Jump to content
Sebastian Rekdal

atc-discussion Shanwick/Gander Phraseology

Recommended Posts

Sebastian Rekdal

Hello all,

after reading some of the relevant sections in the newest version of ICAO's NAT MNPS doc 007, I found some new changes in terms of phraseology.

The changes are described in ICAO NAT MNPS doc 007 Attachment 7 "Oceanic Clearances Delivery/Format/Content"

Format of Oceanic Clearance messages delivered via voice
Oceanic clearances delivered via voice in the NAT Region will normally have the following format:

"Oceanic clearance with a (list of ATC info), (ATC unit) clears (callsign) to (clearance limit/destination)  via Track (route), from (Entry point) maintain (level), (speed/Mach), (Free text)."

The following (list of ATC info) will advise a difference in the clearance from the filed or requested details. It will normally be in accordance with the table below: 

  • Reroute: The controller changes, deletes or adds a waypoint other than the entry point.
  • Level Change: Flight level in the clearance message is not the same as the flight level in the RCL.
  • Speed Change: Speed in the clearance message is not the same as the speed in the RCL.
  • Entry Point Change: The first waypoint in the clearance message is not the same as in the RCL. 
  • Clearance Limit Change: The controller changes the clearance limit.

Example exchange:
“Oceanic clearance with a re-route. Shanwick clears Air Canada 865 to Kennedy via Track B. From MALOT maintain Flight level 350, Mach .82"

 

Format of an Oceanic Clearance Revision delivered via voice
"Amended (change) clearance. (ATC unit) clears (callsign) to (clearance limit/destination)  via Track (route), from (Entry point) maintain (level), (speed/Mach), (Free text)."

Note: Multiple (Change) elements will normally be separated with the word “and" (e.g. "Amended Route and Level clearance").

Example exchange:
This can be done in two ways:

  1. Inform the pilot in command about the relevant amendment in his clearance (e.g. "route", "level" and/or "speed" amendment).

ATC: Air Canada 865 amended level and speed clearance.
PILOT: Go ahead.
ATC: Shanwick clears Air Canada 8665 climb to and maintain Flight level 350 maintain Mach 81, report leaving, report reaching.

  1. Inform the pilot in command about the relevant amendments in his clearance, and give the new clearance in the same transmission:

ATC: Air Canada 865 amended level and speed clearance. Shanwick clears Air Canada 8665 climb to and maintain Flight level 350 maintain Mach 81, report leaving, report reaching.


Reference:
T
he content on this website is gathered from official NAT documents from ICAO.

Edited by Sebastian Rekdal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Simon Kelsey

“Oceanic clearance with a re-route. Shanwick Radio clears Air Canada 865 to Kennedy via Track B. From MALOT maintain Flight level 350, Mach .82"

To be terribly picky (and please do correct me if I'm wrong) -- I was always under the impression that Shanwick Radio (the HF radio operators at Ballygireen) is merely a relayer of messages from Shanwick ATC at Prestwick and therefore cannot clear anybody to do anything.

Therefore, although the message may come via Ballygireen, the phraseology should be "Shanwick ATC clears..." to make it clear that the clearance is being issued by the controllers at Prestwick and not from the radio operator.

However, if I'm wrong I apologise!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sebastian Rekdal

I'm not entirely sure about that, to be honest. However, I believe you're right that it shouldn't be "radio". Whether it should be "ATC" or just "Shanwick" I do not know. I shall have a look at it and give you all an update when/if I find an appropriate answer. :) 

An oceanic clearance is usually issued by Shanwick CDOs (Clearance Delivery Officers) at Prestwick. Only during special circumstances (which I believe would be coordinated beforehand), is Shanwick HF to issue such clearance. 

The question then is, should it be "Shanwick Radio" when clearances such as climb/descend and increase/reduce Mach? I believe this should be "Shanwick Radio as it's a request made by the pilot, or by the ATC unit for separation purpose, enroute (i.e. after its original oceanic clearance). This is something that's not highlighted in the ICAO NAT MNPS doc 007 so it'll be difficult to provide a correct answer from me, right now.

At the end of the day, I think it all falls down to "Shanwick" only (not "ATC" or "Radio").

 

Anyway, thanks for pointing it out, @Simon Kelsey!

Edited by Sebastian Rekdal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ben Hunwicks

I'm not entirely sure about that, to be honest. However, I believe you're right that it shouldn't be "radio". Whether it should be "ATC" or just "Shanwick" I do not know. I shall have a look at it and give you all an update when/if I find an appropriate answer. :) 

An oceanic clearance is usually issued by Shanwick CDOs (Clearance Delivery Officers) at Prestwick. Only during special circumstances (which I believe would be coordinated beforehand), is Shanwick HF to issue such clearance. 

