CALLBACK CALLBACK
From NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System�
Number 196
Clearanc
e
Roge
r
September 1995
Say The Magic Words
No, not the ones your parents taught you—“please” and “thank you.” Rather, the ones your flight instructor taught you—“Cleared for...” These magic words apply to instructions for taxi, takeoff, landing, and entry into Class B airspace. Two reporters share their experiences of not verifying receipt of the magic words:
“Roger”
According to the Pilot/Controller Glossary of the Airman’s Information Manual (AIM), “Roger” means, “I have received all of your last transmission.” It should not be used by either pilots or controllers to answer a question that requires a “yes” or “no” response. In this incident reported to ASRS, the pilot of a small aircraft questioned a controller’s use of “Roger”:
■ About 7 miles West of [the Class B airport], I called [Ap
proach Control], and stated our position and intentions. Controller responded with a squawk number and ident, which was complied with. Approximately one minute later [now inside the Class B boundary], the Controller came back with, “I guess a clearance means nothing, but you are cleared into the [Class B airspace].” I felt that once contact was made, the Controller knew our intentions and a squawk and ident were given, that a clearance was imminent. Imminent does not mean “Cleared.” Contact with ATC and receipt of a squawk code constitutes permission to enter Class C airspace, but Class B airspace requires the magic words. Even when the pilots are clear on the rules, distractions can set the stage for not receiving the magic words.
■ We were cleared by Tower to depart and climb northeastbound. [We noticed] an aircraft approximately 50 feet below us...paralleling our course, and climbing. I told the Tower we had traffic off our wing. The Tower acknowledged by saying, “Roger.” The aircraft began turning northbound towards us, at which point we took evasive action to avoid [a mid-air collision]. The aircraft continued climbing and departed northbound. I questioned the Tower again about the traffic, and again the Tower only answered, “Roger.”
Upon landing, I telephoned the Tower to try to clear up several questions about the Tower’s responsibility. The Controller’s response was that once we had the traffic in sight, it was our responsibility to maintain visual separation ...[and] that he was not in contact with the airplane in question. The way the Controller stated “Roger” [on our initial call] gave me the impression that the Tower was aware of the traffic and it was under his control. It appears that the pilot of the other aircraft was flying in Class D airspace without contacting the Tower. The report doesn’t say whether the Tower was radar-equipped. This does make a difference, since the conflict was estimated to have occurred two miles from the airport, at 2,300 feet MSL. If the Tower lacked radar, the controller’s “Roger” may have been appropriate. However, an optional message from ATC–“I’m not in contact with the traffic”–would have been helpful to the pilot. If the Tower did have radar, the controller might have announced, “You have traffic at [clock position].” However, the AIM notes that the issuance of a safety alert is contingent upon the Controller’s capability to have an awareness of the situation. Controller workload, poor radar return of transponder signals, and lack of aircraft transponders, can all reduce the Controller’s ability to have this awareness. In this incident, the Controller apparently had no knowledge of a second aircraft until the callout from the reporter. Finally, the AIM and the FARs both state that the job of safely flying the aircraft remains with the pilot. As the Controller observed, it was the pilot’s responsibility to practice the see-andavoid concept and to maintain separation.
■ Landed without receiving landing clearance from Tower. The weather and traffic were heavy... Just prior to marker...we had a lightning strike which caused a momentary loss of navigation instruments. I believe this event caused the First Officer not to switch over to the Tower, and I forgot to verify that we had received a landing clearance. I landed and rolled out normally, and realized we were on Approach Control frequency. When...distracted or startled, even experienced pilots can make fundamental mistakes.
Will the Last One Out Please Turn Out the Lights?
■ Normal single engine taxi, [and] at the gate, ran normal
engine shutdown checklist. When external power came on line, APU was shut down and normal transfer of power was observed on panel... Cockpit cleanup was accomplished and we departed to the next gate for [our next] flight... Approximately 10-15 minutes later, we were notified of the left engine running on [our previous] aircraft, and maintenance had shut down the engine. Chances are the flight crew substituted the APU shutdown for shutdown of the last engine. Apparently, their thoughts were already on their next flight instead of clear communication and proper coordination of cockpit duties.
ASRS Recently Issued Alerts On...
