ATC

On Mar 28, 12:16 pm, Jim Logajan wrote:

The poster said these were ATC transmissions, not internal company
communications. Since ATC doesn't concern itself with weight, balance,
or any other flight performance factors, your explanation is almost
certainly wrong.

ATC does, however, need to know if the pilot has the current ATIS
(Automated Terminal Information Service) information: ceiling,
visibility, wind, altimeter setting, runway in use, and any special
airport information.


The KGRB ATIS includes a statement advising air carrier aircraft to
make sure they have their numbers before calling ready for taxi. It
was added because Northwest became notorious for taxiing without them
and blocking other departures while they waited for them.

On Mar 28, 1:09 pm, Jim Logajan wrote:

The OP described two different transmissions - one from the ATC asking a
question and one presumably initiated by the aircraft. I'm still not sure
why ATC would ask or be interested in whether the aircraft has the sort of
numbers Jay mentions.


The aircraft can't depart without that information. ATC does not want
to taxi aircraft that can't depart because they block other aircraft
from departing.



So you think Jay was almost certainly right and I am almost certainly
wrong? That is possible, but I'd like a bit of evidence that that is what
the alleged exchanges are all about.


What sort of evidence would satisfy you?

On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 05:06:50 -0700 (PDT), "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:

On Mar 28, 1:09 pm, Jim Logajan wrote:

The OP described two different transmissions - one from the ATC asking a
question and one presumably initiated by the aircraft. I'm still not sure
why ATC would ask or be interested in whether the aircraft has the sort of
numbers Jay mentions.


The aircraft can't depart without that information. ATC does not want
to taxi aircraft that can't depart because they block other aircraft
from departing.

My experience is that the OP may have heard a ground or clearance
delivery frequency.

On Mar 28, 5:00*am, "Mike Gilmour" wrote:
Listening to Boston ATC at various times the Tower controller asks a flight
if they 'have got their numbers" (?) or a flight will say they're not ready
to proceed because they "don't have their numbers".

FYI, Radio closeout of the AWABS is mostly standard out of KBOS,
especially on the shuttle. The ATIS is retrieved via ACARS and the
rest is on the flight plan. " Having the numbers" indicates that the
flight would be ready for departure upon taxi. This is important when
departing North out of KBOS.
Frank

On Mar 28, 5:16*pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
The poster said these were ATC transmissions, not internal company
communications.

Hi Folks

I'm the guy that dropped the pebble in the pond on this one.

I'm doing my UK PPL and listen to Live ATC feeds in 'background' when
doing tedious work at home. Due to UK law we can't get feeds from any
UK airfields so it's intersting to tune in and hear you guys waking up
across the pond.

It was a question I posed on the UK GA web site (www.ukga.com).

I was listening to Boston ATC and what I heard was a flight taxying
for departure telling the Tower that they needed more time because,
"We don't have our numbers", not "the numbers".

Later the Tower controller calls him back and ask him, "Have you got
your numbers" (not "the numbers") and advising the flight he'll have
to pull him over to let other flights through if he wasn't ready in a
jiffy.

Now there seems to be at least a couple of occasions where the time
delay between the flight first saying they weren't ready and their
still not being ready when the controller called them back was
significant, i.e to my way of thinking much longer than it would have
taken for the crew to tune to ATIS and get the lastest information.
Indeed why would they have pushed back without the ATIS?

My thought was that it must have something to do with the load figures
and the weight/balance calcs. And that the Tower didn't want the guy
to get to the head of the queue at the hold point and not be certain
he was ready to go.

So I think I'm with Jay on his explanation.

However it does show how confusing using shorthand phrases like 'the
numbers' can be!

Glad to know it's generated some stimulating debate!

Cheers

Ed

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:
On Mar 28, 1:09 pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
So you think Jay was almost certainly right and I am almost certainly
wrong? That is possible, but I'd like a bit of evidence that that is
what the alleged exchanges are all about.


What sort of evidence would satisfy you?

Very little. I posted a retraction yesterday after someone else provided
further enlightenment.

