Quote:
Originally Posted by daveatc  By all means, please report leaving altitudes. In a radar environment, it's not as big an issue. However, if you ever go into a non-radar sector, we cannot use that altitude until you report being out of it. Since we can't confirm it with Mode C, it's locked out from us until you either call out of it, or call reaching your newly assigned altitude. It also helps us confirm our Mode C readout in a radar environment, which is always fun.
"NWA321 leaving FL260 climbing FL280."
"N734TV leaving 10 thousand descending to 8 thousand."
I don't know that saying "to" is a bad thing. I can't see where it would be an issue. Any place it would be a concern, the FL is put in the middle so I can differentiate and make sure you didn't say '280' instead of 'to 8000.' 28thousand would be FL280. Clear as mud? Just leave it off it you want. |
I, too, leave off the "to" and "for". The accident referenced above was Flying Tiger 77 into KUL. ATC said "descend two four zero zero" and the crew took it to mean "descent TO four zero zero". Not sure what they were thinking there, but they were heading to 400' when they hit the terrain. I would just have the terms dropped.
Like using the term "level" to mean a constant altitude, as the U.S. is the only place that uses it that way, everywhere else it means "flight level".
What about saying altitudes such as "twenty four point seven", when they mean "flight level two four seven"? There's another common misuse.