Radio talk in the UK

After 16 years of flying across UK and Europe as a hobby, I completed my
Night Rating on thursday at London Luton. The radio calls you do there are
the same as at Luton, with the exception that we have tower and ground
frequencies.

The power checks are done at the best place for you that does not
inconvenience the heavies that pay for the upkeep of the airport. With
regard to the radio calls, airports with significant volumes of IFR traffic
need a common system, with checks and balances to ensure everyone is singing
from the same hymnsheet. Stick with it, it will stand you in good stead.
Better to learn at learn that level, than to learn at a grass strip and be
frightened of going near a control zone.

"Paul" wrote in message
...
Hi

I am training for my PPL in the UK at Liverpool John Lennon Airport, I
have
passed the 55 hour mark which includes my Qualifying X-Country. Not long
to
go now.... anyway, back to the subject of my posting.
At Liverpool, we do our power checks on the GA Apron and not at the
holding
point, after the power checks we check the ATIS then request taxi.

I have been taught by my instructor(s) to make the call something like
this:

G-ABCD: Liverpool Tower, this is G-ABCD at Kilo with information Alpha QNH
1234, QFE 1234 request Taxi

To which the tower will reply confirming the AN/QFE and give taxi
instructions.

However,
When re-entering the Liverpool zone (or any other FIR), the first call is
usually (Station, callsign)
i.e.
G-ABCD: Liverpool Approach, this is G-ABCD
Approach: G-ABCD, Pass your message
etc. etc. etc.

I was told this was to just 'Introduce Yourself' first to ensure the
controller is ready to accept your message,

My question is:

Why not do the same when on the Apron?
i.e.
G-ABCD: Liverpool Tower, this is G-ABCD
Tower: G-ABCD, Pass your message
G-ABCD: G-ABCD is at Kilo with information Alpha AN 1234, QFE 1234 request
Taxi

Surely it would be better to 'just introduce' yourself to the Tower before
babbling for 10 seconds only to be told by the Tower to 'Stand By' as he
is
about to vector a 737 in for an approach.

I hate it (especially earlier in my training) when I would make a rushed
tongue tied call to the Tower only to be either told to Stand By or
realise
I was talking over someone else.

Any comments or advice?

Better to learn at learn that [Luton] level, than to learn at a grass
strip and be
frightened of going near a control zone.

Yes, definitely. I learned to fly at Norwich, and actually did about 10
hours out of RAF Coltishall, and so I got to do a lot of R/T that those
flying from little rural places wouldn't do. My R/T examiner commented that
he can always tell someone who's done their course at a fully-featured, busy
airport versus someone who's learned at a dinky place with an oft-silent
air-ground station and has no actual experience of (say) calling a military
guy for a MATZ crossing, or having a radar advisory service, or whatever.

D.

Exactly my point. I used to own a Warrior and flew virtually every week. I
just restarted after a three year layoff, although I flew with a friend
sometimes from Stapleford. My instructor at Luton said he could always tell
if someone had learned their R/T at a grass strip or a controlled airfield.
I learnt at Southend in the days when it had a control zone.
If you learnt at Norwich, you might have been to Earls Colne (EGSR). That's
where my plane was (and still is) based. Did a lot of flying around E.Anglia

John

"David Cartwright" wrote in message
...
Better to learn at learn that [Luton] level, than to learn at a grass
strip and be
frightened of going near a control zone.

Yes, definitely. I learned to fly at Norwich, and actually did about 10
hours out of RAF Coltishall, and so I got to do a lot of R/T that those
flying from little rural places wouldn't do. My R/T examiner commented
that
he can always tell someone who's done their course at a fully-featured,
busy
airport versus someone who's learned at a dinky place with an oft-silent
air-ground station and has no actual experience of (say) calling a
military
guy for a MATZ crossing, or having a radar advisory service, or whatever.

D.

Its amazing in this day and age that telegraphic CW abbreviations (QNH &
QFE) are still being used instead of normal words. I guess it must just be
RT double talk.

In uk.rec.aviation beaudoin wrote:
: Its amazing in this day and age that telegraphic CW abbreviations (QNH &
: QFE) are still being used instead of normal words. I guess it must just be
: RT double talk.

"QNH" uses a bit less air time than "mean sea level pressure". I guess
one could argue that the use of "altimeter" across the other side of
the pond is a good use of "normal words", but as we use QFE and a
number of regional pressure settings as well, having short phrases to
differentiate between subscale settings is useful. Sure, we could come
up with words to replace the CW abbreviations but it would surely only
be change for the sake of change.

At least we don't have to phonetically spell out the
abbreviations. What is the queenie nan how today anway? :-)

And besides QNF is completely unnecessary if flying. If one cannot fly
without QNF, one cannot fly. QNF only serves to complicate things.

beaudoin wrote:

And besides QNF is completely unnecessary if flying.

QNF? What the hell should that be?

Stefan