I sometimes hear my own pilot tell the ATC on approach that I am 'with Delta' or 'with Kilo' -anyone know what that means?

Could that be coming from ATIS?  Usually if you tune in for weather info you will hear the

 

"with bravo, Kilo Delta, etc"

 

 

I had a great link with some good info but it won't post.

 

This information is referring to the ATIS information and what ATIS report you currently possess.  If you have information Bravo, and Information Charlie, or Delta is already out, your information is outdated and not current. The controller will ask you to get the new information from ATIS prior to contacting them again. The letter is just a representation of HOW OLD your information is.

If you have information Echo, and Echo is the latest, you’re good to go.  If you have information Delta, and Echo is the latest, you know that a revision has been made, so check ATIS to find out what it is. It is a way of letting THE CONTROLLER know that the information you have is current and up-to-date.

Oh I see, that makes sense! I don't use ATIS as much as I should.

(...) I don't use ATIS as much as I should.

 

 

In that case, your pilot should say "with the numbers"!   :lol:

http://atccommunication.com/two-ways-to-scam-an-air-traffic-controller

Paul,

 

I love see questions like you posted, because it's indicative of someone who very well may enjoy learning more about aviation and higher end flight simulation - it's a great hobby full of some really great people!

 

Sincerely, I hope you start looking at VATSIM, as it will significantly compress your learning curve while exponentially increasing your knowledge.  After 26+ years in flight simulation, online-interactive flight simulation was the best thing I ever did in the hobby and the most enjoyment I've ever had.

In that case, your pilot should say "with the numbers"!   :lol:

http://atccommunication.com/two-ways-to-scam-an-air-traffic-controller

 

To clarify.... Ollie is joking, and he almost drew me in until I read the article he referenced.  Have to say... nice one!

 

For those who are learning, Saying "with the numbers" is never correct or appropriate, and I cringe every time I hear a pilot on VATSIM use that term - not because they're using it, but because it's inevitable that someone will hear that term and think it's cool or correct.  Nice small article for our next Online Pilot Newsletter.

 

Ollie, nice one, and great article.

 

 

For those who are learning, Saying "with the numbers" is never correct or appropriate,

 

Not entirely correct, many times at uncontrolled field its used when traffic is busy and CTAF is jammed up..... reporting your inbound position then 'with the numbers' to let other know you are aware of the wind and the active if it has been reported.

Paul,

I love see questions like you posted, because it's indicative of someone who very well may enjoy learning more about aviation and higher end flight simulation - it's a great hobby full of some really great people!

Hi Dave, I do take my flying very seriously, I use published pilot charts for the UK as well as the Pooleys Flight Guide to UK airports, I calculate flight hdgs and distance with a pilots plotter ... I follow all written procedures for GA flying in and out of airstrips as prescribed by the Pooleys Guide 'circuits at 800' for example, or avoid overflying the village close the threshold, or even full lights when crossing a runway. Following the rules might make my 16 year old son laugh, but its part of the immersion and learning for me.

 

VATSIM - maybe one day, but I am a GA flyer at heart. I might move on to mini-airliners (bizjets one day, though).

Not entirely correct, many times at uncontrolled field its used when traffic is busy and CTAF is jammed up..... reporting your inbound position then 'with the numbers' to let other know you are aware of the wind and the active if it has been reported.

 

Sorry Jay, but I can't agree on that. I've heard it many times real-world, but it's still slang and incorrect. This is indicative of the problem we have with many different communications procedures... a pilot or flight sim pilot hears one pilot say something incorrect and repeats it either because they think it sounds cool or it's correct. I've been guilty of this myself at times.

 

Among other things, radio communications are supposed state accurate, timely and specific and pertinent information in order to prevent incidents and accidents. Stating "with the numbers" just doesn't state anything specific and leaves room for assumptions - which is what radio procedures are designed to prevent. Pilots should report reception of the most current ATIS by using the current ATIS alpha designation.

 

That said, I don't believe that any ATIS report from a pilot is required at a non-controlled field, as the only pertinent information is what runway the pilot is setting their approach up for.  In other words, other pilots don't really care if you have the most current conditions.  Controlled fields of course are different, because you'd confirm the ATIS with the Controller.

 

REFERENCE:  https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/aim0401.html

Hi Dave, I do take my flying very seriously, I use published pilot charts for the UK as well as the Pooleys Flight Guide to UK airports, I calculate flight hdgs and distance with a pilots plotter ... I follow all written procedures for GA flying in and out of airstrips as prescribed by the Pooleys Guide 'circuits at 800' for example, or avoid overflying the village close the threshold, or even full lights when crossing a runway. Following the rules might make my 16 year old son laugh, but its part of the immersion and learning for me.

 

VATSIM - maybe one day, but I am a GA flyer at heart. I might move on to mini-airliners (bizjets one day, though).

 

Nice!  By the way, while VATSIM has mostly commercial traffic, there are a lot a GA flights on the network.  Anyway, nice question, and nice to "meet" you.

 

 

Sorry Jay, but I can't agree on that. I've heard it many times real-world, but it's still slang and incorrect

 

We may not agree but after flying for over 40 years I can tell you it's common practice at UN-controlled fields, especially when it's busy. This is no ATIS and if you hear others on unicom/CTAF reporting the active runway, there is no need to repeat it, the goal is to minimize radio traffic while still letting others know where you are and what your intentions are.... example.....

 

"Lantana Traffic, Cessna N3KV 5 west- 1000ft - entering downwind for Rwy 9 with the numbers."

 

That lets others know where to look for you and that you are aware of the active runway and any other information like wind speed/direction and altimeter setting, if they have been reported.

 

Of course if you dont have the info then you would request it and not use that phrase.

Interesting example, Jay.  Live in Florida?

 

Randall

Interesting example, Jay.  Live in Florida?

 

Randall

West Palm

"Have numbers" is used--in the U.S.--at tower-controlled airports, and is shorthand for the pilot telling the controller he has the runway, wind, and altimeter setting, thus keeping the controller from having to repeat these things.  It is correct, approved phraseology.

 

You don't have to take my word for it:

 

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/PCG/H.HTM

West Palm

I grew up in Lantana, about a mile from the airport.  Living in Texas now.

Randall

Randall, I'm in West Palm, have a few friends with planes at KLNA that I get to use on occasion :-)

Ah yes, friends with planes. Have had a few myself over the years,

 

Randall