While taking a bit of a break at the Orlando Executive FBO the other day, the very place where I took my commercial single and multi-engine check ride all those years ago, a fellow wandered up to me with an expectant look in his eye. Donut in hand, coffee at the ready, he pondered aloud if it was alright to pester me with a question.
“Of course,” I replied. I’ve got as many questions as anyone else. Why not share?
“When I learned to fly we announced ourselves on the radio using our N number,” he said.
“Yep,” I agreed.
“When did it become okay to announce ourselves as ‘White Cessna’ on the radio instead of using the N number?”
“Ahh,” I replied. “It’s become common, but it’s not right. You should still use your N number.”
“The whole thing?” he queried.
“Use the whole N number until ATC abbreviates it. The you can use the abbreviated version while talking to that controller.”
He tipped his donut, took a sip of coffee, and wandered back through the FBO, his look of trepidation replaced by one of satisfaction.
Life is good.
His question was a good one. Pilots have increasingly gotten in the habit of announcing themselves in the vicinity of non-towered airports as a color and a manufacturer, not by the N number assigned to their aircraft.
I suspect this shift took place because a CFI somewhere began using new, different terminology with students. Those students took that to mean the proper way to identify yourself in flight was by color and manufacturer. So, they did. Others heard the calls and thought, “Hey, that makes a lot of sense. I’ll do that too.” So, they did. And now we have the situation my donut wielding friend asked about.
By the way, the insight I shared is not of my own creation. It came from the FAA. The folks who regulate aviation in the U.S. Believe it or not, they write these rules and recommendations down and publish them. No kidding.
Yes, folks are doing the wrong thing for the right reasons. But that doesn’t make the wrong thing the right thing. It’s still wrong. Fortunately, it’s an easily correctable error.
Folks are doing the wrong thing for the right reasons. But that doesn’t make the wrong thing the right thing.”
And yet, we have a dilemma on our hands. For too many of us the question arises if lots of people are doing the wrong thing, is it still wrong? Maybe what’s right has become this new method of speaking or doing. Majority rules, doesn’t it?
Well…no. Because the FAA puts out the Aeronautical Information Manual, and updates it periodically to keep it relevant and fresh. They do that to impart knowledge and awareness to the pilot community.
When the FAA, via the AIM, tells us that pilots should self-announce at non-towered airports, saying, “Strawn traffic, Apache Two Two Five Zulu…” they mean it. It’s up to us to comply with the recommendation.
And there’s the rub. Too many of us assume that a recommendation from the FAA is a non-regulatory suggestion that we can take or leave as we wish. That’s technically true, but in practical terms it’s a bit weak.
Think of the non-regulatory AIM as your mom, and the regulatory FAA as your dad. When you were 12 and your mom told you she wanted you to take out the garbage, that was a recommendation. Not regulatory perhaps, but clear and unequivocal just the same. If you chose to ignore your mom, as I often did, a very different experience awaited you when regulatory dad got home.
The recommendations and regulations come from the same team. They’re issued to the same group. We would all be wise to work collaboratively, rather than combatively. Compliance with the written word is a great way to start.
Interestingly enough, issues like, “How should I announce myself,” or “How should I enter the traffic pattern,” or “What does, ‘VFR not recommended,’ really mean,” are all written down in the AIM for us to brush up on any time we need it. The book is available as a printed product, and as a free online download from the FAA.
It’s there if you’ll take the time to look. And I look often. Sometimes it tells me I’m doing the right thing. Sometimes it tells me I need to correct myself. Either way, I come out ahead every time I reference the AIM. It’s a great resource.
Admittedly, the folks calling out “White Cessna on downwind” mean well. They’re trying to be helpful and specific. It’s somewhat ironic that the result of their intent is the opposite of what they hoped for. Most Cessnas are white. It’s like asking for a new football because the one you’re using is wet. “I left a brown one in the locker room. Can you get it for me?”
Yeah, regardless of the intent, that’s a pretty non-specific description.
Things can escalate from the generic color and make, too. Not so long ago I heard a pilot call in at my local airport, “White Cessna, over the lake.”