The question then is, should it be "Shanwick Radio" when clearances such as climb/descend and increase/reduce Mach? I believe this should be "Shanwick Radio as it's a request made by the pilot, or by the ATC unit for separation purpose, enroute (i.e. after its original oceanic clearance). This is something that's not highlighted in the ICAO NAT MNPS doc 007 so it'll be difficult to provide a correct answer from me, right now.

At the end of the day, I think it all falls down to "Shanwick" only (not "ATC" or "Radio").

 

Anyway, thanks for pointing it out, @Simon Kelsey!

The reason the "(unit) clears.." bit is in there at all is because the person giving the message is not the controlling authority, and therefore as Simon says it is not "Shanwick Radio Clears..." because they are just relaying the clearance.

As for the change of level/speed bit, of course it's not "Shanwick Radio" giving the clearance, they still don't give any clearances, they just relay messages! The clearance to change level/speed still comes from the controlling unit, whether it is Shanwick/Gander etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sebastian Rekdal

I'm not entirely sure about that, to be honest. However, I believe you're right that it shouldn't be "radio". Whether it should be "ATC" or just "Shanwick" I do not know. I shall have a look at it and give you all an update when/if I find an appropriate answer. :) 

An oceanic clearance is usually issued by Shanwick CDOs (Clearance Delivery Officers) at Prestwick. Only during special circumstances (which I believe would be coordinated beforehand), is Shanwick HF to issue such clearance. 

The question then is, should it be "Shanwick Radio" when clearances such as climb/descend and increase/reduce Mach? I believe this should be "Shanwick Radio as it's a request made by the pilot, or by the ATC unit for separation purpose, enroute (i.e. after its original oceanic clearance). This is something that's not highlighted in the ICAO NAT MNPS doc 007 so it'll be difficult to provide a correct answer from me, right now.

At the end of the day, I think it all falls down to "Shanwick" only (not "ATC" or "Radio").

 

Anyway, thanks for pointing it out, @Simon Kelsey!

 

The reason the "(unit) clears.." bit is in there at all is because the person giving the message is not the controlling authority, and therefore as Simon says it is not "Shanwick Radio Clears..." because they are just relaying the clearance.

As for the change of level/speed bit, of course it's not "Shanwick Radio" giving the clearance, they still don't give any clearances, they just relay messages! The clearance to change level/speed still comes from the controlling unit, whether it is Shanwick/Gander etc.

Makes sense to me. Thanks Ben and Simon. So in conclusion (as stated in the ICAO NAT MNPS doc 007), it should only be "Air Canada 865, Amended level clearance. Shanwick clears..." ? 

Edited by Sebastian Rekdal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Martin Bergin

Just one thing - On VATSIM 99% of the time the controller giving the radio operator and clearance controller are one and the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • Kieran Samuel Cross
      By Kieran Samuel Cross
      --PLS DELETE--
    • James Taylor
      By James Taylor
      Hi,
      Does anyone know where I can get the actual client for Audio For Vatsim that runs alongside Euroscope?
      Thanks in advance,
      Regards
      James
    • Edward Berkley
      By Edward Berkley
      Hello all,
      I was finding a more realistic way to give out PDC's via text. I thought of using these two messages:
      .pdc1 .msg $aircraft $dep PDC: $aircraft CLRD TO $arr $deprwy via $sid INIT ALT: $alt squawk $asquawk ATIS $atiscode NO READBACK REQUIRED. If you're happy with this PDC, please verify by replying to this message, saying: "ACCEPT".
       
      If they reply with 'accept' then I send out this second message.

      .pdc2 .msg $aircraft Thank you, $aircraft. Contact $callsign on frequency $com when FULLY ready to push and start with stand number, ATIS info, aircraft type AND current QNH
      I preferably wanted all of the important information from the second message into the first message. However, I discover that euroscope has a word limit as to how long your messages can be.
      I'm wondering what you guys think of this procedure. Are vatsim pilots very responsive? As well, is there a way to automatically send out the second message by a somewhat means of detection from the pilot when he/she says 'accept'?
      I hope what I just said makes sense. 
       
      Many thanks!
       
       
    • Paul Dean
      By Paul Dean
      Can anyone suggest an atis frequency for Marham?
      Cheers
    • Trevor Gibson
      By Trevor Gibson
      Just wondering now that I have my S1 at some point after I operated at EGCC GND would it be possible to control EGAA. How would I go about getting that sector or is Belfast not available 
×
×
  • Create New...