LiveATC Discussion Forums
Air Traffic Monitoring => Aviation Audio Clips => Topic started by: nitroboie on February 04, 2006, 09:45:11 PM
-
This happened around 1917 EST, tower controller gave a pilot (Siberian 6253) instructions to hold at a certian taxi way, but the pilot did otherwise and ended up in the wrong spot. Then, the pilot wouldn't repeat the correct holding instructions. You can tell by the tone of the ATC's voice that he was getting very agitated. The clip is ALOT easier to understand if you find a map of the airport.
Enjoy
-
YIKES!!! You gotta respect the guys over there at Kennedy who deal with this stuff every night. Great clip nitro, thanks for sharing.
-
wow great clip unbelevable :oops: :oops: :oops: but i dount know what happend complet ly that guy got very mad at him :oops: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:
-
Wow that was incredible. Those controllers really go through a lot with foreign pilots down there.
-
Great post. Almost expect him to blow a whistle...
-
Jeez that was crazy. It sounds like a language barrier was in the way here.
-
here is a map of jfk who are interested....
-
LOLOLOL.....Found that pretty entertaininng, although that really pissed off the controller. They are great controllers. Ill try to edit the map to get Siberians route, just for fun.
-
Bit harder than it seamed, wont be able to do it. That is confusing :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
-
Here's what I came up with... green is where he was supposed to go, yellow is where he went, and red is at the point where the controller told him to stop his plain. BTW, the colors weren't done of purpose, I just realized it after I edited the picture (green, yellow, red). :lol:
-
Thanks man! I started that exact thing and thought it was wrong :x Oh well, thanks alot anyway.
SEAHAWKS!!!!!!!!
-
I believe that the carrier in question was "Iberian", but don't quote me on that.
At any rate, if a foreign operator should be familiar with any english terminology, the words "Hold Short" would be pretty high on my list.
-
I also think it's Iberian...
But that clip is definitely incredible.
I've got some other situations that look like that, it's always very impressive.
I've noticed that the hold short instructions are unkown to many foreign carriers. For example, at Montreal, when controllers ask to Air France to hold short, the french way to say it, they can't understand. Same thing for carriers like Cubana, CSA, etc (KLM and British are not included). Controllers end up to say "hold position" or "line-up" instead of "taxi into position".
-
I also tought this was "Iberia" / "Iberian"... but the controller is talking about the G-A-T... and why would an Iberia plane park at the General Aviation Terminal? 8)
-
I also tought this was "Iberia" / "Iberian"... but the controller is talking about the G-A-T... and why would an Iberia plane park at the General Aviation Terminal? 8)
Iberian, siberian, its all good 8)
-
Well, at least I tought Iberia pilots would understand english :roll:
-
Well, at least I tought Iberia pilots would understand english :roll:
They SHoud sounds like HO SHOR FWER WHITE
-
it must be sooooo hard to work @ JFK :shock:
-
"STOP YOUR PLANE, DON'T MOVE..." LOL that was great!
-
I listened to it again last night. Iberian 6253 Heavy
Its just hilarious..
"That guy cut in front of you American 952??"
"Uh, yeah, he's bigger than us though."
"American 952 Heavy didn't mean for you to get stuck behind this..." this what? LOL
And then we have The Pass...
-
Type rated but cant master atc communications, go back to ground school!
-
I listened to it again last night. Iberian 6253 Heavy
"That guy cut in front of you American 952??"
"Uh, yeah, he's bigger than us though."
I thought that was pretty damn funny too
:D
-
I'm still trying to figure out what the pilot said after the ATC told him to taxi to the end of the runway 58 seconds into the audio clip:
ATC: "Iberian you need to taxi to the end of the runway it looks like, is that correct?"
Iberian 6253: "Correct... ????????"
-
This guy is my FAVORITE KJFK controller EVER.
I've heard him say "Stop your plane" one other time when GND giving taxi inst to 4L.
He's also famous for the exchange with UAL203 and the reply "Thanks I'm tryin' see ya babe." When a pilot says "Have a good night".
-
Is this the same controller that was on the TLC program about ATC that showed LGA, EWR, and JFK?
-
Is this the same controller that was on the TLC program about ATC that showed LGA, EWR, and JFK?
