If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Judah wrote:
Because the proper response to "was that for N12345" is from the controller, and is either "no" or a repeat of the call. Since the call is going to be repeated regardless, the obvious point here is to simply not say anything and await the repeat. Saying "was that for blah, blah" just uselessly clutters the frequency even more. I recall one time while in NY airspace when the controller was constantly being stepped on, but apparently didn't realize it. After about the third or fourth repeat, he suddenly berated his listeners by stating, "I need all of you pilots to pay attention to my calls and not make me repeat everything twice!" We all were listening and ready to react, but all we heard were squeals. -- Peter |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Peter R." wrote in message = ... Judah wrote:=20 =20 Because the proper response to "was that for N12345" is from the=20 controller, and is either "no" or a repeat of the call. =20 Since the call is going to be repeated regardless, the obvious point=20 here is to simply not say anything and await the repeat. Saying "was=20 that for blah, blah" just uselessly clutters the frequency even more. =20 =20 --=20 Peter =20 Under one circumstance, I'll say "blocked". If I hear my own call just before the beginning of the squeal, I'm likely to transmit: "Blocked. Say again for Nxxxx." It saves the wait time for the controller to decide I'm not responding. ---JRC--- |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Judah ) wrote:
What, exactly, is the PROPER response to "blocked"? Both the controller and the blocker repeat and do it again? Every time I hear it used, it is the controller who then speaks. -- Peter |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
I must say that I've found the responses to be quite interesting: the
majority see a problem with "blocked". I plan to reverse a long-standing procedure that I've always used (effectively, I might add) and stop using it. My experience is (from my perspective) that using "blocked" works very well. I hear it most often with LA or Oakland Center where there are as many airliners and commuters as bug smashers. There is a key requirement that *before responding "blocked" a sufficient amount of time must has elapsed to make it clear that neither intended message went through*. It seems to work so well because when a true blocking occurs, there are 2 entities that probably don't know that their transmissions were not received. A single short transmission ("blocked") *often* replaces 2 or more (since the second attempt is also blocked) longer transmissions (e.g. "Continental 760, cross XYZ at and maintain 123, expect ABCD, do not exceed 999 knots, altimeter 30.00, over"). I have *never* heard any confusion on Center frequencies, when this happens. Transmitting "blocked" almost never causes total blocking itself since it is so short. The bottom line: whatever works best. "SeeAndAvoid" wrote in message link.net... Been a controller for 18 years and I wish "blocked" would go away. Once I was in a jumpseat, and this one pilot kept a firm grip on his mic just waiting to say "blocked" even when it was obvious the call wasn't for him. I finally told him to knock it off, free ride or not, I had to finally say something. I let him know just because it sounded blocked to him, or that the call may have been for another frequency (controller working more than one freq at a time) and he may have only heard half of the communication, etc etc. It's just bad form, and more often than not the call wasnt really "blocked" at all as the person the call was intended for shortly thereafter answers and at least HE was paying attention and listening. I love it when I hear "blocked" with one aircraft on frequency. I'll reply with "let me guess, blocked by Guard?" No, usually blocked by someone not paying attention or blocked by flight attendant. Usually something can be picked out of the most blocked, heterodyned call. If you think your callsign was part of that call, ask "was that for N12345?". Chris "Lee Elson" wrote in message m... I'd like some input from those of you who are familiar with the working ATC environment. In a situation where a transmission to/from ATC is "interfered with" by a second transmission I've always believed that it is useful to let all parties know that the tranmission was blocked, even if I suspect that I'm not the intended receiver. In order to make sure that the transmission did not go through despite the interference, I usually wait a few seconds to see if there is an answer. Often there is and I just keep quiet. On Sunday I was flying (VFR) in the Ontario, CA Class C, talking to ATC in the northeast sector. Things were not as zoo-ey (a technical term, sorry) as they can be in Socal space, in fact there was not alot of congestion on the freq. However there were 2 transmissions that occured at the same time making the first part unintelligable. From the last few words (from ATC) I strongly suspected the transmission was intended for me. After waiting a few seconds, I transmitted "Blocked". The angry response from ATC was "who said 'blocked'?". I repled that I did and he said "don't do that". He later had time to explain that this often blocks another of his transmissions and that it can interfere with a second frequency that he may be using or that the transmission is not "blocked" at all. He said it is his preference for pilots not to do this but if they do, they should also give their N number (e.g. "blocked, N12345"). So here's my question: it's my impression that such a short transmission almost never causes confusion or interference. Rather it quickly clears up the situation enabling other aircraft to talk, freeing up the frequency. So you controllers out the which is it? Does this help or hurt the situation? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
