Taxi Readbacks
A week ago I did a post about readbacks, and one reader mentioned the idea of reading back instructions/authorizations to cross runways when given authorization to do so. An example would be, "Alpha Bravo Charlie taxi A, D across runway 24, hold short of runway 33." In my post, I stated that only the "Hold short of runway 33" needed to be read back.
The AIP RAC 4.2.5 deals with this. In accordance with CAR 602.31(1)(a), it says, readbacks of instructions other than those with the words "Hold Short" are not required. So that makes my point about what is required. The same section of the AIP does state that, "instructions to enter, cross, backtrack or line up on any runway should also be acknowledged by a readback." The underline is in the original text, but I added the italics to the word, "should," in that last quote.
The difference between the word should and shall is that should means application is recommended, and shall means application is mandatory. So is it a good idea to readback these instructions, but it is not required under the Canadian Aviation Regulations.
With the increased use of multiple runways at many airports, it doesn't hurt to readback these authorizations. To make the point a little more clear, take this example: "ACA123 taxi Alpha, Delta, Charlie, across runway 34, Bravo, Echo, hold short of runway 10," could be readback as, "ACA123 across runway 34, hold short of 10," to save frequency congestion and still readback both what's required and recommended.
The AIP RAC 4.2.5 deals with this. In accordance with CAR 602.31(1)(a), it says, readbacks of instructions other than those with the words "Hold Short" are not required. So that makes my point about what is required. The same section of the AIP does state that, "instructions to enter, cross, backtrack or line up on any runway should also be acknowledged by a readback." The underline is in the original text, but I added the italics to the word, "should," in that last quote.
The difference between the word should and shall is that should means application is recommended, and shall means application is mandatory. So is it a good idea to readback these instructions, but it is not required under the Canadian Aviation Regulations.
With the increased use of multiple runways at many airports, it doesn't hurt to readback these authorizations. To make the point a little more clear, take this example: "ACA123 taxi Alpha, Delta, Charlie, across runway 34, Bravo, Echo, hold short of runway 10," could be readback as, "ACA123 across runway 34, hold short of 10," to save frequency congestion and still readback both what's required and recommended.
posted by Michael at
07:31
