LHR is a marvel to behold. Probably the busiest frequency in European airspace. During a busy period there are ZERO gaps on frequency - constant to and fro with the controller who is issuing instructions to different aircraft one after the other, some in the hold and the rest on approach. And all of this leads to the very tight separation you see on finals at LHR. As a pilot you really have to be on your toes to make sure you don't miss a call and that you respond immediately.

It always strikes me as being very formal compared to other airports, especially in the USA but I suppose it has to be, because there are such high volumes of traffic from every corner of the world. I remember once I heard a Delta airlines pilot broadcast his pre-landing passenger PA on Heathrow Director frequency by accident - about 45 seconds which felt like the longest ever - thats one frequency you do not want to block with a PA. The controller just carried on like nothing had happened, probably didn't have the time to chastise him about it!

(Edit: I believe due to an archaic law its not legal to listen to UK ATC which is a shame because this frequency would be highly entertaining to listen to)

I can sit for hours listening to these videos, the American ATCs don’t hold back if you step a foot out of line

" In the phonetic alphabet, “Whiskey” is not used in some Islamic areas where its connotations to alcohol is offensive"
Nope I work and live in the Middle East and W is Whiskey!

atcsundevil wrote:

FLALEFTY wrote:

Back 10 years ago the ATC instruction, "Position & hold on runway XX" changed to, "Line up & wait on runway XX". This was due to the former phrase being mixed up with the common ATC instruction, "Hold your position", which usually refers to taxiway and ramp instructions. This also put the FAA in line with the ICAO standards by making the switch.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... p-and-wait

The previous phraseology was, "N123, Runway XX, position and hold." which was replaced with, "N123, Runway XX, line up and wait." (7110.65, 3-9-4).


There are a lot of examples where controllers will deviate from the standard phraseology to enhance clarity.

For numbers: when issuing altimeter settings, I typically say "double-oh" as opposed to "zero-zero". I found that it made for more hearback-readback errors, whereas I almost never have errors with "double oh". Certain combinations of frequencies can also make it more prone to hearback-readback errors, and sometimes that's dependent on the individual controller's speech rate, pitch, etc. For example, with "one-two-six-point-eight-five", the point and eight can run together, so some controllers may get a bad readback of 126.5. Instead, they might simply say, "Contact XXX on twenty-six eighty-five." Other controllers opt to use ICAO phraseology and say, "one-two-six-decimal-eight-five". I don't have this issue, but I've heard other controllers do both in the interest of clarity and expediency.

For letters: we issue a lot of routes at my facility, and while I will phonetically spell the fixes, I will often say plain letters. "Cleared direct to LOUIE. Lima, Oscar, Uniform, India, Echo. L-O-U-I-E." I'll do that regularly with GA pilots who may not be as proficient with phonetic spellings, or if I'm giving a lengthy route and don't want to have to repeat myself. In both cases I tend to read pretty slowly so that hopefully I only need to read it once. If I'm getting a bad readback, sometimes I'll only spell it out rather than use phonetics. Using phonetics generally works well, but occasionally it can cause pilots to repeatedly mix letters up, whereas simply spelling it in plain language can clear up the issue.

With all of those things, it's just a matter of picking up tricks through experience. Certain number and letter combinations seem to scramble people's brains, so after we have enough trouble with it, we'll try non-standard things to see if it enhances clarity. Reverting to something non-standard isn't necessarily a degradation of safety if it enhances clarity.

I’ll echo what you say about issuing a lot of routes at your facility!

atcsundevil wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

In 47 years of flying including 5 at EAL, never D as Dixie except perhaps as a joke. DL”s call sign is Deltaxxxx, xxxx being the flight number.

For reference:
A110-23 Taxiway D is referred to as "DIXIE".
https://flightaware.com/resources/airport/KATL/remarks

Wouldn't it have been easier simply to not have a "Taxiway D" in the first place?

ranbidaraxflo wrote:

" In the phonetic alphabet, “Whiskey” is not used in some Islamic areas where its connotations to alcohol is offensive"
Nope I work and live in the Middle East and W is Whiskey!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_phon ... et#History says:

But the International Air Transport Association (IATA), recognizing the need for a single universal alphabet, presented a draft alphabet to the ICAO during 1947 that had sounds common to English, French, Spanish and Portuguese.

