Using correct flight terminology: From a pilot

[frugaltravel]

Unlike some boards devoted to air travel, many (if not most) of the people posting here are not air travel experts. While it is sometimes difficult to be patient when people ask questions without giving sufficient information (or the wrong information), their intent is not to annoy. At times some of the regulars here can be pretty tough on them, imo.

 

Bingo. And they use whatever as an excuse to be tough.

[scottbee]

 

Moral of the stories: Don't use codes unless you really, really know what you're doing. And don't use codes just because you think it'll make you look more knowledgeable - you might only succeed in making an even bigger fool of yourself.

 

 

I completely agree. The only time you see people here getting in a tizzy is when someone is insisting that their (incorrect) codes are just fine for the forum. It's not; if you're going to use the codes, use the right one; or just spell it out. Don't make things up.

[FawnRiver]

Codes matter. This morning there's an article about a couple that expected to fly from Birmingham UK to Las Vegas (BHX-LAS) but had instead booked tickets from Birmingham, Alabama (BHM-LAS).

 

How many times a year do we hear of someone thinking they're getting a cheap flight to Sydney, Australia and instead end up in Sydney, Nova Scotia? :rolleyes:

[frugaltravel]

How many times a year do we hear of someone thinking they're getting a cheap flight to Sydney, Australia and instead end up in Sydney, Nova Scotia? :rolleyes:

 

I have never heard that and never seen it here on the forum. Do you have a link to some of those posts?

[Globaliser]

I wouldn't have put it as high even as every year, but just from the first page of Google search results:-

• 2002: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2172858.stm
• 2008: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/09/25/1222217366682.html
• 2009: http://metro.co.uk/2009/08/17/dutch-travellers-fly-to-the-wrong-sydney-346440/
• 2010: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/italian-tourists-end-up-in-wrong-sydney-1.975605

I'm not sure how many of these will have been code mixups, though, rather than just plain old inattention to detail (or seduction by the holy grail of a cheaper-than-expected price).

[FawnRiver]

I have never heard that and never seen it here on the forum. Do you have a link to some of those posts?

 

 

Never seen it in the forums here, but it's a story that crops up in the news from time to time. Globaliser was kind enough to post links to some examples.

Edited April 30, 2016 by FawnRiver

[loubetti]

Oh gosh, what have I started, except to state that a direct flight IS different than a non-stop flight.

 

Now, we are getting into airport / city codes- oy!

 

That being said: Let's get fancy now.

 

You are in the cockpit and over the radio you hear that ATC tells "Speedbird" 123 to descend to 12,000'.

 

What airline is the controller talking about?

 

How about "Cactus"?

 

"Shamrock"? (easy!)

 

There are many, many more.

 

Yes, many are simple, and based on the airline's name, but not all are.

 

We have quite a lingo out there! :D

[FlyerTalker]

Speedbird = British Airways

Cactus = US Airways (and previously America West)

Shamrock = Aer Lingus

 

Add in a few including from the past:

 

Critter = ValuJet

Citrus = AirTran

Waterski = TransStates

Clipper = PanAm

Springbok = South African

[Globaliser]

That being said: Let's get fancy now.

 

You are in the cockpit and over the radio you hear that ATC tells "Speedbird" 123 to descend to 12,000'.

 

What airline is the controller talking about?

You'd have to do stuff that's a lot more obscure than this to stump us!

[fbgd]

BA also use "Shuttle" and "Santa" as callsigns on domestic flights.

 

The franchise carriers in the US have a lot of non obvious callsigns.

[Globaliser]

BA also use "Shuttle" and "Santa" as callsigns on domestic flights.