Nope
-
I agree, this guy is the best JFK controller. He doesn't take any s$i% from the pilots, and moves everyone around the best he can. I remember a few years ago hearing him get extremely mad a UAL pilot, because she was not reading the hold short clnc, and eventually had to hand the radio over to the PNF. Great clip, thanks for sharing!
-
A similar situation happened again tonight, except this time even he gets confused at one point . Here's the clip. :P
-
A similar situation happened again tonight, except this time even he gets confused at one point . Here's the clip. :P
My God...that is freakin' halarious. I think they call the the New York treatment. Welcome to the USA. :lol:
-
I would imagine that it could be quite difficult understanding the commands when english is not your first language. These two examples are caused, in my opinion, by the pilot trying to be hasty and fast and not trully listening to the commands of the ATC.
I wonder what kind of prep these pilots go thru before arrival to JFK, cause they know they will have to taxi and follow commands in english?
-
I would imagine that it could be quite difficult understanding the commands when english is not your first language.
Depends a lot on where you come from. In some places, even if first language is not english, they have no problem understanding at all (like in Quebec). I would say foreign companies should really train their pilots to US phraseology much more then what they actually do (if ever done?).
-
Thats just funny thanks for those clips.
-
I love NY.
-
that Iberian pilot really screw things up. I was laughing so hard at talk between ATC and him :P :P
HOLD SHORT ON 4L lol :P
-
I tell you what: The ground controller, after giving the Iberian pilot a very hard time for not repeating "Hold Short," made a mistake by not requiring the "Hold Short" readback from the American Airlines pilot at the very end of the audio clip.
"Left Yankee, Right 3-1 Right, short of 4 L," was the AA pilot's readback, which is procedurally incorrect. The controller MUST hear "HOLD short" rwy XX and the controller let it go.
-
Well.. I hear a lot of "short of", which is a short way of saying "hold short of". It's probably not the right way (officially) to say it, but we hear it quite often...
The controller was on the Iberian probably because his answers weren't clear at all. Moreover, he told the pilot he wasn't able to understand what he was saying.. things like "....hold..." are not very clear. For the second file (8081 heavy), readbacks weren't good at all:
"-Tam 8081 right Hotel, left 04L, hold short of Golf
-Right on Hotel and hold short of Golf"
That's incomplete, especially when a runway is used for taxi.
-
Well.. I hear a lot of "short of", which is a short way of saying "hold short of". It's probably not the right way (officially) to say it, but we hear it quite often...
There is no short way of communicating "Hold Short," at least in US aviation. If the controller instructs an aircraft to hold short, the pilot MUST specifically read back "Hold Short." If the pilot does not read this back exactly, the controller is obligated to correct it.
This was a requirement put in place several years ago as part of the FAA's crackdown on runway incursions.
-
I tell you what: The ground controller, after giving the Iberian pilot a very hard time for not repeating "Hold Short," made a mistake by not requiring the "Hold Short" readback from the American Airlines pilot at the very end of the audio clip.
"Left Yankee, Right 3-1 Right, short of 4 L," was the AA pilot's readback, which is procedurally incorrect. The controller MUST hear "HOLD short" rwy XX and the controller let it go.
Actually, it's not incorrect at all.
ONLY ATC is required to use proper phraseology. The pilot IS required to readback the instruction, but the definition of "readback" for a pilot is a LOT looser than the definition for how ATC instructs a plane.
If you look at Order 7110.65P Chapter 3, Section 7, there's never any example of what the readback is supposed to sound like.
ATC has to give the standard "Callsign, Kennedy Tower, wind XXX at XX, Rwy 22L, cleared to land". They HAVE to give their name on initial contact, they HAVE to make "cleared to land" the last thing they say. However, it's perfectly OK for the PILOT to say "clear to land 22L".
The demand of exact phraseology is on ATC. There are sections saying how you should tell an A/C to give a readback, but nothing about what has to be contained in it.
At least that I could find that is.
-
Actually, it's not incorrect at all.
Are you a pilot or active (non-VATSIM) controller?
I am a very active general aviation pilot just a few hours shy of the 1,000 hour mark obtained in the last four years. My Bonanza is based at a class C airport and I have flown many times into Boston Logan airport, as well as the busiest class Ds of the northeast US (Teterboro and Bedford/Hanscom). I have also flown my Bonanza across the US, from NY to California and back through Denver International. The purpose of stating all this is merely to establish my credibility.