You know where I stand (and where the FAA stands) on the whole White Cessna thing. But in a county with more than 500 lakes, in a city with at least 50, a city that actually calls itself “The Chain of Lakes City,” announcing, “White Cessna over the lake,” is essentially pointless. Yet, there we have it. Pilots do exactly that, because it seems logical and reasonable to them.
Maybe it’s time we started to think of being book smart as a higher priority than we’ve done previously. Stick and rudder skills are essential, there’s no doubt about that. But knowing how to work safely in a system populated by a slew of other stick and rudder proficient pilots is every bit as critical.
This is a fascinating thread of comments. I think I made the first comment and never thought it would really go on this long! It’s great to see so many people reading the articles and being involved in the conversation.
There have been great ‘arguments’ for various methods, formats and strategies for the type of communication the article discusses. Many are well thought out and supported with reason. A few – a bit more emotional. But much of it seems moot to me. It doesn’t really matter how reasoned your argument is – if you are advocating a procedure that is in conflict with the FAR and the AIM – you are wrong! It’s really that simple.
To those of you advocating a non-standard process – would you be so agreeable if we were talking about cruising altitudes? Or right of way rules? Standards have long been shown to be the best way to create a safe environment. If any of us truly believe a procedure is wrong or dangerous – we should work to CHANGE that process – not simply ‘do whatever we think is best’.
It’s the reason things like standard patterns, and standard pattern altitudes, and standard reporting exist – to make us all safer. The accident data supports this. The FAA supports this. The NTSB supports this.
Rules, regulations, standards all matter. We will all be safer if we support them rather than disregard them.
-g
Excellent!
At last night’s CFI Forum sponsored by the Reno FSO the consensus was that we should follow AC 90-66B, dated May 2018, which reads in part:
“10.3.1 Self-announce transmissions may include aircraft type to aid in identification and detection, but should not use paint schemes or color descriptions to replace the use of the aircraft call sign.”
Correction…dated March 2018.
Agreed. The most interesting thing I find is that the various regs/advisories/ACs/etc support using additional aircraft description in addition to tail number… **just not in replacement of tail number.**
Doesn’t seem like a very difficult thing to subscribe to.
And, as mentioned by a couple people, it does make it more efficient for radio-communications to a specific aircraft (especially, as mentioned, with the advent of ADS-B). So it is prudent to include tail number (even if it were not required).
At any rate, a very helpful discussion for me… and mentioned some FAA advisories for which I was not specifically familiar.
I fly out of KDLS which is uncontrolled,with the also uncontrolled Hood River airport 18 miles away with communication at either heard at both, so I add ” Dalles traffic N1450L entering the pattern at 1000 AGL on right downwind. Communications needs to fit the situation while complying with proper procedure.
From some of the comments I am sure glad that some of the commenters do not often come my way.
Then there are the guys/gals who can’t put the mic near their lips, so you get all the background noise and barely make out what they are saying. Or the ones that think it is cool or beneficial to talk fast. So everyone else either isn’t sure about half of what they said or has to ask for a repeat, where they do the same thing again anyway.
What about the guy that says he is “ten miles north making a straight-in to runway 1-2”? And then when you ask him about it, is adamant about it? How does that work?
Or the ones that give you every detail of their plan in every transmission, starting about twenty miles out? Plenty of time to be more specific later (full stop vs touch and go, etc.) in subsequent transmission or if we determine we will be in close proximity. Brevity is important, and saying too much can and is as bad as saying not enough.
Hmmm. So at a towered airport when the tower tells me i’m number two to land behind a Cessna 150, he should also give me his tail number so I’m sure I’m following the right one! Never happens.
Normally in my 50 plus years of flying I have always used my tail number. Only recently have I re-evaluated that habit in the interest of useful but abbreviated communication in busy non controlled traffic situations. But of course, N numbers are important for assigning landing fees and rule violation accusations, etc.
Many years ago while working in a airline training position I had mentioned to a FAA inspector the term “common sense” while discussing a possible checklist modification. His reply stunned me when when he said that phrase does not exist in FAA policy.