Actually, "SANTA" isn't limited to domestic flights. I think that BA actually does more international flights under "SANTA" (with ICAO code "XMS") than domestics - typically the seasonal charters to appropriate points in Finland. On a quick search, I dug up the following from last season:-

• http://www.thebasource.com/british-airways-a319-g-dbcf-positions-for-rovaniemi-charter/
• http://www.thebasource.com/british-airways-a320-g-gatl-positions-for-roveniemi-charter/
• http://www.thebasource.com/british-airways-a319-g-dbce-positioning-flight-2/
• http://www.thebasource.com/british-airways-a320-g-gatl-operates-roveniemi-charter/
• http://www.thebasource.com/british-airways-a319-g-dbcd-positions-for-rovaniemi-charter/
• http://www.thebasource.com/british-airways-a319-g-dbck-operates-kittila-santa-charter/
• http://www.thebasource.com/british-airways-a320-g-gatm-operates-ravaniemi-santa-charter/

[CantanaLobo]

IMHO knowing the difference between non-stop vs direct is probably more important than the distinction between ship and boat. Calling up Carnival and saying I want to book a "room" on their Sunshine "boat" won't get me a surprise. Calling up an airline and saying I want to book a direct flight could. ( "Why is the plane/aircraft/ship stopping here?")

 

Sometimes a term of art matters. The trouble is trying to know when.

 

(You have my permission to sue me for slander over this post.)

[CruiserBruce]

IMHO knowing the difference between non-stop vs direct is probably more important than the distinction between ship and boat. Calling up Carnival and saying I want to book a "room" on their Sunshine "boat" won't get me a surprise. Calling up an airline and saying I want to book a direct flight could. ( "Why is the plane/aircraft/ship stopping here?")

 

Sometimes a term of art matters. The trouble is trying to know when.

 

(You have my permission to sue me for slander over this post.)

 

I agree. On another board I have been to convince a poster that BA doesn't fly non-stop from PHL to VCE, but there would be a stop in London. The flight the poster is booking is a codeshare on AA, and AA flies non-stop PHL-VEN, so the poster will be on AA metal. I guess the poster will find out when they try to check in at BA in PHL.

 

Understanding what a "codeshare" actually means is important. Direct vs non-stop is important. Even tho I cringe at "getting on the boat" (I have only been on cruise ships, never on a cruise "boat"), it actually doesn't matter that much.

[Globaliser]

Another thread here (now deleted) prompts this: "one-way", "round-trip", "open-jaw" and "circle trip" are all different from each other.

 

It was a bit sobering to see posts from a travel agent who not only didn't know the difference (which is understandable if you are not an air fare specialist), but didn't know that she didn't know.

[frugaltravel]

I wouldn't have put it as high even as every year, but just from the first page of Google search results:-

• 2002: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2172858.stm
  
• 2008: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/09/25/1222217366682.html
  
• 2009: http://metro.co.uk/2009/08/17/dutch-travellers-fly-to-the-wrong-sydney-346440/
  
• 2010: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/italian-tourists-end-up-in-wrong-sydney-1.975605
  

I'm not sure how many of these will have been code mixups, though, rather than just plain old inattention to detail (or seduction by the holy grail of a cheaper-than-expected price).

 

Thanks for the links. It sounded like it was posted here on the forum. But that was not the case.

 

I would put that on par with booking the wrong date. Most mistakes are due to inattention to detail. Sure it happens. But if the most recent reported mistake was 6 years ago it is not something that happens too often :)

[cocacola86]

They will never say 12,000 they will say 120. I used to work at a airport first passenger than cargo. For passenger all we had was 737s and cargo we had 727, 757 and 767.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums mobile app

[CantanaLobo]

.... I used to work at a airport first passenger than cargo...

So, is that considered an improvement to not work with the self-loading cargo? :) Edited May 7, 2016 by CantanaLobo

[CruiserBruce]

They will never say 12,000 they will say 120. I used to work at a airport first passenger than cargo. For passenger all we had was 737s and cargo we had 727, 757 and 767.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums mobile app

 

Good catch, but to be correct, they will say "flight level 120", or similar. Or "descend to level 120". Or, with more context "climbing through 120 for 240".