NOTAM procedures for tethered balloon operations Reported transmission gaps in an RCO below FL170 Failure of a backup battery system at San Juan CERAP Uncommanded yawing during a Fokker F-28 ferry flight A BA-31 emergency attributed to a chafed hydraulic line
A Monthly Safety Bulletin from The Office of the NASA
Aviation Safety Reporting
System,
P.O. Box 189,
Moffett Field, CA
94035-0189
July 1995 Report Intake
Air Carrier Pilots General Aviation Pilots Controllers Cabin/Mechanics/Military/Other 2028 817 100 24
TOTAL
2969
飞行翻译公司 www.aviation.cn 本文链接地址：美国ASRS安全公告CALLBACK cb_196.pdf
From NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System�
Number 196
Clearanc
e
Roge
r
September 1995
Say The Magic Words
No, not the ones your parents taught you—“please” and “thank you.” Rather, the ones your flight instructor taught you—“Cleared for...” These magic words apply to instructions for taxi, takeoff, landing, and entry into Class B airspace. Two reporters share their experiences of not verifying receipt of the magic words:
“Roger”
According to the Pilot/Controller Glossary of the Airman’s Information Manual (AIM), “Roger” means, “I have received all of your last transmission.” It should not be used by either pilots or controllers to answer a question that requires a “yes” or “no” response. In this incident reported to ASRS, the pilot of a small aircraft questioned a controller’s use of “Roger”:
■ About 7 miles West of [the Class B airport], I called [Ap
proach Control], and stated our position and intentions. Controller responded with a squawk number and ident, which was complied with. Approximately one minute later [now inside the Class B boundary], the Controller came back with, “I guess a clearance means nothing, but you are cleared into the [Class B airspace].” I felt that once contact was made, the Controller knew our intentions and a squawk and ident were given, that a clearance was imminent. Imminent does not mean “Cleared.” Contact with ATC and receipt of a squawk code constitutes permission to enter Class C airspace, but Class B airspace requires the magic words. Even when the pilots are clear on the rules, distractions can set the stage for not receiving the magic words.
■ We were cleared by Tower to depart and climb northeastbound. [We noticed] an aircraft approximately 50 feet below us...paralleling our course, and climbing. I told the Tower we had traffic off our wing. The Tower acknowledged by saying, “Roger.” The aircraft began turning northbound towards us, at which point we took evasive action to avoid [a mid-air collision]. The aircraft continued climbing and departed northbound. I questioned the Tower again about the traffic, and again the Tower only answered, “Roger.”
Upon landing, I telephoned the Tower to try to clear up several questions about the Tower’s responsibility. The Controller’s response was that once we had the traffic in sight, it was our responsibility to maintain visual separation ...[and] that he was not in contact with the airplane in question. The way the Controller stated “Roger” [on our initial call] gave me the impression that the Tower was aware of the traffic and it was under his control. It appears that the pilot of the other aircraft was flying in Class D airspace without contacting the Tower. The report doesn’t say whether the Tower was radar-equipped. This does make a difference, since the conflict was estimated to have occurred two miles from the airport, at 2,300 feet MSL. If the Tower lacked radar, the controller’s “Roger” may have been appropriate. However, an optional message from ATC–“I’m not in contact with the traffic”–would have been helpful to the pilot. If the Tower did have radar, the controller might have announced, “You have traffic at [clock position].” However, the AIM notes that the issuance of a safety alert is contingent upon the Controller’s capability to have an awareness of the situation. Controller workload, poor radar return of transponder signals, and lack of aircraft transponders, can all reduce the Controller’s ability to have this awareness. In this incident, the Controller apparently had no knowledge of a second aircraft until the callout from the reporter. Finally, the AIM and the FARs both state that the job of safely flying the aircraft remains with the pilot. As the Controller observed, it was the pilot’s responsibility to practice the see-andavoid concept and to maintain separation.
■ Landed without receiving landing clearance from Tower. The weather and traffic were heavy... Just prior to marker...we had a lightning strike which caused a momentary loss of navigation instruments. I believe this event caused the First Officer not to switch over to the Tower, and I forgot to verify that we had received a landing clearance. I landed and rolled out normally, and realized we were on Approach Control frequency. When...distracted or startled, even experienced pilots can make fundamental mistakes.
Will the Last One Out Please Turn Out the Lights?
■ Normal single engine taxi, [and] at the gate, ran normal
engine shutdown checklist. When external power came on line, APU was shut down and normal transfer of power was observed on panel... Cockpit cleanup was accomplished and we departed to the next gate for [our next] flight... Approximately 10-15 minutes later, we were notified of the left engine running on [our previous] aircraft, and maintenance had shut down the engine. Chances are the flight crew substituted the APU shutdown for shutdown of the last engine. Apparently, their thoughts were already on their next flight instead of clear communication and proper coordination of cockpit duties.
ASRS Recently Issued Alerts On...
NOTAM procedures for tethered balloon operations Reported transmission gaps in an RCO below FL170 Failure of a backup battery system at San Juan CERAP Uncommanded yawing during a Fokker F-28 ferry flight A BA-31 emergency attributed to a chafed hydraulic line
A Monthly Safety Bulletin from The Office of the NASA
Aviation Safety Reporting
System,
P.O. Box 189,
Moffett Field, CA
94035-0189
July 1995 Report Intake
Air Carrier Pilots General Aviation Pilots Controllers Cabin/Mechanics/Military/Other 2028 817 100 24
TOTAL
2969
飞行翻译公司 www.aviation.cn 本文链接地址：美国ASRS安全公告CALLBACK cb_196.pdf
自定义标签： 