With regards to US ATC communications, I can attest to the fact that controllers absolutely must hear a readback of "hold short" (both words) if they issue a hold short command. Where this is in their controller's handbook, I couldn't say. However, I have heard on more occasions than I can count on my fingers a pilot not including "HOLD short" in their readback andthe controller immediately and tersely responding, "Sir, I must* hear the words HOLD SHORT," followed by a sheepish, "Hold short runway XX, Cessna XXX."
Apparently, this also applies to "Position and Hold" as well. One time last year at Boston Logan I was instructed to position and hold. In an attempt to keep radio chatter down to the bare minimum, I opted to respond "WILCO, Bonanza XXX" and the controller did the same thing. "Sir, please read back the entire instruction, including the word HOLD."
-
Actually, it's not incorrect at all.
Are you a pilot or active (non-VATSIM) controller?
I am a very active general aviation pilot just a few hours shy of the 1,000 hour mark obtained in the last four years. My Bonanza is based at a class C airport and I have flown many times into Boston Logan airport, as well as the busiest class Ds of the northeast US (Teterboro and Bedford/Hanscom). I have also flown my Bonanza across the US, from NY to California and back through Denver International. The purpose of stating all this is merely to establish my credibility.
With regards to US ATC communications, I can attest to the fact that controllers absolutely must hear a readback of "hold short" (both words) if they issue a hold short command. Where this is in their controller's handbook, I couldn't say. However, I have heard on more occasions than I can count on my fingers a pilot not including "HOLD short" in their readback andthe controller immediately and tersely responding, "Sir, I must* hear the words HOLD SHORT," followed by a sheepish, "Hold short runway XX, Cessna XXX."
Apparently, this also applies to "Position and Hold" as well. One time last year at Boston Logan I was instructed to position and hold. In an attempt to keep radio chatter down to the bare minimum, I opted to respond "WILCO, Bonanza XXX" and the controller did the same thing. "Sir, please read back the entire instruction, including the word HOLD."
Agreed, sounds right to me, its practical runway and airport safety to readback Poistion and Hold to the controller when on a taxi way or runway. As one at any towered airport when a pilot taxis to the runway, youll always hear the controller : United XXX, taxi to runway 27L, position and hold. Pilot: Taxi runway 27L position and hold. Common safety rules that could make all the difference sometimes.
-
On a slight different note - how much does it matter if the pilot reads back their callsign before the instruction, and at that - an abbreviated in-flight instruction?
eg. November 123, 3 thousand.
-instead of-
eg. Climb to 3 thousand, November 123.
...?
-
This explains it quite clearly. Don Brown is required reading for all pilots.
http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182636-1.html
w0x0f
-
Don Brown is required reading for all pilots.
Absolutely! My favorite monthly column. I am very critical of my communication skills (always listen to the LiveATC archives) and have really tightened this up since I began reading his columns a few years ago.
Reading aviation accident analyses in the magazine NTSB Reporter or the various columns in Flying, Aviation Safety, and Plane and Pilot also reinforces proper communication (when to say it) and phraseology (what to say) skills.
The accident that sticks with me and demonstrates poor communication is an accident where a C150 was cleared for takeoff and a second C172 announced ready, but failed to include his location. This C172 was actually at a taxiway intersection some 1,000 feet further down the runway. The tower controller, thinking he was the C172 he saw immediately behind the C150 taking the runway, gave him a position and hold instruction.
The C172 taxied onto the runway and right into the path of the rolling C150. All aboard both aircraft were killed as a result of the collision.
-
You won't find the requirement to read back HOLD SHORT instructions in the 7110.65. It is a local requirement imposed at almost every busy airport, and is not optional, as Peter points out. In fact, listen to the ATIS recording at almost every busy airport, and you will hear the words:
"Read back all hold short instructions."
This is required of all pilots, and is a local requirement. The local requirements override everything, regardless of whether you don't find something in a regulatory publication or not.
And I am not sure whether it is in the FAR's or not....no time to look it up right now.
-
On a slight different note - how much does it matter if the pilot reads back their callsign before the instruction, and at that - an abbreviated in-flight instruction?