From 1948 to 1949, Jean-Paul Vinay, a professor of linguistics at the Université de Montréal worked closely with the ICAO to research and develop a new spelling alphabet.[31][8] ICAO's directions to him were that "To be considered, a word must:

Be a live word in each of the three working languages.
Be easily pronounced and recognized by airmen of all languages.
Have good radio transmission and readability characteristics.
Have a similar spelling in at least English, French, and Spanish, and the initial letter must be the letter the word identifies.
Be free from any association with objectionable meanings."

So apparently this professor and his IATA supervisors felt whiskey had no objectionable meanings. I guess they hadn't experienced a hangover!

X-ray was named such because the scientist who discovered such did not know what to call this new form of radiation he discovered. Basically he said "let us call it X" and the name stuck.

For those interested....LiveATC.net offers live access to ATC towers and more around the world. It's like listening to a reality television show.

atcsundevil wrote:

The previous phraseology was, "N123, Runway XX, position and hold." which was replaced with, "N123, Runway XX, line up and wait."

When they changed that, I said "position and hold" is something you do in an airplane, "line up and wait" is something you do at Walmart...

Phen wrote:

Heathrow Director frequency at LHR is a marvel to behold. Probably the busiest frequency in European airspace. During a busy period there are ZERO gaps on frequency - constant to and fro with the controller who is issuing instructions to different aircraft one after the other, some in the hold and the rest on approach. And all of this leads to the very tight separation you see on finals at LHR. As a pilot you really have to be on your toes to make sure you don't miss a call and that you respond immediately.

It always strikes me as being very formal compared to other airports, especially in the USA but I suppose it has to be, because there are such high volumes of traffic from every corner of the world. I remember once I heard a Delta airlines pilot broadcast his pre-landing passenger PA on Heathrow Director frequency by accident - about 45 seconds which felt like the longest ever - thats one frequency you do not want to block with a PA. The controller just carried on like nothing had happened, probably didn't have the time to chastise him about it!

(Edit: I believe due to an archaic law its not legal to listen to UK ATC which is a shame because this frequency would be highly entertaining to listen to)

I always wondered if it were illegal to listen to UK ATC. Thanks for clearing that up.

JoseSalazar wrote:

One late evening I was cleared on the BNYRD6 departure, but instead of the usual “boneyard 6” the controller said “bunny road 6.” From then on whenever I would see BNYRD I couldn’t see it without saying bunny road to myself. The one time I subsequently said it in a readback one slow evening, the lady on the other end did not seem to appreciate it.

We do that stuff all the time! One of my favorites is SKWKR, which is a transition fix for the JJEDI arrival to ATL. Obviously it's supposed to be "Skywalker", because the entire arrival was made by a Star Wars fanatic, but half the time I'll say "Squeeker" or "Skewer", and pilots will almost always read it back that way. Just a little bit of fun The Delta guys usually know better, but they'll still play along.

75driver wrote:

In 34 years of commercial operation ATC phraseology has undergone minimal change. What has changed is the volume of traffic with radio activity increasing exponentially. At the same time ATC controllers have gotten better even with a more demanding workload. It always amazes me how they can direct that dance of metal while lining us up for sidesteps 4 abreast. The stress level has to be high with zero margin for error. Think about it, how many accidents have been caused by ATC vs pilot error or a mechanical? That speaks volumes in itself.

Automation and equipment reliability has vastly improved over the years, which makes working higher traffic volumes much more manageable than it used to be. I do not envy the controllers from previous generations, because their jobs were complicated by far more manual tasks and unreliable equipment.

Frequency congestion is still an issue though, particularly on combined sectors. In many cases, we can cross-couple frequencies, which is a relatively new thing, but it's not always possible. We don't blame the pilots, because they can't hear the other frequencies if there's no cross-couple, but it's extremely frustrating to have pilots calling on multiple frequencies when you're busy. The worst is when you're working a busy flow on one set of frequencies, but also working low sectors on another set of frequencies with student pilots and weekend flyers. CPDLC ("datacomm") does help to an extent though, but it's currently limited to participating operators at a handful of facilities. Being able to click a couple of buttons to send altitude assignments or frequency changes saves tangible amounts of time on frequency. I can send frequency changes or altitude assignments or routes while I'm talking to other aircraft, which is awesome. It should be up and running at all centers right now, but alas COVID got in the way after it was delayed by the shutdown last year.

TheWorm123 wrote:

I can sit for hours listening to these videos, the American ATCs don’t hold back if you step a foot out of line

We're not all like that! Some controllers are more forgiving than others. I tend to be very forgiving, but that's mainly because I don't get upset very easily. Scolding a pilot doesn't fix the problem, so I've never seen the point unless it's a serious safety issue. I'll usually throw out a witty remark (or at least an attempt at one) to hopefully make everyone chuckle a little and move on.