I must say that I've found the responses to be quite interesting: the
majority see a problem with "blocked". I plan to reverse a long-standing procedure that I've always used (effectively, I might add) and stop using it. My experience is (from my perspective) that using "blocked" works very well. I hear it most often with LA or Oakland Center where there are as many airliners and commuters as bug smashers. There is a key requirement that *before responding "blocked" a sufficient amount of time must has elapsed to make it clear that neither intended message went through*. It seems to work so well because when a true blocking occurs, there are 2 entities that probably don't know that their transmissions were not received. A single short transmission ("blocked") *often* replaces 2 or more (since the second attempt is also blocked) longer transmissions (e.g. "Continental 760, cross XYZ at and maintain 123, expect ABCD, do not exceed 999 knots, altimeter 30.00, over"). I have *never* heard any confusion on Center frequencies, when this happens. Transmitting "blocked" almost never causes total blocking itself since it is so short. The bottom line: whatever works best. "SeeAndAvoid" wrote in message link.net... Been a controller for 18 years and I wish "blocked" would go away. Once I was in a jumpseat, and this one pilot kept a firm grip on his mic just waiting to say "blocked" even when it was obvious the call wasn't for him. I finally told him to knock it off, free ride or not, I had to finally say something. I let him know just because it sounded blocked to him, or that the call may have been for another frequency (controller working more than one freq at a time) and he may have only heard half of the communication, etc etc. It's just bad form, and more often than not the call wasnt really "blocked" at all as the person the call was intended for shortly thereafter answers and at least HE was paying attention and listening. I love it when I hear "blocked" with one aircraft on frequency. I'll reply with "let me guess, blocked by Guard?" No, usually blocked by someone not paying attention or blocked by flight attendant. Usually something can be picked out of the most blocked, heterodyned call. If you think your callsign was part of that call, ask "was that for N12345?". Chris "Lee Elson" wrote in message m... I'd like some input from those of you who are familiar with the working ATC environment. In a situation where a transmission to/from ATC is "interfered with" by a second transmission I've always believed that it is useful to let all parties know that the tranmission was blocked, even if I suspect that I'm not the intended receiver. In order to make sure that the transmission did not go through despite the interference, I usually wait a few seconds to see if there is an answer. Often there is and I just keep quiet. On Sunday I was flying (VFR) in the Ontario, CA Class C, talking to ATC in the northeast sector. Things were not as zoo-ey (a technical term, sorry) as they can be in Socal space, in fact there was not alot of congestion on the freq. However there were 2 transmissions that occured at the same time making the first part unintelligable. From the last few words (from ATC) I strongly suspected the transmission was intended for me. After waiting a few seconds, I transmitted "Blocked". The angry response from ATC was "who said 'blocked'?". I repled that I did and he said "don't do that". He later had time to explain that this often blocks another of his transmissions and that it can interfere with a second frequency that he may be using or that the transmission is not "blocked" at all. He said it is his preference for pilots not to do this but if they do, they should also give their N number (e.g. "blocked, N12345"). So here's my question: it's my impression that such a short transmission almost never causes confusion or interference. Rather it quickly clears up the situation enabling other aircraft to talk, freeing up the frequency. So you controllers out the which is it? Does this help or hurt the situation? |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Since reading and contributing to this thread I've been paying