Finally, ever listened to communication at AirVenture or SunNFun, no N numbers used there.
Point is, it’s not within the regs to skip your N number. Should the rules change? Maybe, but they haven’t yet. Until they do….
KXYZ traffic, Nxxxxx, green, white Cessna with red & silver trim, five miles northwest of Silver Lake with critical fuel will be entering a ten mile straight-in approach for runway ZERO NINER; anyone in the pattern and radio check please. And what does the wind look like down there? Is there ground transportation available?
OVER
If another pilot can see my 2-inch numbers to identify my aircraft, it’s already a problem. I’ll continue to do the safest thing by announcing my type & color, so other pilots can identify me from a safe distance at our uncontrolled airport.
Windy,
Do you suppose ATC expects your N number so they can read it will you cruise overhead? Or might they be using your identifier as an identifier. There are plenty of white, off-white, beige, and tan aircraft out there. But there’s only one N123AB.
Other pilots will use the information in the same way, which is why the FAA recommends and the. FCC requires the use of your N number when making position reports.
Wow, Jamie, with all these comments one would think that you had made a teasing comment about Millennials or something (Ben Visser feels your pain!).
So, on a more serious note, there seems to be a lot of righteous indignation being expressed within the comments about providing position announcements during Non-Towered Airport Flight Operations via identification by any other means than aircraft call sign. FAA Advisory Circular AC 90-66B Chg.1 (Date: 2/25/2019) has some helpful guidance on this issue. Statements from Paragraph 10.3.1 include the following:
“Self-announce transmissions may include aircraft type to aid in identification and detection. Paint schemes and color or style descriptions may be added to the use of the aircraft call sign and type, but should not replace type or call sign.”
…..and…..
“In some cases, where the type of aircraft may not be familiar to pilots, the color and description may be added to the type and call sign.”
So, while we should be including our call sign (at least an abbreviated form of it) in our position reports, FAA guidance does recommend usage of aircraft types, paint schemes, color or style, in addition to call sign, to aid in identification when helpful. Therefore, it may be useful to include this AC in our materials to review for refresher training as pilots.
Thanks for the thought provoking article, Jamie!
Perfectly stated!
So, FWIW, I’m continuing to use my type, color, call sign, and position… Black Pogo n1XF short final runway 1. Seems pretty easy.
That Piper looks more like an Arrow than a Warrior ?
Absolutely correct. I was going to add the same comment.
Mom’s request is only a recommendation and wait until Dad gets home? How sexist!
You apparently never met my folks, J Cohen. Sexist? Maybe. Entirely accurate? You bet.
You made a statement about moms and dads in general then used your own parents to back up your claim. Just keep it in check next time.
Let me first state that I agree 100% with the article and that the proper phraseology is to identify yourself with the N number. However….
I live in a VERY busy private airport with a unique mix of very slow aircraft (ultralights), helicopters and fast turboprops and jets. Sometimes it feels as if you are actually landing at SnF or Oshkosh 🙂 In this place, we all identify ourselves by aircraft make (or type) and color. I sometimes struggle with this concept but it makes sense. The N number in this case is meaningless to our operation. It is much more important to know the relative speed between different aircraft in the pattern, who is who when you have five planes on downwind, and keep the transmission short. I myself fly an experimental that is pretty much an Ultralight so I just call myself “White Ultralight” so everyone knows I am VERY slow. Sometimes I just say “watch out for me because I am slow and hard to see”.
Possibly all not per AIM recommendations but in our case it helps maintain separation in our field. But, could we still use make, color and N number, Yes. But each call does become lengthy and I guess over the years the practice at this particular field has become what it is today.
Another thing, my other experimental is a LongEZ. Regs (I think) says I should call myself Experimental but I always say Experimental LongEZ XXXX” on my first transmission to controllers and then just “LongEZ XXX”. wong? Maybe, but controllers seem to prefer that I say LongEZ otherwise they ask (my plane is again hard to see and in this case fast).
FCC regulations are another story. That could possibly not using an identifier in a radio transmission ilegal.
Please, don’t burn me in the pire. I found this article very informative and as a CFI I will make sure my students understand what the correct phraseology is.