LimaFoxTango wrote:

Wouldn't it have been easier simply to not have a "Taxiway D" in the first place?

There are no taxiways in my world, so the answer to that question is always yes.

Moose135 wrote:

When they changed that, I said "position and hold" is something you do in an airplane, "line up and wait" is something you do at Walmart...

I remember seeing pictures of signs that said, "Line up and woof!" as a reminder of the new phraseology. Needless to say it took a while for people to come around!

atcsundevil wrote:

We do that stuff all the time! One of my favorites is SKWKR, which is a transition fix for the JJEDI arrival to ATL. Obviously it's supposed to be "Skywalker", because the entire arrival was made by a Star Wars fanatic, but half the time I'll say "Squeeker" or "Skewer", and pilots will almost always read it back that way. Just a little bit of fun The Delta guys usually know better, but they'll still play along.

I’ve heard you! I’m always happy to play along. I know it’s not kosher but introducing a little levity in a chaotic environment seems appropriate from time to time. The whole Star Wars thing is funny, Jedi, Skywalker, Sith. You weren’t the one who blurted out “SHART” were you? We heard some traffic a few years back and was like W H A T? They even read it back and we damn near “sharted” ourselves. Turned out the FO tuned the wrong frequency but funny nonetheless.

canyonblue17 wrote:

For those interested....LiveATC.net offers live access to ATC towers and more around the world. It's like listening to a reality television show.

Thanks for this reference. It is great!

For some entertaining ATC look up “Kennedy Steve” on Youtube

75driver wrote:

I’ve heard you! I’m always happy to play along. I know it’s not kosher but introducing a little levity in a chaotic environment seems appropriate from time to time. The whole Star Wars thing is funny, Jedi, Skywalker, Sith. You weren’t the one who blurted out “SHART” were you? We heard some traffic a few years back and was like W H A T? They even read it back and we damn near “sharted” ourselves. Turned out the FO tuned the wrong frequency but funny nonetheless.

Not me, but now that I've heard it, anything is possible. I agree that well-placed levity is a good thing. Too many pilots and controllers have an "us vs. them" mentality, which I've never understood. Reminders that we're all human helps bridge that gap. Back in the spring, I was giving a lot of "...turn 15 degrees right, vectors for social distancing." Sometimes it helps to smile a bit when times are weird.

dr1980 wrote:

For some entertaining ATC look up “Kennedy Steve” on Youtube

This and of course "relax, Captain Happy".

I also enjoying listening to ATC, on LIVEATC.NET. It is interesting how ATC personnel rarely use filler words like "um" and "ah" when doing their jobs. Is this something that is trained into ATCs not to use filler words?

dfwjim1 wrote:

I also enjoying listening to ATC, on LIVEATC.NET. It is interesting how ATC personnel rarely use filler words like "um" and "ah" when doing their jobs. Is this something that is trained into ATCs not to use filler words?

Generally your trainer makes fun of you until you stop

If I say "um" or "ah", it's usually on purpose. Example: "Hey, can we get a shortcut?" Me, sees that they're going to LGA, "Uhhhhhh, let me take a look." Then I just wait 30 seconds to say unable.

Since my first flying lesson in 1979 and working as a professional pilot from 1982 I’ve never said ‘niner’ or heard another pilot say it anywhere in the world at any time


And ‘W’ is Whiskey all over the world


Don’t know where this BS gets started.

Agree on the “niner” thing. Not sure where that comes from but it’s not commercial flying.

I’ve thought another thing for several years. I can see where a lot more ATC commands converted into data and uploaded directly to the flight computers. It goes along the lines of automation and makes sense. Why should a controller be tasked with regurgitating your rnav points when it could easily be confirmed and authorized digitally? I can see a lot of ATC audio work changing along these lines.

75driver wrote:

Agree on the “niner” thing. Not sure where that comes from but it’s not commercial flying.

I’ve thought another thing for several years. I can see where a lot more ATC commands converted into data and uploaded directly to the flight computers. It goes along the lines of automation and makes sense. Why should a controller be tasked with regurgitating your rnav points when it could easily be confirmed and authorized digitally? I can see a lot of ATC audio work changing along these lines.