Since the callsign of the aircraft is most likely second nature, many pilots will read-back the instruction first, then add their callsign. This is actually an effective memory aid for those pilots, like myself, who are able to remember most instructions (clearances and taxi instructions excluded) without writing them down.
Hear the numbers, repeat the numbers first (which plants the numbers in the short term memory - the same memory trick works when meeting someone new and hearing their name), then add the callsign after the instruction.
Oh, and the callsign is never abbreviated by the pilot without the controller first abbreviating it. Many pilots make this mistake.
-
... an abbreviated in-flight instruction?
eg. November 123, 3 thousand.
-instead of-
eg. Climb to 3 thousand, November 123....?
I missed your second question in my previous reply. Believe it or not, neither reply in your example is technically correct.
When flying IFR in the US, the correct readback for an altitude change instruction is actually:
"Leaving one thousand eight hundred, climbing three thousand, November 123," or "One thousand eight hundred, climbing three thousand, November 123."
The first part of the readback allows the controller (I believe - one of the controllers here would need to verify) to quickly verify the altitude on his scope (what is really the altitude from the aircraft's mode C transponder corrected to the local barometric pressure) matches what the pilot is seeing on his altimeter.
To demonstrate that this phraseology is correct, I have very often heard an incorrect, or abbreviated reply met with an immediate, "Say altitide leaving" by the controller. In busy airspace, this additional exchange ties up the frequency that much more.
-
Actually, it's not incorrect at all.
Are you a pilot or active (non-VATSIM) controller?
I am a very active general aviation pilot just a few hours shy of the 1,000 hour mark obtained in the last four years. My Bonanza is based at a class C airport and I have flown many times into Boston Logan airport, as well as the busiest class Ds of the northeast US (Teterboro and Bedford/Hanscom). I have also flown my Bonanza across the US, from NY to California and back through Denver International. The purpose of stating all this is merely to establish my credibility.
With regards to US ATC communications, I can attest to the fact that controllers absolutely must hear a readback of "hold short" (both words) if they issue a hold short command. Where this is in their controller's handbook, I couldn't say. However, I have heard on more occasions than I can count on my fingers a pilot not including "HOLD short" in their readback andthe controller immediately and tersely responding, "Sir, I must* hear the words HOLD SHORT," followed by a sheepish, "Hold short runway XX, Cessna XXX."
Apparently, this also applies to "Position and Hold" as well. One time last year at Boston Logan I was instructed to position and hold. In an attempt to keep radio chatter down to the bare minimum, I opted to respond "WILCO, Bonanza XXX" and the controller did the same thing. "Sir, please read back the entire instruction, including the word HOLD."
Nah, just an enthusiast. I plan on getting some flying time in there as soon as I get the $ for it as soon as I get a real job for that.
That's a lot of "as soon as-es", but you gotta have a goal right.
Just read stuff on my own time, try to keep up with things, listen to ATC on here, and just trying to keep straight the many things I hear from here and there.
I hadn't heard of that. Always had heard (and it seems from the "quality" of some of the "readbacks" you hear) that the proper phraseology was on the ATC side less than the pilot side.
-
... an abbreviated in-flight instruction?
eg. November 123, 3 thousand.
-instead of-
eg. Climb to 3 thousand, November 123....?
I missed your second question in my previous reply. Believe it or not, neither reply in your example is technically correct.
When flying IFR in the US, the correct readback for an altitude change instruction is actually:
"Leaving one thousand eight hundred, climbing three thousand, November 123," or "One thousand eight hundred, climbing three thousand, November 123."
The first part of the readback allows the controller (I believe - one of the controllers here would need to verify) to quickly verify the altitude on his scope (what is really the altitude from the aircraft's mode C transponder corrected to the local barometric pressure) matches what the pilot is seeing on his altimeter.
To demonstrate that this phraseology is correct, I have very often heard an incorrect, or abbreviated reply met with an immediate, "Say altitide leaving" by the controller. In busy airspace, this additional exchange ties up the frequency that much more.
Actually, "out of 5 for 3, cessna xxx" will suffice...
