Pictures are a crutch for a weak mind
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 60
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I think some ppl's forget that aviation isn't for recreation.
And then it will be all about my timetable!
Plain (plane?) English weather, where will it stop?
Ah g'day tower, I am sitting in my little high wing single engine powered flying machine and I am flying downwind and I would like to land on the runway. Would that be okay with you? Just reply in Plain English with the wind direction and wind speed and talk me through the approach and landing; OVER to you.
Ok, a rediculous post but seriously where will it stop? As has been stated, it isn't hard to learn and it keeps everyone on the same page talking the same language.
Ah g'day tower, I am sitting in my little high wing single engine powered flying machine and I am flying downwind and I would like to land on the runway. Would that be okay with you? Just reply in Plain English with the wind direction and wind speed and talk me through the approach and landing; OVER to you.
Ok, a rediculous post but seriously where will it stop? As has been stated, it isn't hard to learn and it keeps everyone on the same page talking the same language.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: au
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, but that is a strawman - radio happens in realtime, and someone talking like that will cause problems with both the controller and other people. If Joe the Weekend Warrior uses the plain english option, that doesn't impact Mike the ATPL who loves the current format.
For the record I am not advocating long rambling reports like
But something like a table, indicating location, time, wind direction/speed, etc etc. Personally I could live with weather as-is as long as NOTAMs were optionally in english.
Can anyone honestly say that using 'TWR' for tower, 'OBST' for obstruction etc makes them easier to read?
For the record I am not advocating long rambling reports like
Terminal Area Forecast for Cairns International Airport Issued on the 25th at 1008 Coordinated Universal Time Valid from the 25th at 1200 Coordinated Universal Time until the 26th at 1200 Coordinated Universal Time The Wind direction is from 150 degrees (thats from the South East) at 8 knots (around 14 kilometres per hour)...
OBST LGT ON TWR (BALD HILLS MAST) PARTIALLY LIT
SHOWING 5 RED LGT ONLY PSN S27 19 E153 01
BRG 285 MAG 7.3NM FM BRISBANE VOR
SFC TO 685FT AGL
FROM 02 220618 TO 05 230300 EST
SHOWING 5 RED LGT ONLY PSN S27 19 E153 01
BRG 285 MAG 7.3NM FM BRISBANE VOR
SFC TO 685FT AGL
FROM 02 220618 TO 05 230300 EST
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Tropical Australia
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Visitors who don't speak English as a first language might find it easier to deal with standard abbreviations and accepted phrases.
We share the airspace. Do you want to deal with translations, in-flight, during less than ideal conditions, just because someone in the circuit area can't be bothered to learn standard abbreviations and standard phrases?
Do you think they would have a better command of 'plain' English instead? There are enough people out there now, who have trouble with the limited, standard phrases as it is, without adding to the problem by introducing plain language that can be open to all sorts of interpretations.
If you can't learn the relatively small number of terms, abbreviations and phrases, that are used in ARFORS, TAFs and general radio telecommunications, you might not be suited to aviation? To introduce plain language instead, would make it so much harder. Who has time to make, and verify, all of the interpretations that would be possible?
The current terms, abbreviations and phrases that are currently in use, are not that hard to deal with. Just look at how hard it has been for some people, to deal with interpretations of the plain language regulations that have been discussed in this thread so far. Do you really want to try doing that in the air?
We share the airspace. Do you want to deal with translations, in-flight, during less than ideal conditions, just because someone in the circuit area can't be bothered to learn standard abbreviations and standard phrases?
Do you think they would have a better command of 'plain' English instead? There are enough people out there now, who have trouble with the limited, standard phrases as it is, without adding to the problem by introducing plain language that can be open to all sorts of interpretations.
If you can't learn the relatively small number of terms, abbreviations and phrases, that are used in ARFORS, TAFs and general radio telecommunications, you might not be suited to aviation? To introduce plain language instead, would make it so much harder. Who has time to make, and verify, all of the interpretations that would be possible?
The current terms, abbreviations and phrases that are currently in use, are not that hard to deal with. Just look at how hard it has been for some people, to deal with interpretations of the plain language regulations that have been discussed in this thread so far. Do you really want to try doing that in the air?
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gods Country
Age: 53
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like the majority have said, it's not hard to learn how to read TAF's etc.
It doesnt need changing, those who need to use it need to learn how to read it.
Its an international system, imagine trying to read the TAF for VTSP (Phuket) if was to be written in plain language ? (I dont fly there but can read the TAF just before I depart as pax so I have an idea what the weather will be like on arrival, other than hot
)
It doesnt need changing, those who need to use it need to learn how to read it.
Its an international system, imagine trying to read the TAF for VTSP (Phuket) if was to be written in plain language ? (I dont fly there but can read the TAF just before I depart as pax so I have an idea what the weather will be like on arrival, other than hot
)