Maybe, neither of you read FAA AIM 4-2-7, table 4-2-2 which pretty specific about how to pronounce 9 as nin-er. Basic ICAO Phonetic Alphabet. I didn’t use in the US, but did overseas. We had a Standards Pilot that insisted on correct ICAO radio technique. Then, I flew and worked with some very pedantic Canadians and Aussies, which whipped me into shape. I got an ATC request for our indicated, “two-ninety, call sign”. I didn’t stop hearing about it for a week.

The French once complained about MAC crews butchering navaid names, letter came out instructing us to use only the phonetic LOCID. Quimper and Nantes were two notables.

75driver wrote:

Agree on the “niner” thing. Not sure where that comes from but it’s not commercial flying.

The OP quite correct explained where "niner" came from, which predates commercial aviation. It's still part of ICAO phraseology, which is used worldwide, except of course the US.

75driver wrote:

Agree on the “niner” thing. Not sure where that comes from but it’s not commercial flying.

I’ve thought another thing for several years. I can see where a lot more ATC commands converted into data and uploaded directly to the flight computers. It goes along the lines of automation and makes sense. Why should a controller be tasked with regurgitating your rnav points when it could easily be confirmed and authorized digitally? I can see a lot of ATC audio work changing along these lines.

Automated transmission of ATC directives was thought about a long time ago. Having given up flying decades ago (I was a terrible pilot) I don't know what the current state of the art is, but I remember working on a project in the early 1970's on behalf of ARPA (Advanced Research Projects Agency , DOD for those who don't know of it.) We also worked on early versions of what is now called glass cockpits. Our project ended when it became clear that private enterprise could and would do it. I was scheduled to start flying in jump seats to learn more about the requirements or airline pilots. I wish our project could have lasted another year!

We did continue one project, the ARPANET, which turned into the internet. That seemed to go OK.

75driver wrote:

Agree on the “niner” thing. Not sure where that comes from but it’s not commercial flying.

I’ve thought another thing for several years. I can see where a lot more ATC commands converted into data and uploaded directly to the flight computers. It goes along the lines of automation and makes sense. Why should a controller be tasked with regurgitating your rnav points when it could easily be confirmed and authorized digitally? I can see a lot of ATC audio work changing along these lines.

I always say niner. Everybody I work with does. I assume most pilots do, but I guess I've never really paid that much attention to give a percentage. It gets drilled into controllers pretty early on.

atcsundevil wrote:

75driver wrote:

Agree on the “niner” thing. Not sure where that comes from but it’s not commercial flying.

I’ve thought another thing for several years. I can see where a lot more ATC commands converted into data and uploaded directly to the flight computers. It goes along the lines of automation and makes sense. Why should a controller be tasked with regurgitating your rnav points when it could easily be confirmed and authorized digitally? I can see a lot of ATC audio work changing along these lines.

I always say niner. Everybody I work with does. I assume most pilots do, but I guess I've never really paid that much attention to give a percentage. It gets drilled into controllers pretty early on.

I was about to say, I know I am a lowly GA Pilot, but I have always said niner, and always heard niner. The plane I learned to fly on was 73-niner-24 or after establishment just niner-24. This was in and around ATL airspace (PDK)

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

75driver wrote:

Maybe, neither of you read FAA AIM 4-2-7, table 4-2-2 which pretty specific about how to pronounce 9 as nin-er. Basic ICAO Phonetic Alphabet. I didn’t use in the US, but did overseas. We had a Standards Pilot that insisted on correct ICAO radio technique. Then, I flew and worked with some very pedantic Canadians and Aussies, which whipped me into shape. I got an ATC request for our indicated, “two-ninety, call sign”. I didn’t stop hearing about it for a week.

The French once complained about MAC crews butchering navaid names, letter came out instructing us to use only the phonetic LOCID. Quimper and Nantes were two notables.

I can guaranty I never read it completely. Would fall into the “browse than read later” category for me. I’ve always called “XXX Two Nine Seven Four” vs “XXX Two Niner Seven Four”. I’ve not once heard from ATC about it but more importantly never heard from the chief! Most of my flying is/was North America with Caribbean, Canada, Mexico sprinkled in. I hear it but seems unimportant as long as your comms are clear. It’s what I was taught. “Nine” is difficult to confuse with another numerical phrase.

75driver wrote:

Agree on the “niner” thing. Not sure where that comes from but it’s not commercial flying.

I’ve thought another thing for several years. I can see where a lot more ATC commands converted into data and uploaded directly to the flight computers. It goes along the lines of automation and makes sense. Why should a controller be tasked with regurgitating your rnav points when it could easily be confirmed and authorized digitally? I can see a lot of ATC audio work changing along these lines.