more attention to the situations that bring a "blocked" on freq. Of course I snicker when I hear it now, and in the past I've been known to blindly transmit sarcastically "can I get a blocked" on freq. Another observation is trying to identify who said it, not publicly on freq to humiliate, just to myself. And so far it's been someone who isn't even on freq yet, someone waiting to check on, yet feels they should throw in their "blocked", big help. Well, today had one of the more irritating examples: I heard both transmissions loud and clear, but the last half second of one transmission was clipped by the first half second of the other - but the overlap was a slight squeal and no talking, just keyed-up dead air. So I was going to acknowledge both calls, as they were as clear as day to me, but I hesitated, and sure enough - "blocked". I almost said something, but as usual, didn't. The most I've said before was "Blocked? Alright, calling center say again", just to get across in a friendly way - as I can't get into a three paragraph discussion on freq about it - that I'm questioning the use of "blocked". It's just not worth getting into a ****ing contest on freq over it, once the tone of the sector get's hostile, everyone just gets in a bad mood and things dont flow as easily. You can tell when you get a pilot that just came from such a sector. Sidenote: there is one time I intentionally say "blocked", and other controllers will understand this one. For laughs, when a controller keys up on a landline and he goes out over the speakers (thinking he's transmitting on his freq), the usual response from other controllers, and several will hear him, is "you're on the landline". Not me, I jump on and say "blocked". It's just one of my favorite things. If some of you pilots havent figured it out yet, most controllers have a pretty twisted sense of humor. God help us when we accidentally key up after a transmission, as it's often pretty colorful and rude. I'm sure you've heard the stories of the occasional "oops" that wasnt meant to be transmitted. From flying, myself or in a jumpseat, I know it happens on the other side, too. With cockpit recorders, I cant imagine it getting as bad as it gets in the control room. Later, Chris |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"SeeAndAvoid" wrote in
link.net: Another observation is trying to identify who said it, not publicly on freq to humiliate, just to myself. And so far it's been someone who isn't even on freq yet, someone waiting to check on, yet feels they should throw in their "blocked", big help. About the only time I do it is if transmissions ARE blocked, all I hear is a squeal, and I'm expecting a call from ATC. That call might have been my clearance for lower, which I've been expecting and really want, but I couldn't tell. I want to find out, but I don't want to make a long call, or antagonize the controller, so I might just transmit a 'blocked' so I can get a retransmission. It's rare, but it sometimes happens. Otherwise I just ignore the squeals, because I usually have more important things to do, like keep the aircraft right-side up, on course and on altitude, or else make sure the FO is doing all that. If I transmit a 'blocked' it's because I really wanted to know what was said, and I couldn't understand it. -- Regards, Stan |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Your description made it sound like ATC would not retransmit unless they
were notified that their message did not get through to you. That certainly is not the case. They will wait 10 or 15 seconds and retransmit, if you don't reply. It is more efficient for everyone if you just wait for ATC to re-transmit the message to you without broadcasting a "blocked." Even if you hear your tail number but the rest of the message is garbled, it is better to wait. Any attempt to alert ATC that they were blocked risks further delaying the original message and causing confusion. For all you know, it was blocked by some guy broadcasting "Mayday, Mayday, Mayday." Stay off the air and let the protocol do it's job. The protocol is designed so that the originator of the message has responsibility to make sure the message got through and was understood. Your job as a receiver, is to wait and listen. -- ------------------------------- Travis "Stan Gosnell" wrote in message ... "SeeAndAvoid" wrote in link.net: Another observation is trying to identify who said it, not publicly on freq to humiliate, just to myself. And so far it's been someone who isn't even on freq yet, someone waiting to check on, yet feels they should throw in their "blocked", big help. About the only time I do it is if transmissions ARE blocked, all I hear is a squeal, and I'm expecting a call from ATC. That call might have been my clearance for lower, which I've been expecting and really want, but I couldn't tell. I want to find out, but I don't want to make a long call, or antagonize the controller, so I might just transmit a 'blocked' so I can get a retransmission. It's rare, but it sometimes happens. Otherwise I just ignore the squeals, because I usually have more important things to do, like keep the aircraft right-side up, on course and on altitude, or else make sure the FO is doing all that. If I transmit a 'blocked' it's because I really wanted to know what was said, and I couldn't understand it. -- Regards, Stan |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
In article .net,
Travis Marlatte wrote: Your description made it sound like ATC would not retransmit unless they were notified that their message did not get through to you. That certainly is not the case. They will wait 10 or 15 seconds and retransmit, if you don't reply. 10 or 15 seconds?? I try to set the heading bug before I read it back and if it takes me more than a split second they're reading it all to me again. -- Ben Jackson http://www.ben.com/ |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|