-
You won't find the requirement to read back HOLD SHORT instructions in the 7110.65. It is a local requirement
Actually it is required of the controller to receive it in the .65. Par 3-7-2 d
This is a national requirement, not just local. Nothing in the .65 is regulatory for pilots.
http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp3/atc0307.html#3-7-2
d. Request a read back of runway hold short instructions when it is not received from the pilot/vehicle operator.
w0x0f
-
It's also in the section governing ATIS content:
Section 9. Automatic Terminal Information
Service Procedures
2-9-3. CONTENT
j. A statement which advises the pilot to read back instructions to hold short of a runway. The air traffic manager may elect to remove this requirement 60 days after implementation provided that removing the statement from the ATIS does not result in increased requests from aircraft for read back of hold short instructions.
-
"The first part of the readback allows the controller (I believe - one of the controllers here would need to verify) to quickly verify the altitude on his scope (what is really the altitude from the aircraft's mode C transponder corrected to the local barometric pressure) matches what the pilot is seeing on his altimeter. "
Mode C altitude readouts must be verified on interfacility handoffs and on initial track start. So the pilot must state their current altitude, or if climbing or descending, the altitude they are passing through and their assigned altitude.
http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp5/atc0502.html#5-2-17
w0x0f
-
"Leaving one thousand eight hundred, climbing three thousand, November 123," or "One thousand eight hundred, climbing three thousand, November 123."
I posted an article by Don Brown earlier in this thread. Here is an excerpt of why you should use your call sign first and readback instructions second.
What controllers think they are saying is this:
"November 12345 descend and maintain one five thousand"
In the real world, it comes out like this:
"(Click)ber 12345 descend and maintain one five thousand"
For airlines and such, if there is a similar callsign on the frequency, the book requires us to repeat the call sign after the flight number. That's because it comes out like this:
"(Click)ner 123 Airliner descend and maintain flight level three three zero."
Okay, now we go back and tie in the original example of a bad readback.
"(Click)ner123 descend and maintain flight level three three zero."
"(Click) three zero Airliner123."
Let's try to do it halfway right and see if there is a difference.
"(Click)ner 123 descend and maintain flight level three three zero."
"(Click)ht level two three zero Airliner123."
"(Click)gative Airliner123 descend and maintain flight level THREE three zero."
So you see, good phraseology habits are incumbent upon all parties in aviation communications. Safety first. Hot dog phraseology may sound cool and you may hear air carrier pilots using it, but it actually creates more workload because of readback again requests. I've been in aviation for 30 years and I still use good phraseology to this day. I get very few requests for "say again." I was taught that way from the beginning and I hope the younger and more impressionable aviators on this excellent site will do the same.
w0x0f
-
"The first part of the readback allows the controller (I believe - one of the controllers here would need to verify) to quickly verify the altitude on his scope (what is really the altitude from the aircraft's mode C transponder corrected to the local barometric pressure) matches what the pilot is seeing on his altimeter. "
Mode C altitude readouts must be verified on interfacility handoffs and on initial track start. So the pilot must state their current altitude, or if climbing or descending, the altitude they are passing through and their assigned altitude.
http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp5/atc0502.html#5-2-17
w0x0f
when you switch from say memphis center to atlanta center, they dont ask you for a read out of the altitude, they just give you an altimeter setting that is close to you...this is also done when changing from say one sector of memphis center to another sector.
-
when you switch from say memphis center to atlanta center, they dont ask you for a read out of the altitude, they just give you an altimeter setting that is close to you...
Most pilot give their altitude when they check in on the frequency.
-
In Canada, the altitude confirmation is mostly given by the pilot when checking in, as JD said.
If a pilot calls "Departure Air Canada 123 with you", the controller will ask in 95% of the cases "Air Canada 123 say passing altitude". If controller is too much busy, he'll try to ask the pilot as soon as possible. But most of the pilots will say "Departures American 802 out of 2.6 for 5".
When arriving, even if pilot doesn't say his altitude, most of the time the ATC won't ask the passing altitude since he supposes the altitude was confirmed after takeoff. You can hear sometimes "Air France 356 traffic 3 o'clock 4 miles, Cessna 172 at 1,500 ft unverified".
If altitude sent is not correct, controller has to issue the altimeter setting a second time and the pilot has to check the altitude again. If it still doesn't work, pilot has to turn off the transponder and leave class C airspace...