Cheers!
Just consider what ATC uses at Oshkosh, colour and type….N numbers are meaningless when high volume traffic is around.
That traffic control system at OSH is very different than at an uncontrolled, non-tower airport, especially during times of lower visibility or night.
Remember, if you have to communicate with another aircraft, there may be more than one red and white Cessna. The extra gab to sort out the comms will interfere with the comm necessary to provide separation and coordination. Add to this the extraneous comm from the guy flying by overhead announcing he is transiting the area 5000’ above the airport or the guy taxiing from his hangar to the gas pit and you can see the issues. Comms should be concise, accurate and to the point, particularly during busy times. Do you really want to break in to the busy traffic pattern comms to announce flying overhead or taxiing from the gas pit to the restaurant?
Using aircraft type and color is a bad trend.
Exactly what I was going to add. OSH years ago went to just color & type to make transmissions as brief as possible & as specific as possible. Just calling in as Cessna N….. is useless. High wing or low wing Cessna. One or two engines.
I fly from an extremely busy Private/Public Use Airport & we have gone almost entirely Color & Type to make identifications much easier & faster.
OSH is a visually controlled situation with special procedures due to the traffic volume. An uncontrolled airport is a different animal.
You might want to refer to AC 90-66B and the following paragraph before you pursue this misplaced trend of not using callsigns.
Note it specifically says, “…should not use paint schemes or color descriptions to replace the use of the aircraft call sign.“
10.3.1 Self-announce transmissions may include aircraft type to aid in identification and detection, but should not use paint schemes or color descriptions to replace the use of the aircraft call sign. For example, “MIDWEST TRAFFIC, TWIN COMMANDER FIVE ONE ROMEO FOXTROT TEN MILES NORTHEAST” or “MIDWEST TRAFFIC, FIVE ONE ROMEO FOXTROT TWIN COMMANDER TEN MILES NORTHEAST,” not “MIDWEST TRAFFIC, BLUE AND WHITE TWIN COMMANDER TEN MILES NORTHEAST.” When referring to a specific runway, pilots should use the runway number and not use the phrase “Active Runway,” because there is no official active runway at a non-towered airport. To help identify one airport from another when sharing the same frequency, the airport name should be spoken at the beginning and end of each self-announce transmission.
Just to be 100% accurate per that recommendation, do also add the airport at the end of the transmission. It is very helpful if the first part or last part of the transmission was stepped on or missed.:
MIDWEST TRAFFIC, TWIN COMMANDER FIVE ONE ROMEO FOXTROT, TEN MILES NORTHEAST, **MIDWEST TRAFFIC**
The AC mentions that. A good thing.
What about at night? What about at a towered airport? When there are five predominately white Cessna’s in the traffic pattern? What about low vis/rainey, but still VFR? This is a bad procedure incorrectly being made fashionable by pilgrim pilots. Oshkosh and Burning Man are different events. Sorry, there’s no other logical way to describe it.
Let’s see. I think I’m number three or four in the pattern following what looks like a Cessna, but I don’t know what color it is. If I give him a call for any reason and say color (guess) and Cessna will he respond or will all the Cessna’s in the pattern say, “which Cessna?” With my ADS-B, I can call him directly by Reg number. Otherwise, he’s just Cessna or high-wing mid downwind. Once he establishes his callsign I know my traffic is base to final when he (hopefully) calls, or wherever. Simple, effective and correctly done under all weather or day/night conditions.
Mine is white and blue with a tasteful use of red and silver trim, BTW. Take your pick…and your chances.When ADS-B begins indicating aircraft color, then maybe we can include color in the call. Until then, I’m sticking with my callsign. Let’s all stay on the same page.
“One size does not fit all” – Use your head and choose the best option. That ADSB you’ve got is one of the most flawed systems ever devised by the FAA – Better to be looking out the window instead of that little screen when out of Class B airspace – If behind a hill, in a canyon, out of range, or let’s see, I don’t even have a transponder – good luck with that ADSB.
