MCE and PF3: "as cleared"

[RALF9636 1,951]

I have very few time for serious simming these days due to other obligations. Just found the time today for an airliner flight with the newest versions of MCE and PF3 (on P3DV3.4). I used my FO for ATC throughout the flight and I  am happy to say it was a flawless flight from gate to gate.

 

One thing that bothered me throughout the flight though is this (I think I mentioned it earlier):

Every time my FO checked in with a new ATC facility while in cruise he said

"<facility name> <callsign> as cleared".

 

I am not sure if this is correct phraseology but I guess I have never heard it outside of MCE, be it in PF3 or LiveATC. The usual phraseology I heard is:

"<facility name> <callsign>

with you at flight level ...

flight level ...

level at ...

etc.

 

It would be nice if MCE could adapt to that and offer some variety in this regard. In climb or descent the MCE-FO already correctly says something like "passing ... for ...".

 

Regards

Ralf

 

 

[signmanbob 592]

All that you are supposed to say is: "<facility name> <callsign> altitude".

Certainly not "as cleared" and also not "with you at".

If you don't know the facility name, it would be ok to just say "departure (or center) <callsign>altitude". They're not too worried about you knowing their name, but of course MCE wouldn't have that problem.

 

[FS++ 708]

OK, will add some variations for the cruise phase.

In fact there are far more variations than you think.

In Europe, some would even say

Center, good morning Callsign on route to Papa Tango Victor

Center, good morning Callsign mainting 260

Center, good morning Callsign on heading 250 (when previous controller would have instructed them to maintain that heading)

It comes down to one thing.

If you're under Secondary radar control where controller can work out heading, speed, altitude himself, never mind position, you can keep it as short as possible. With something like "Control callsign with you".

In not so well covered airspace, the more info you give the controller, the better. Just try not to overload him.

In some areas with no radar,  you would actually give your position and even give the ETA for the next waypoint.

You'd have to fly over all continents in the real world to understand why it's not always "with you". Africa comes to mind.

 

 

[RALF9636 1,951]

4 hours ago, FS++ said:

OK, will add some variations for the cruise phase.

In fact there are far more variations than you think.

In Europe, some would even say

Center, good morning Callsign on route to Papa Tango Victor

Center, good morning Callsign mainting 260

Center, good morning Callsign on heading 250 (when previous controller would have instructed them to maintain that heading)

It comes down to one thing.

If you're under Secondary radar control where controller can work out heading, speed, altitude himself, never mind position, you can keep it as short as possible. With something like "Control callsign with you".

In not so well covered airspace, the more info you give the controller, the better. Just try not to overload him.

In some areas with no radar,  you would actually give your position and even give the ETA for the next waypoint.

You'd have to fly over all continents in the real world to understand why it's not always "with you". Africa comes to mind.

 

 

Thanks, looking forward!

[RALF9636 1,951]

Hi,

did you already make any progress on the above?

 

Here is one more, the handling of an emergency:

First, the FO just transmits something like: ".. we are on emergency...". Shouldn't he add "Mayday, Mayday, Mayday"?

But more important:

After declaring emergency PF3 responds: "Can you make it back to the departure airport?" This has to be answered with Yes or No.

When talking to PF3 via MCE myself saying "affirmative" or "negative" works fine.

But the FO just reads back this question to ATC, which doesn't make sense, and does not continue with an answer.

Instead the FO should ask me "yes or no" and then transmit my response to ATC accordingly.

 

Regards!

[FS++ 708]

1 hour ago, RALF9636 said:

 Shouldn't he add "Mayday, Mayday, Mayday"?

Regards!

Yes, should be either "Mayday, Mayday, Mayday" or "Pan Pan Pan" for the old timers.

It wasn't implemented due to lack of recordings in human voice packs.

Will be added for those using TTS voices.

[RALF9636 1,951]

2 hours ago, FS++ said:

Yes, should be either "Mayday, Mayday, Mayday" or "Pan Pan Pan" for the old timers.

It wasn't implemented due to lack of recordings in human voice packs.

Will be added for those using TTS voices.

The use of Mayday or Pan-Pan depends on the degree of urgency. Since this is not differentiated in PF3 a randomization of the two terms by MCE would be fine for me.