For the HOLD SHORT instructions, well if it's mandatory, controllers don't do their job correctly. I hear a lot of abbreviated expressions both on CA and US feeds and rarely the controller will obstinate on it, unless it is not clear.
To me: "left on Golf and short of 28" is clear enough. But I fully understand confusion could happen one time and that could be dangerous.
-
To me: "left on Golf and short of 28" is clear enough. But I fully understand confusion could happen one time and that could be dangerous.
Just like so many other regulations, sometime, somewhere, *someone* got things messed up, and now there's a regulation that *everybody* is required to follow, every time. Maybe not everybody follows those regulations all the time, but those that don't, put themselves at risk of being caught in an infraction of the rules, even if there's no actual incident or accident, and if there *is* an accident...
-
Exactly, you're totally right.
That's why I said that one time it could bring a confusion and etc.
-
Actually, "out of 5 for 3, cessna xxx" will suffice...
Sloppy phraseology, at least in the US. Sure, many say it. In fact, it seems that a lot of very low time pilots like to use that example to sound like the ariline pilots. Doesn't mean it's correct.
-
So you see, good phraseology habits are incumbent upon all parties in aviation communications. Safety first. Hot dog phraseology may sound cool and you may hear air carrier pilots using it, but it actually creates more workload because of readback again requests.
Well put.
-
when you switch from say memphis center to atlanta center, they dont ask you for a read out of the altitude, they just give you an altimeter setting that is close to you...this is also done when changing from say one sector of memphis center to another sector.
Are you implying that pilots who switch from Memphis Center to Atlanta Center never include their altitude on the initial check-in?
-
when you switch from say memphis center to atlanta center, they dont ask you for a read out of the altitude, they just give you an altimeter setting that is close to you...
Most pilot give their altitude when they check in on the frequency.
From the US AIM 5-3-1. ARTCC Communications, altitudes are part of the suggested check-in. See the following quote.
(http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/Chap5/aim0503.html#5-3-1)
2. The following phraseology should be utilized by pilots for establishing contact with the designated facility:
(a) When operating in a radar environment: On initial contact, the pilot should inform the controller of the aircraft's assigned altitude preceded by the words "level," or "climbing to," or "descending to," as appropriate; and the aircraft's present vacating altitude, if applicable.
EXAMPLE-
1. (Name) CENTER, (aircraft identification), LEVEL (altitude or flight level).
2. (Name) CENTER, (aircraft identification), LEAVING (exact altitude or flight level), CLIMBING TO OR DESCENDING TO (altitude of flight level).
NOTE-
Exact altitude or flight level means to the nearest 100 foot increment. Exact altitude or flight level reports on initial contact provide ATC with information required prior to using Mode C altitude information for separation purposes.
-
when you switch from say memphis center to atlanta center, they dont ask you for a read out of the altitude, they just give you an altimeter setting that is close to you...this is also done when changing from say one sector of memphis center to another sector.
Are you implying that pilots who switch from Memphis Center to Atlanta Center never include their altitude on the initial check-in?
im sorry, what i meant was that they do not ask your altitude, of course checking in is something like "atlanta center, cessna xxx with you level 5" then the reply would be something like "cessna xxx, atlanta center roger, xxxx altimeterr 30.14"
i am by no means a low time pilot, so how about you leave your chastising me at the door.
-
i am by no means a low time pilot, so how about you leave your chastising me at the door.
Relax. It was meant as a fact, not as a slam against you.
-
Wow, either this thread is waaaaay of course now, or I need new charts...
-
Wow, either this thread is waaaaay of course now, or I need new charts...
It actually is not that far off. It started with the audio clip of a ground incident at JFK and evolved into a discussion about communications and phraseology as a direct result of an exchange within that audio clip.
Phraseology, like "teaching spins," "what causes lift," and "high wing versus low wing," is a very active topic in aviation-related groups.
-
Wow, either this thread is waaaaay of course now, or I need new charts...
It actually is not that far off. It started with the audio clip of a ground incident at JFK and evolved
Oh, I know how it started. I don't need a lecture from you.
-
Oh, I know how it started. I don't need a lecture from you.
I didn't see anyone here lecturing....lighten up a bit.
-
It's that "New York atitude" from the clips--it's contagious... :lol:
-
It's that "New York atitude" from the clips--it's contagious... :lol:
..that must be it.