On Mar 29, 10:42*am, Ed Sharkey wrote:
On Mar 28, 5:16*pm, Jim Logajan wrote:

The poster said these were ATC transmissions, not internal company
communications.

Hi Folks

I'm the guy that dropped the pebble in the pond on this one.



Now there seems to be at least a couple of occasions where the time
delay between the flight first saying they weren't ready and their
still not being ready when the controller called them back was
significant, i.e to my way of thinking much longer than it would have
taken for the crew to tune to ATIS and get the lastest information.
Indeed why would they have pushed back without the ATIS?

My thought was that it must have something to do with the load figures
and the weight/balance calcs. *And that the Tower didn't want the guy
to get to the head of the queue at the hold point and not be certain
he was ready to go.

Ed, Good explination . Ill try to clarify some more . At airports
where gate space is at a premium airliners will often push before the
final paperwork is recieved. The final paperwork consists of the WT &
Bal, flap and trim settings, T.O. power settings for each runway, max
weights for each runway , V speeds, and WX updates if applicable. It
comes up on the ACARS and then it is printed out. ATC needs to know if
we have the "Numbers" (Final paperwork) . It wouldnt do much good to
send a plane to a runway they are too heavy for. All of this comes
from a load planner, not the dispatcher.
As far as ATIS goes, it gets printed up at the touch of a screen and
it is pretty much assumed that if a crew calls to taxi or push that
they have it. Good luck with the training.
FB

On Mar 28, 5:00*am, "Mike Gilmour" wrote:
Listening to Boston ATC at various times the Tower controller asks a flight
if they 'have got their numbers" (?) or a flight will say they're not ready
to proceed because they "don't have their numbers".
What does this mean as it doesnt translate here in the UK?
TIA

I've always heard the phrase used when ATC asks or a pilot responds
regarding whether they have the information broadcasted on a AWOS/ASOS
frequency. When the tower is open, its an ATIS, so theres a letter to
go with it. If the tower is closed, or there is no tower, its just a
continuously updated recording of numbers. Since you can't say "We
have information Bravo", you say "We have the numbers". At KBOS I
doubt the tower closes, so my guess is the controller is using this
term as a colloquialism for "ATIS information"

buttman wrote in
:

On Mar 28, 5:00*am, "Mike Gilmour" wrote:
Listening to Boston ATC at various times the Tower controller asks a
fligh
t
if they 'have got their numbers" (?) or a flight will say they're not
read
y
to proceed because they "don't have their numbers".
What does this mean as it doesnt translate here in the UK?
TIA

I've always heard the phrase used when ATC asks or a pilot responds
regarding whether they have the information broadcasted on a AWOS/ASOS
frequency. When the tower is open, its an ATIS, so theres a letter to
go with it. If the tower is closed, or there is no tower, its just a
continuously updated recording of numbers. Since you can't say "We
have information Bravo", you say "We have the numbers". At KBOS I
doubt the tower closes, so my guess is the controller is using this
term as a colloquialism for "ATIS information"


Nope.


Good guess you broadcatedededed there, theough.


Bertie

buttman wrote in
:

On Mar 28, 5:00*am, "Mike Gilmour" wrote:
Listening to Boston ATC at various times the Tower controller asks a
fligh
t
if they 'have got their numbers" (?) or a flight will say they're not
read
y
to proceed because they "don't have their numbers".
What does this mean as it doesnt translate here in the UK?
TIA

I've always heard the phrase used when ATC asks or a pilot responds
regarding whether they have the information broadcasted on a AWOS/ASOS
frequency. When the tower is open, its an ATIS, so theres a letter to
go with it. If the tower is closed, or there is no tower, its just a
continuously updated recording of numbers. Since you can't say "We
have information Bravo", you say "We have the numbers". At KBOS I
doubt the tower closes, so my guess is the controller is using this
term as a colloquialism for "ATIS information"

If the tower is closed, or there is no tower, who are you communicating
"the numbers" to? And who cares?