100% Agreed. ADS-B is a helpful tool but it does not replace constant viewing outside when in the traffic pattern. If anyone here thinks ADS-B is the catch all solution please re-think your position. It is not infallible, it is not on all aircraft, it does not replace a traffic scan in the pattern, and it will likely get you in the worst kind of trouble if you’re looking at that display instead of outside.
You are wrong, of course. ADS-B is far better than TCAS or any other way of avoiding others….you would be able to know that if you had it in your plane and were using it regularly.
ADS-B is not better than TCAS. Are you aware of the TCAS technology? Directional, differential antennae, onboard interrogators, completely independent of an ADS-B-out requirement on other aircraft, near zero latency, and a whole slew of other items that makes TCAS alerts approved for traffic collision avoidance for commercial operations.
I am curious, gbigs, where your info is derived. What your background is. Because from what I’m reading you’re spreading some serious inaccuracies. Perhaps it is you that should remain on the ground and study these technologies a bit closer.
Perhaps at a training airport with non-stop 172s a call sign is proper and by the book but at rural airports and in the bush “Yellow Cub” is much preferred. One size never fits all and the FCC is not the pilot in command.
Your right, of course, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is not the Pilot in Command (PIC). However, I would not underestimate the ability of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to rain on your PIC parade.
Joking aside, though, while you may prefer “Yellow Cub”, that does nothing to help someone trying to address one Yellow Cub over another on the radio. And the “norms” of your particular “rural airport” mean very little to the transient pilot that is unfamiliar with your airport and preferences. Instead, that transient pilot (who I am quite sure wants to NOT die just as much as you) only has published charts and AIM standards with which to know what is appropriate for operating at your rural airport.
If local “preference” has influenced operations at such an airport to the point that referring to the AIM and published charts alone is not sufficient to allow any pilot to operate in the area of any airport in the US safely, then that is dangerous and is a problem for everyone, even the locals.
Well… this is very interesting to me.
I can’t help but add that relying on ADS-B-in is a poor safety choice. Your head should be scanning outside for all aircraft including those that have no electrical system, no ads-b-out and/or non-functioning ads-b-out. In addition, I’d like to throw into the ring the idea that tower controllers don’t call out tail numbers… rather it’s company-traffic, aircraft type, or other identifying features. They don’t seem to expect me to read the tail number of that white Cessna turning final in front of me.
ADS-B is by far the most reliable way to see and avoid others. If you are an old-timer resisting this technology then you will endanger yourself and others in the sky. Please get the gear and learn to use it…it’s a life-saver.
Well… as an aerospace engineer who has worked on everything from tcas to prm to stars to ads-b, perhaps I am indeed an old timer.
As an aircraft owner I have been an early adopter for ads in and out and have had the latest and greatest traffic advisory systems I can get my hands on over my many years of aircraft ownership. It is certainly a useful tool.
And I promise you, in the pattern, depending on ads-b for position updates of other aircraft is simply unsafe for the reasons I’ve stated. Please do keep your eyes outside the cockpit as much as possible while in the pattern. If you see someone on ads-b and don’t see them visually, you simply do not have them in sight.
As a side note. I can’t help but have noticed your other responses, gbigs, and find them a bit contentious in this very helpful and thought provoking forum.
I fly an airplane with no electrical system – I’m not resisting new technology – I just have nowhere to plug it in 🙂
Yes, there are a lot of white Cessnas. But knowing to look for a white Cessna is better than looking for N4321 which I hope to never be able to distinguish in the air. Also, if I instead see a yellow Cub while looking for the white Cessna I’m not going to assume he is N4321. That’s why I tend to use “Salem traffic, Blue and white RV 12345…”
Position reports are another issue. Calling “over the lake” in the land of lakes is poor reporting. Also calling “left downwind” when you’re a mile out is mid leading.
Maybe I’m strange, but I don’t limit myself to a particular color when looking for traffic in a particular spot in the sky. I look for any aircraft near me, while paying particular attention to specific spots according radio calls. I then use the tail number that has been kindly (and appropriately, hopefully) provided to address the ones that I believe I may be in conflict with, so that I and the other pilot can avoid close encounters that might give us the opportunity to discuss the various merits of dark blue versus black and silver versus gray paint colors.