It seems to make sense but a controller can always talk faster than type so doesn’t the concept fall apart there ?

Especially in high density approach control environments like New York, LA, etc

No problem in non congested airspace though

FLALEFTY wrote:

Back 10 years ago the ATC instruction, "Position & hold on runway XX" changed to, "Line up & wait on runway XX". This was due to the former phrase being mixed up with the common ATC instruction, "Hold your position", which usually refers to taxiway and ramp instructions. This also put the FAA in line with the ICAO standards by making the switch.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... p-and-wait

My favorite thing about the old position and hold was hearing the grumpy folks who’ve been around a while read back the clearance all sour and say “arrghhh... into position, only to hold.. argh. Huff... Callsign123.”

Max Q wrote:

Since my first flying lesson in 1979 and working as a professional pilot from 1982 I’ve never said ‘niner’ or heard another pilot say it anywhere in the world at any time


And ‘W’ is Whiskey all over the world


Don’t know where this BS gets started.

You’ve never heard anyone read back an altimeter that’s in the 29.90-29.99 range with ‘niners’? Ever??

atcsundevil wrote:

dfwjim1 wrote:

I also enjoying listening to ATC, on LIVEATC.NET. It is interesting how ATC personnel rarely use filler words like "um" and "ah" when doing their jobs. Is this something that is trained into ATCs not to use filler words?

Generally your trainer makes fun of you until you stop

If I say "um" or "ah", it's usually on purpose. Example: "Hey, can we get a shortcut?" Me, sees that they're going to LGA, "Uhhhhhh, let me take a look." Then I just wait 30 seconds to say unable.

I knew it!!!!!

For grins and giggles I checked out the live ATC site mentioned above re: niner. Guess I’ve always taken it for granted but listening to Tokyo approach ATC would use “decent and maintain one thousand niner zero zero” and a United flight calls back “one thousand nine hundred”. Same Tokyo ATC tells another aircraft to decent and maintain “one thousand eight hundred”. Listened a bit to Brisbane and ATC also uses niner along with the matching pilot call backs. Then tuned into Memphis with loads of Fedex heavies and ATC uses niner but most of the pilots call backs use nine. Funny how you take certain things for granted and just don’t think about it. IMHO the one thousand niner zero zero is unnecessary. Much easier to say and understand one thousand nine hundred. I’ll also point out that when identifying rnwy’s I always use niner for single digit rnwys and “one nine” for a two digit rnwy. I just never use niner while using in flight comms. I think either is acceptable.

"one thousand niner / nine" zero zero on a 6nm final .... surely cleared for approach by then ??

75driver wrote:

For grins and giggles I checked out the live ATC site mentioned above re: niner. Guess I’ve always taken it for granted but listening to Tokyo approach ATC would use “decent and maintain one thousand niner zero zero” and a United flight calls back “one thousand nine hundred”. Same Tokyo ATC tells another aircraft to decent and maintain “one thousand eight hundred”. Listened a bit to Brisbane and ATC also uses niner along with the matching pilot call backs. Then tuned into Memphis with loads of Fedex heavies and ATC uses niner but most of the pilots call backs use nine. Funny how you take certain things for granted and just don’t think about it. IMHO the one thousand niner zero zero is unnecessary. Much easier to say and understand one thousand nine hundred. I’ll also point out that when identifying rnwy’s I always use niner for single digit rnwys and “one nine” for a two digit rnwy. I just never use niner while using in flight comms. I think either is acceptable.

ICAO thinks otherwise. But I am not surprised the one country in the world, or better it’s citizens, know better...

Moose135 wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

The previous phraseology was, "N123, Runway XX, position and hold." which was replaced with, "N123, Runway XX, line up and wait."

When they changed that, I said "position and hold" is something you do in an airplane, "line up and wait" is something you do at Walmart...

We humble passengers do it quite a lot at the airport as well…

CATIIIevery5yrs wrote:

I knew it!!!!!

I guess I'm sharing all our secrets here! I usually do look to see if it's possible. Under normal circumstances (which don't include the past six months obviously!), there are some days where asking for shortcuts is just a waste of time. Specifically, pretty much any afternoon in the summer going to New York. I don't want to just slam the door immediately, because then it seems like I didn't even try. Sometimes even if I can give a shortcut, it's just better to let the next guy/gal make that decision. Nine times out of ten, I give the shortcut if I can before the pilots even ask. Gets you out of my sector faster

Nicoeddf wrote:

ICAO thinks otherwise. But I am not surprised the one country in the world, or better it’s citizens, know better...

