Purpose of readback

[bruce]

Ok I expect to be shot down in flames on this one but I always understood that the purpose of reading back instructions was to ensure that the pilot had received the instructions fully & accurately.
Take this example. From ATC "turn rt 180, vector for vis. app 19R, desc & maintain 3000ft" I responded "Rt 180, vec for vis app" (leaving out two important elements of the original instruction - my bad) ATC correctly responded "vis app 19R" but didn't pick up on the missed "desc.to 3000"
I would add that I was not exactly aware of my position relative to the field & thought I was further out, (I should have been but I got distracted) & in fact at 5000ft it was tucked beneath my nose & out of site.
My point is that had ATC picked me up on my missed descent calls life might have been easier for both sides.
The real question is, is a descent instruction important enough to be read back? (yes) & if missed should ATC have immediately picked up on it? (over to you - I have a thick skin so feel free" There is a further option & that is that ATC were having a bit of fun at my expense - no, surely not )

[Anthony Santanastaso]

An instruction such as heading and altitude is an example of an ATC clearance. The responsibility of the pilot is to acknowledge the receipt and understanding of the ATC clearance.

You can view more of the responsibilities by viewing Section 5 of AIM (http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publicat ... m0505.html).

[Keith Smith]

Bruce,

I'm with you on this one. You were giving partial readbacks and due to frequent land line calls and other distractions, I wasn't catching the fact that you weren't reading everything back. Had I been listening more closely, I would've certainly corrected the cases where you weren't reading back an assigned altitude, because I would take that as a sign that you hadn't heard the instructions, rather than assuming that you were opting to not read it back.

One of ATC's responsibilities is to ensure that ATC readbacks are correct and complete. I was catching the 'correct' portion in a few cases, but not the 'complete' portion on a few occasions. Those mistakes are on the controller (me).

If you hear it and not elect to read it back, that's something to work on, but that wasn't what was happening here. You were not hearing all of the instructions, and I was missing the fact that you weren't reading them all back as a result of doing a bit too much at once on my end.

[bruce]

That's a one all then.
I listened to the replay & the descent instructions was clearly given so I obviously must have heard it but the brain didn't compute & just digested & acted on the initial parts of the instruction.
Now here's an interesting point on the holding short at "D" at KSBA. I had noted the full taxi instructions D/H/J for RW 25 but again reacted to the first part only (scenery was fine)
As if I was on overload (without cause) Better make an appointment to go & lie on the couch again & tell someone my war stories.

Must try harder

[Keith Smith]

The taxi issue and the altitude issue are two different things. The first is on you as the pilot, the second is on me as the controller, the difference being that you apparently read the taxi instructions back correctly, whereas you didn't read back the altitude.

It it helps with the taxi, when you brief the route, you can trace your finger over the path to be followed and say outloud, 'straight on delta, right on hotel, left on juliet'. If you've visualized the route, you'll be primed for the right turn on hotel and won't get too distracted by the shiny runway as you approach the end of delta

If you're reacting to what you see in front of you, rather than executing a specific plan, then you're likely to fall prey to scenery errors, which are many.

If this technique only helped overcome sim errors, then it wouldn't have much real world use, but visualizing a flight/taxi path and then executing it to the best of your ability can help reduce the noise/clutter that you're presented with on real world flights.