Edited May 7, 2016 by CruiserBruce

[cocacola86]

Yah we would ship penguins, lions, polar bears, gold, diamonds, cars like Mercedes, bugatis, transmissions from Germany

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

[cocacola86]

You can listen to ATC online or if you download the app for the iPhone.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums mobile app

[Globaliser]

They will never say 12,000 they will say 120.

Good catch, but to be correct, they will say "flight level 120", or similar. Or "descend to level 120". Or, with more context "climbing through 120 for 240".

Even if the transition altitude is 18,000 feet? (As I think it usually is across North America.)

 

I think the OP may be able to confirm whether "12,000 feet" is correct in these circumstances.

[toberman]

Even if the transition altitude is 18,000 feet? (As I think it usually is across North America.)

 

I think the OP may be able to confirm whether "12,000 feet" is correct in these circumstances.

 

As someone else said.. "Good Catch". The transition altitude in NA is indeed 18000 ft. Below that is altitudes, at or above - flight levels.

Unless the controller is lazy (happens), the correct phraseology is.. climb/descent to twelve-12 thousand - not 120 or level 120 or flight level 120.

 

If descending from the "high" (FL180 or above) an altimeter setting will also be issued which the pilot will adjust to once he leaves FL180 - above that all altimeters are set to 29.92, not ground pressure.

Edited May 7, 2016 by toberman

[loubetti]

Even if the transition altitude is 18,000 feet? (As I think it usually is across North America.)

 

I think the OP may be able to confirm whether "12,000 feet" is correct in these circumstances.

 

The transition altitude in the USA is 18,000'(altimeter setting goes to 29.92" hg), across the rest of the world it can be MUCH lower.

 

That being said, in the higher altitudes we refer to " flight levels" above 18,000'. Thus, "flight level 350" (35,000').

 

Now actual flight levels might vary above 18,000' due to pressure, temperature.

 

Otherwise, above 10,000' until I am assigned a "flight level", I will say, for example, "one-two, twelve thousand feet", "one-five , fifteen thousand feet".

 

Of course we can get lazy at times, and when ATC tells us to climb to "fifteen thousand", we might just respond "up to fifteen".

 

It's not a precise verbal science. Yes, there is the correct way, and then there is what actually happens!

 

"We are at take off". Famous last words, and totally improper phraseology. That statement, along with other issues resulted in the deaths of 583 people.

[Globaliser]

The transition altitude in the USA is 18,000'(altimeter setting goes to 29.92" hg), across the rest of the world it can be MUCH lower.

 

That being said, in the higher altitudes we refer to " flight levels" above 18,000'. Thus, "flight level 350" (35,000').

 

Now actual flight levels might vary above 18,000' due to pressure, temperature.

 

Otherwise, above 10,000' until I am assigned a "flight level", I will say, for example, "one-two, twelve thousand feet", "one-five , fifteen thousand feet".

To expand a bit on this for the uninitiated: On the climb up to the transition altitude, your altimeter setting is based on the local air pressure, and altitudes are used (eg 12,000 feet). When you climb through the transition altitude, you change to the standard altimeter setting (29.92 inHg or 1013 mbar / hPa) and use flight levels.

 

On descent, when you reach the transition level, you change from the standard setting of 29.92 or 1013 to the local air pressure, you stop using flight levels and resume using feet.

 

In addition to the differences in transition altitude / transition level between countries that loubetti mentions, there are also different systems in place in a few countries that use the metric system for controlling the heights at which aircraft fly. I think that the main users of this system are the PRC, the DPRK, Mongolia and a number of ex-CIS "-stans". Russia's system is now in effect the same as the standard in the rest of the world.

 

Seeing as we're talking terminology here, it may be worth noting that "height" has a specific and distinctly different meaning from "altitude". So don't get those two confused, either, or else you could inadvertently fly into a very hard cloud.

[loubetti]

Thanks for saving me time adding details!

 

Queensland And Northern Territories Air Service.

 

No word starting with a "U" there!

 

However I cannot spell or even pronounce "KLM"!:D