My point is that, the tail number is important and really must be included for safe and effective communication. If someone wants to add a bit of extra detail that might be helpful (as you describe), that not necessarily bad. However, I would add on that point is that many people, with the best of intentions, seem to have a real problem being brief and to the point in their radio calls. So, it is very easy on a busy frequency to add so much “helpful” detail that someone else with what could be far more significant information can’t get a word in edge-wise. And, that (at least in my mind) is why position, intention, and tail number are all I really need or want from any one aircraft unless there is some potential conflict that must be resolved.
I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one. I see nothing “important” or “safe” about using a tail number over a more descriptive method of self identifying.
Unfortunately, being non-standard or going rogue doesn’t contribute anything to the issue except for more issues. Standardization within flight departments has been a key factor in the enhancement of safety in aviation for a long time. That philosophy needs to be pursued in other areas as well, which is the purpose of the AIM, FAR’s, AC’s, etc.
Manny,
Be careful about who you call a “rogue.” Don’s example of his own self-announce phraseology given above – “Salem traffic, Blue and white RV 12345…” – is actually in line with guidance per AC 90-66B. It may not be your method, but Don’s given example is in alignment with FAA guidance per the advisory directive.
Even though he said: “I see nothing “important” or “safe” about using a tail number over a more descriptive method of self identifying.”?
I’ve been careful my entire professional aviation career, but thanks for the reminder.
Oops! Please excuse my error at the end of my previous comment above: it is an Advisory CIRCULAR – not Directive.
In my neck of the woods, we’ve been spared the “aircraft/color” thing. However, we have a plethora of less-than-professional pilots who still append “Conflicting traffic please advise…” to their position reports.
I guess they’re somehow hoping that I’m now responsible for their well being.
PS We’ve had pilots who are fifteen miles away at a different altitude and going the other direction respond with their position and “no conflict”…
Very interesting discussion and some great points. I hadn’t even thought about the FCC thing. Perhaps I’m just not as geeked out on airplanes as everyone else – but I question the ability of the average pilot to be able to reasonably determine A/C type at the distances we’re talking about. Beyond high wing / low wing and dominate color (most of which is white) I’m skeptical. At a mile – that white warrior is going to tough to differentiate from the Bellanca.
I think it’s the position report that is most valuable (mid field down wind, base, final etc).
And the Osh Kosh example is an outlier – a unique situation accompanied by special regs, policies, and trained professionals….
I vote we stick with the AIM and established recommended procedures 🙂
I do agree with your points. Perhaps, however, consider that knowing the type also assists in what you can expect. If I call out I’m a bonanza versus a 152, you can know what to expect speed wise and even, perhaps, skill wise. May I suggest that type and tail number may meet all recommended criteria and provide additional useful info that will likely increase safety?
The problems in non-towered airspace are many. Not citing a tail number is among the least important ones.
In non-towered it is more important to say your location relative to the airport, distance, altitude and intent. And to keep updating that information as you enter the pattern and land.
It is not okay to give your location using local landmarks (near the pink Cadillac parked in front of Mom’s house.) And it is not okay to be silent as you fly (planes with no radio are a great example of a government agency, FAA getting it wrong.)
Sounds like you should consider limiting your operations to towered airports only, at least until the government makes it “safe” for you…
Sounds like you are one of those ‘cowboys’ who thinks flying is about your experience and not the safety of others and those you have in the plane. Please limit your flying to a ag field somewhere so others don’t have to deal with it, thanks.
I’m a little little less common than “white Cessna” (blue and white Ercoupe-and there probably are not two look-alike Ercoupes in the world) but I get your point and usually succumb to “Blue and white Ercoupe” only on base or final.
However, at an uncontrolled airport, does it REALLY help to call out your tail number? I mean, it’s not as if we can actually read the number off another plane in the pattern, right.?
No, if everything is going well, you probably can’t read the tail number off of another plane in the pattern. But, what you can do is address that particular aircraft directly and specifically over the radio to clarify their intent and make them aware of you (again, specifically) if you believe your intent may conflict with theirs.
