cfeyeeye opined

On 9 Mar 2005 21:25:1 -0500, "Ash Wyllie" wrote:

What is needed is something like a readback that means "do I have the new
clearance correct" followed by "give me a chance to see if I can accept it".
It seems that currently that a readback means you have accepted the new
clearance. Which is a problem.


Where is it written that "a readbck means you have accepted the new
clearance"?

From Newps
--
Jose wrote:

Which is you do not blindly accept a clearance without first studying
the reroute.



No argument there.

I've never had an "impossible" reroute, but the scenario goes,
ATC: "Amended clearance, advise ready to copy."
Me: "Ready"
ATC: "blahblahVictorThisblahIntersectionThat..."
Me: "blahblahSayAgainRest"
Them: "blahblah"
Me: "blabla"
Them: "No, Blah, then Blah"
Me: "okay, got it."

Then, I have to find it on the charts and quickly figure out whether
it makes any sense at all, while still maintaining the oily side down
and more or less on course to the next waypoint. This takes a couple
of minutes.


After which you lose comms. Does ATC think you've already accepted the
clearance?

ATC gives you a clearance and you read it back. You have accepted it.
--

From Steve McNicoll
--
"Jose" wrote in message
...

After which you lose comms. Does ATC think you've already accepted the
clearance?


He accepted it when he said "okay, got it."
--


Quite the contrary. The excerpt below is from the AIM.

Notice that the pilot's responsibility to "accept or refuse" the
clearance issued comes AFTER the readback instructions.

Also note that the readmack is described only as " a means of mutual
verification".

This idea of a "readback as acceptance" is just one more item of
aviabaloney.



b. ATC Clearance/Instruction Readback. Pilots of airborne aircraft
should read back those parts of ATC clearances and instructions
containing altitude assignments or vectors as a means of mutual
verification. The readback of the "numbers" serves as a double check
between pilots and controllers and reduces the kinds of communications
errors that occur when a number is either "misheard" or is incorrect.

1. Include the aircraft identification in all readbacks and
acknowledgments. This aids controllers in determining that the correct
aircraft received the clearance or instruction. The requirement to
include aircraft identification in all readbacks and acknowledgements
becomes more important as frequency congestion increases and when
aircraft with similar call signs are on the same frequency.

EXAMPLE-
"Climbing to Flight Level three three zero, United Twelve" or
"November Five Charlie Tango, roger, cleared to land."

2. Read back altitudes, altitude restrictions, and vectors in
the same sequence as they are given in the clearance or instruction.

3. Altitudes contained in charted procedures, such as DPs,
instrument approaches, etc., should not be read back unless they are
specifically stated by the controller.

c. It is the responsibility of the pilot to accept or refuse the
clearance issued.

But your cite says nothing about a change in routing.

I agree that equating a readback with an acceptance of a new clearance is
idiocy. First pilot and controller have to agree with what the new clearance
*is* , then they must agree that the pilot can accept the clearance. Only then
can it be said that the pilot has accepted the clearance. Any other course
invites disaster.



-ash
Cthulhu in 2005!
Why wait for nature?