Like I said above, everybody I work with says "niner", so on the ATC side, we aren't just doing our own thing. To be fair though, we did sorta invent this stuff Just about every country has their own idiosyncrasies that deviate from ICAO, so the US is hardly alone in that regard.

Using the ICAO standard becomes important overseas, start talking like Americans on London Control, use HF over the Arabian Sea trying to raise Mumbai on HF, speak with controllers who are barely English proficient beyond Aviation English and you’ll being doing lots of read backs and confusion. Americanisms, “with you at fourteen point five”; “ten-fourteen Hectopascals”; “altimeter setting” aren’t standard and confuse non-English speakers. It’s “altitude one four thousand, fife hundred“, “QNH 1-0-1-4” as was pointed out to me, “every number has a name and every name has a number”

I know at my facility the majority of us use niner. In fact during review time, if I were to use nine instead of niner, they’ll write you up for bad phraseology. So not sure where the idea that it’s BS (as someone so elegantly put it) and nobody uses it comes from.

atcsundevil wrote:

75driver wrote:

I’ve heard you! I’m always happy to play along. I know it’s not kosher but introducing a little levity in a chaotic environment seems appropriate from time to time. The whole Star Wars thing is funny, Jedi, Skywalker, Sith. You weren’t the one who blurted out “SHART” were you? We heard some traffic a few years back and was like W H A T? They even read it back and we damn near “sharted” ourselves. Turned out the FO tuned the wrong frequency but funny nonetheless.

Not me, but now that I've heard it, anything is possible. I agree that well-placed levity is a good thing. Too many pilots and controllers have an "us vs. them" mentality, which I've never understood. Reminders that we're all human helps bridge that gap. Back in the spring, I was giving a lot of "...turn 15 degrees right, vectors for social distancing." Sometimes it helps to smile a bit when times are weird.

ATL PLMMR2 departure. I'm still trying to figure out if it's the Palmer or the Plumber departure.....

bradyj23 wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

75driver wrote:

I’ve heard you! I’m always happy to play along. I know it’s not kosher but introducing a little levity in a chaotic environment seems appropriate from time to time. The whole Star Wars thing is funny, Jedi, Skywalker, Sith. You weren’t the one who blurted out “SHART” were you? We heard some traffic a few years back and was like W H A T? They even read it back and we damn near “sharted” ourselves. Turned out the FO tuned the wrong frequency but funny nonetheless.

Not me, but now that I've heard it, anything is possible. I agree that well-placed levity is a good thing. Too many pilots and controllers have an "us vs. them" mentality, which I've never understood. Reminders that we're all human helps bridge that gap. Back in the spring, I was giving a lot of "...turn 15 degrees right, vectors for social distancing." Sometimes it helps to smile a bit when times are weird.

ATL PLMMR2 departure. I'm still trying to figure out if it's the Palmer or the Plumber departure.....

I've heard both quite often on that departure. Seems like Delta and their regionals say Palmer most of the time while most others say Plumber.

Some of these remind me of the Key & Peele substitute teacher skit where the teacher is mispronouncing the students names and getting angry when they correct him.

Alias1024 wrote:

bradyj23 wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

Not me, but now that I've heard it, anything is possible. I agree that well-placed levity is a good thing. Too many pilots and controllers have an "us vs. them" mentality, which I've never understood. Reminders that we're all human helps bridge that gap. Back in the spring, I was giving a lot of "...turn 15 degrees right, vectors for social distancing." Sometimes it helps to smile a bit when times are weird.

ATL PLMMR2 departure. I'm still trying to figure out if it's the Palmer or the Plumber departure.....

I've heard both quite often on that departure. Seems like Delta and their regionals say Palmer most of the time while most others say Plumber.

Some of these remind me of the Key & Peele substitute teacher skit where the teacher is mispronouncing the students names and getting angry when they correct him.

You done messed up, A-A-Ron. Love that skit.
Anyway, I know its named after Arnold but every time I see it I think Plumber.

Pretty sure the real reason for niner isbecause nine sounds too much like five. It alleviates confusion. And it is used at my facility 97.73% of the time. Pilots are probably closer to 80%. Funny, to comment like “I’ve been doing this since 1910 and never said or heard niner” That is BS

Here's a question that I have always wondered: Do controllers have their own microphone/headsets, or do they use communal ones?