To pull on the “White Cessna” thread, how easy is it going to be for you to address a particular white Cessna in the pattern for de-confliction/coordination if all you know about them is that they are a “White Cessna” that, at some point in the near past (and some number of radio calls ago) were at point (X,Y,Z) in relation to the field? And, when you call on the radio, how does one particular white Cessna be sure there isn’t now some other white Cessna at their previous position?
In short, using tail numbers isn’t about visual references, it’s about being a specific identifier that allows effective radio communication in order to AVOID finding yourself close enough to that white Cessna to read his tail number!
I like the way you think, CF. There. Now you know.
Great comments. Much appreciated.
Finally, sanity.
There’s another thing you or the commenters didn’t touch on. THESE days with ADS-B in, your full N number is visible to others (unless you’re using 978 anonymous). So even if you’re flying into a non-towered airport, airplanes properly equipped will immediately tell who you are from — say — someone squaking Mode C only. In effect, we are our own “controllers.”
You didn’t touch upon using “November” in the call sign. To me, that’s a bit onerous. I treat it as if it’s assumed unless you use a foreign call sign. OR — perhaps — if you live in a place frequented by foreign airplanes.
So why do the ATC controllers at OSH and Sun ‘n Fun use aircraft description (e.g. “Red tail dragger”) rather than N numbers if it is such a poor or unauthorized practice? At non-controlled fields I seldom catch N numbers of other aircraft on the first transmission but will remember a “green Mooney” and actually know what aircraft I’m looking for to follow.
Those are unique procedures for unique circumstances, Lee. Remember, those operations happen in accordance with a NOTAM published just for those events, during a specific time-frame, in a specific location. Those procedures are not intended to be transferable to normal operations. We shouldn’t be announcing ourselves as we think an OSH controller would during AirVenture any more than we should be landing multiple aircraft on the same runway simultaneously, even though that can happen at OSH.
I don’t see my comment posted; perhaps I hit the wrong button. I apologize if this gets posted twice. Now that more and more aircraft have ADS-B installed it is even more important to use the complete N number as other pilots can now see the N number on their ADS-B “in” display and can know exactly which aircraft is which. FAA Advisory Circular AC 90-66B spells out the radio procedures that should be used at non-towered airports and can be accessed on the FAA’s website. It was updated about a year ago and all pilots should review it.
Agreed, a compelling discussion. I must confess that, after 30 years of flying, after hearing someone else do it, I started identifying my aircraft color (not white at all) and make (a somewhat rare/unique make). As much as I enjoyed the Mom/Dad analogy, recommendations are still just that. I believe it is safer if others are looking for my brightly colored aircraft and not confusing me with a white Cessna that is ahead of me and may be negligent in reporting their position.
However, I believe the most complexing argument for call sign would be an FCC requirement, not an FAA requirement… we are transmitter stations that are required to initially report our call signs and repeat that call sign designation at regular intervals. Much like how ATC initially identifies who they are but not on every subsequent transmission to you. So, until someone let’s me know I am being unsafe (our primary mandate) I will continue to identify myself with a combination of call sign and color/type.
I believe that the reason folks got in the habit of using only the color and type around uncontrolled airports was that it was shorter and did not clutter up the frequency as much as saying a long N number. However, now that more and more aircraft have ADSB installed, the number is important because now other pilots can know exactly which aircraft is which on their ADSB “in” equipment. AC 90-66B spells out the radio procedures that should be used at non-towered airports. Of course, pilots should always use the complete N number when communicating with ATC.
I see value in adding your plane’s color to your identifier in non towered airspace. True, “white Cessna” might not mean much but most planes have a prominent color stripe. My own Cherokee is tan and I announce “tan Cherokee 1234”. Adding the color is non standard but takes a fraction of a second and might clear up some confusion when there are several popular planes in the same vicinity.
Color and Model are much more meaningful than N Number and manufacturer. By using color and model, you have actually conveyed significanly more information to any other traffic than you have by announcing Manufacturer and N number.