These "discussion forums" are exactly what the name implies: Where people can freely talk and express their opinions about a topic (LiveATC.net related) and support their statement(s). This doesn't mean you can't agree or disagree with someone's opinion, that's the exact opposite of a discussion, but please just try and lighten up a bit, understand other member's opinion(s) and let's all have fun enjoying what we all love to do here. I don't want to have to lock this thread.
Also--Read someone’s entire post before responding back to it. I've found myself before responding to an opinion that later changed in his/her post and found myself in an odd situation.
These ATC audio clips can be very controversial and are highly based on the situation the controller(s) were presented with at the time, which we most likely don't know.
So--now that all I have to say has been said, let's enjoy these great clips that our members post and in most cases commend the controller and/or pilot for a job well done. This sure was an interesting clip with that NY attitude "flare" (no pun intended) to it. Communication can be very tricky at times and shouldn't be taken for granted. I have a friend in Korea who is an ATCS in the military and has a very difficult time understanding the pilots with thick foreign accents.
Thanks for your understanding,
Jason
-
Oh, I know how it started. I don't need a lecture from you.
Two words, chief: De CAF.
-
The file is no longer up i was looking to get this file if somebody could repost.
-
Wow this guys really have busy nights
-
Actually, when a pilot checks on my frequency, if he was switched from a sector in my facility I am not required to verify his altitude. If he was switched from ANOTHER facility I am required to verify his altitude. Most won't but it is in the 7110.65.
-
The file is no longer up i was looking to get this file if somebody could repost.
yes, can anyone repost please?
-
At one point Air China and Korean were the worst airlines to communicate with. Iberian has been in the lead for some time now. I'm actually fling them in a couple of weeks over in Spain but no, I'm not flying them from JFK to Spain.
-
Can someone reupload this again? Thanks!
-
Yes, what happened to the original file? Kennedy is definitely an entertaining airport to monitor, especially during the evening international push. All hell seems to break loose during Friday nights when there are thunderstorms, fog, or snow...
-
Yes, if someone can reload? I probably read it but that was years ago.
On a more positive note, who are the best non-native English speakers out there? It's a little tricky because it sounds like some of the pilots for foreign carriers are native English speakers. Cathay Pacific for sure but also Emirates and some other mid-east airlines.
I vote for without a doubt for KLM as consistently the best, followed by Lufthansa (though there's a lot of variation with them). Aeromexico, Taca, and Lacsa also have some really good English speakers. And then there's Air India, native English speakers, and with practice perfectly understandable by us Americans - but it does take some practice.
-
I rarely have problems with Air Portugal, Qatar Air, Emirates, KLM, TCV (Cape Verde Airlines), and Mistral (BOS).
My worst are TAM, Iberian, Air France. All three are horrible and just about tied in their lack of ability to speak english. TAM also has the added problem of not knowing how to fly...
-
I'd add China Eastern and Kolean Air, LOT, Dynasty, to those other badboy lists. and,yes, the French are notorious for taking prde in the excerable accents while attemtping to spek English.
-
I'd add China Eastern and Kolean Air, LOT, Dynasty, to those other badboy lists. and,yes, the French are notorious for taking prde in the excerable accents while attemtping to spek English.
Not all of'em buddy!
I am French, and I can tell you there is NO WAY you could tell I am... :-D
Once I even made fun of my fellow Air France pilots departing from LAX while I was on the standard departure procedure from Santa Monica over SoCal Departure.
Even the SoCal dude laughed with me.
Too bad, I looked for the recording, but unfortunately, no feed.....
Anyway... I agree.... Most of us, french bastards, are horrible when it comes to speak english....
:lol:
Hmmmmmmm Say again after good morning??!!! :evil:
-
I work a ton of Air France flights and they're all quite professional and I've had no language problems. Korean Air used to have trouble but they're much better.
-
wer is the link :-o
-
Here's the clip for this thread someone posted on YouTube... man I loved listening to this controller at Kennedy. Definitely took care of business.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOc6MM2jsTE
-
Here's the clip for this thread, posted on YouTube... man I loved listening to this controller at Kennedy. Definitely took care of business.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOc6MM2jsTE
Prime example of why I LOVE listening to KJFK! Outstanding clip!