You must hear the word ‘cleared’ followed by ‘RWnn’ when given a landing or takeoff clearance. The word ‘departure’ or ‘takeoff’ or ‘immediate’ are not relevant…
If the tower wants you to do something quickly they will say ‘expedite’.
Thus, after taxiing and arriving on the RW hold you change frequencies to tower and announce ‘Tower, Cessna zero charlie tango holding short RWnn, ready for takeoff’ – the tower may then say ‘Cessna zero charlie tango cleared for takeoff RWnn’ or ‘Cessna zero charlie tango cleared for departure RWnn’. If the tower does not give the RWnn number make sure you repeat it in your acknowledgment so there is no question which runway will be used.
If cleared for takeoff or departure you MUST repeat the clearance ‘Cessna zero charlie tango cleared for takeoff/departure RWnn’.
The key two word/phrases in the clearance are ‘cleared’ and ‘RWnn’ those must be given and repeated/acknowledged in any clearance.
In non towered airports the general use of the word ‘takeoff’ can mean for the pattern or departure, and the word ‘departure’ for leaving the airport entirely.
The Tower made a mistake too … he shouldn’t have asked him if he was “ready for immediate”, because that implied he’d let him go … I am not saying the pilot didn’t make a (BIG) mistake… but that was really a trap .
Both did not act and react properly.
The Cessnas Pilot obviously misunderstood the tower controller. His answer “cleared for” indicated that and the tower controller should have immediately reacted. I also don’t think his answer to the Cessna was quite standard, normally I’d expect him to say something to the effect of “hold position, I’ll call you back”. That is what I hear in ZRH most of the time when a query about ready or not is answered.
In the end, it was the Ryan Air Crew who thankfully saw the intruder and resolved the situation.
I reckon all concerned learnt from this. Which should be quite enough. No need for trial and punishment as long as the lesson has been clear. But somehow I doubt that this is what will happen.
the general use of the word ‘takeoff’ can mean for the pattern or departure, and the word departure’ for leaving the airport entirely.
Not the case in Europe. This is a European forum, therefore, we talk European procedures, which comply with ICAO standards. America is hugely non-compliant as we know.
We never use the word “takeoff” other than in the takeoff clearance itself.
As US Flyer pointed out in an informative, helpful, non contentious post for the busiest GA market in the world, with a better safety record than European GA, this convention is for non towered airfields.
But even at towered airports, if you have look around youtube for example, you keep hearing pilots say “Cessna123 is ready for takeoff” and things like that.
In case those who think the distinction between departure and take off is pure semantics, there is a real reason why this was introduced.
That reason cost close to 600 lifes on a foggy day in Tenerife when a hugely respected and experienced 747 captain of a major European airline made a mistake quite similar to the one discussed here.
Chaps, this is a big ATC f-ck-up more than anything else. If the controller doesn’t catch the erroneous reply and is ‘busy’ then he or she shouldn’t be in a tower cab. Not exonerating the C172 pilot, though.
1) Shit happens.
2) If prosecuting for innocent errors worked, the only rule required would be “It is prohibited to have accidents, violators will be jailed”
3) Big boys also make mistakes.
Live and learn.
In the US the PIC has the ultimate and final judgement on safety. If ATC gives a questionable or possibly conflicting instruction…the PIC is to ask for clarification and if deemed ATC is wrong, ask for an alternative or a delay if needed. There is a reply ‘cannot comply’ reserved for pilots.
Interesting article published in AVWEB today on this subject: http://www.avweb.com/news/features/ATC-Pitfalls-Communication-225303-1.html
