From: dm@pnet01.cts.com (Dan Melson)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: correcting clearanced [was Re: TCA Clearances (was: A Brief Flight Over Denver)]
Date: 23 Jul 92 05:16:09 GMT
Organization: People-Net [pnet01], El Cajon CA

mparker@adobe.com (Mike Parker) writes:
>I like your idea of saving bandwidth, but I've seen so many people hear
>what they expect to hear.  How about this..
>
>1. a word to get his attention either "negative" or maybe "unable"
>2. a very brief explanation
>3. a corrected clearance to save bandwidth so he can just approved as requested

The first two parts of this are good - but *NOT* the third.  "Approved as
requested", while perfectly acceptable phraseology on the part of a
controller, has a tendency to get one in trouble of one sort or another.
 
(My personal policy, arrived at through getting burned in minor and not so
minor ways, is always to give a pilot full instructions when there's anything
to go wrong.  My guess would be that the vast majority of the controllers I'm
familiar with have similar policies.  So my advice is don't take the time for
a corrected clearance.  If you've reported 10 miles east, and the controller
issues you right traffic for 35 (as in your example), come back with "N2345 is
ten miles EAST", and perhaps "request right traffic" if the frequency isn't
busy (you *did* listen for at least fifteen seconds, didn't you?)
 
And there are reasons to give you other than what you might be expecting.  For
instance, if it's busy, base entries are generally the first thing to go.  SO
even though you might report in a position that's normally a base entry, the
controller may issue you a downwind one because they're busy.  (At least once
a week I see somebody make a base entry when told to make a downwind, or vice
versa.  THIS IS DANGEROUS!).
 
Finally, I've got one more piece of advice: If you're in a position for a
certain kind of entry, report an appropriate position for that kind of entry
if that's what you want.  In the example listed by the original poster (Runway
35), if somebody calls ten miles east, I'm going to guess directly east and
issue a right downwind entry.  But if you say you're ten miles southeast, or
something similar, and it's not too busy for base entries, (again, in the
absence of complicating factors) that's what you'll get.  If you succintly
tell the controller where you really are in the first call, it goes something
like this:
 
"Podunk tower, N12345 ten miles southeast with alfa"
"N12345, Podunk tower, enter right base runway 35, report ..."
 
as opposed to:
 
"Podunk tower, N12345 ten miles east with alfa"
"N12345, make right traffic runway 35, report ..."
"Podunk tower, N12345 is in a better position for a base entry.  Can I have
that?"
"N345, enter right base runway 35, report..."
 
If you're not right over a normal reporting point, it's perfectly legit (and
can save time) to say you're two miles east of it - particularly where this
might make a difference in your type of entry.  It's definitely going to
affect what aircraft the controller thinks might be traffic for you.
 
(Remember, VFR towers do *NOT* all have radar displays!  Unless you know they
do, assume they don't!)
 
                                              DM