Someone approaches and airport and announces “Piper XXX, 10 miles east of ZZZ for landing runway 36” tells me virtually nothing about the aircraft’s velocity or when I would expect them to sequence into the pattern. On the other hand, if they announce “Yellow Cub, 10 miles east of ZZZ for landing runway 36”, I know this aircraft won’t arrive for another 10 minutes, and is very likely to fly a tight pattern. While it may not necessarily do as described, I now understand what to expect. Or if they call “White Meridian, 10 miles east of ZZZ for landing runway 36”, I understand this airplane is likely to be fast and will be in the pattern before I can turn upwind from my departure, and is likely to fly a wider than usual pattern, so I can modify the size of my pattern to accommodate.
The use of the descriptor rather than the N number declutters the frequency and conveys significantly more information in the broadcast telling the pilot not only the color they are looking for, but the speed and likely position. That’s a plus on safety. For the rural airports, I frequent, ADS-B isn’t even a player as maybe 10% are equipped and we are usually out of range for radar and the ground stations, so mode-C traffic also doesn’t show up.
Typically, I use Model and N number on my radio calls, but the argument for model and color has a lot of merit.
Not to mention FCC Regs require it
This article has merit. However, do not get hung up on defined correctness. I once meet a lady airline captain that professed to be a “by the book” pilot. She said, “If I do everything by the book and the airplane crashes, it is not my fault.”
So maybe some of each type call in the non-towered pattern may be required at times. So with 3 Cessna’s in the pattern, maybe “Blue Sky Wagon” is better than “Cessna 123!”
Right on! You know the old quote, “Doing the wrong thing does not make it right just because everyone is doing it, and doing the right thing does not make it wrong because no one is doing it.” I am sure a lot of people using the incorrect phraseology have never considered your great example of the white Cessna and the lake (and yes most Cessnas and many other brands are mostly white). Great article.
Thanks Jamie for clearing that up. I live on a public use private airport and you cannot imagine
how many white Cessna’s come to visit us daily. I agree they mean well but it can get confusing
when more then three are in the pattern.
True, but you won’t be able to read those tail numbers either, until you’re too close for safety in many cases. I remember ages ago when I was in college, on a nice sunny day there may be up to 5 or 6 airplanes in the pattern (with 3 airplanes on downwind). So which of the 6 C-150/C-152’s just made that radio call???
I typically use standard phraseology in non-towered airport operations, but I do think that adding a quick color identifier (like Eric discusses) can be helpful at times if you have more than one Piper or Cessna in the airport operations area. Even the controllers at Airventure/Oshkosh, by procedure, will identify and direct you by aircraft color and type, NOT by tail number. I’ll take the nonstandard, but constructive, radio call from a pilot ANY DAY over the one who doesn’t talk to anyone, and seemingly doesn’t listen to or look for anyone either, and suddenly pops up in front of you at the wrong time.
Again, using tail numbers is NOT about visual references, it’s about being a specific, unique identifier that allows effective radio communication for coordination in order to AVOID finding yourself close enough to that white Cessna to read his tail number!
And Airventure/Oshkosh are TERRIBLE benchmarks to use for standard, every day, best practices. The reason the controllers there use “type” and color is because they can see the aircraft but maybe (probably) not the numbers (particularly for older aircraft that insist on using tiny N-numbers) and there are simply too many aircraft to have everyone on the CTAF self-announcing their position and tail number, all at once.
Instead, the *special* procedures used in those instances have been designed to control the flow of traffic in such a way that the controllers can visually see and then address each plane individually, as appropriate, to direct them along to the next step in the traffic flow. It has nothing to do with standard best practices and was never meant to be seen as such.
Great article and excellent point – same goes for pattern entry folks – Do what the AIM says 🙂
Agreed, some good points made for both sides. Stick to the AIM, I like to use aircraft type and last three of the N number. Makes it easy for other aircraft to call me if they need more info.
Patterns are another subject, I live on an airpark with a busy flight school so I get a ringside seat for the daily show. The growing attitude seems to be that instead of having to read all those boring publications, just announce on the radio your intentions and do whatever is most convenient.