There will be more in the coming weeks!

Geoffrey Gallaway Another great KZfaq page for flight is Premiere1Driver.

Thanks buddy, I was wondering why they need to emphasize that again.

Thanks for watching John!

Thanks!

Thanks for watching!

Thanks!

Thanks Keegan!

Thanks John!

so the E-jet isn't high performance?

Glad you enjoyed it, thanks for watching Chris!

That’s what I was thinking... I’m not a pilot but I listen to atc enough to listen you don’t really talk like that.

I absolutely strongly disagree. His 'phraseology habits'/verbiage is spot-on! He is clear, concise and professional. He gets the readbacks and information transmitted without cluttering up ATC. As I watched the video, one of the first thoughts I had, was 'wow that guy is smooth with his comms'! (And yes, I am a pilot)

@@Dave5500 both times he failed to repeat the runway number and the full call sign. Later he continued to give only partial read backs that left out key parts of the assignments such a the amended climb-via clearance. It appears to be due to complacency and this issue has caused several accidents in the past. I’ve heard several crews over the years getting chewed by ATC for this. I’m not going to explain why these items are extremely important because you’re a pilot and I presume you know this already. Just my 2 cents as an airline Captain and safety auditor.

They did the flight just for us so we could film the procedure. And they pre-coordinated with ATC so we could get the climb via. Very cool!

They are basically providing them free promotion. Expressjet has more to gain than to loose

Dude chill... I've heard pilots say "in/on the box" before when referencing the transponder, are *you* a pilot? Because if not, then who are you to say that?

As an airline pilot, who flies internationally, trust me. Nobody cares. We tailor our language to who we’re talking to. If I’m with a bunch of good ole’ southern boys working Houston center I’m going to talk to them differently than if I’m flying to a non-English speaking country. If I’m going to Mexico it’s all slow, clear, ICAO standard phraseology. With Houston Center I can have fun on frequency. They get it. I get it. Other pilots get it. It’s not a big deal. At the same time I hear mexican pilots and controllers speaking in Spanish to one another and laughing on frequency. They’re doing their thing just like how I do back in the States. I won’t ever complain about them speaking their native tongue to each other.

Sean Buller acey is the call sign for all expressjet operated flights, regardless of the name they are operating under.

I'm sorry but please learn how to spell

Exceeding 250 knots below 10,000 is generally done for safety, not for climb performance ... if your stall speed is 240, you don't want to be too close to it in your climb. If you're not going to manage a crossing restriction, best to tell ATC ASAP (and ASAP can include before departure). All GPS waypoints consist of GPS coordinates, fixes are initially defined as distance and radial from specified navaid(s) but GPS systems just treat them as coordinates too.

Easiest thing to do is say “unable”. I’ve had numerous times where due to strong tailwinds, distractions, ATC foul ups, etc where I won’t make an assigned restriction despite my best efforts. (Spoilers, flaps, even sometimes deploying landing gear early) I just tell them “Unable this restriction, do you need the speed or the altitude?” If he says the altitude I can always dive the airplane to it, but will exceed the speed limit. If he wants the speed I can always pitch the nose up and slow it down, but I’ll be high. If he really needs both and I can’t make it happen he can just give me a vector off route to get into the right energy state. Swept wing jets can be difficult to get down and slow down sometimes. Especially with high density altitude and/or tailwinds. The problem of losing energy is much more common with jets. Gaining energy and climbing to meet restrictions is rarely a problem. But if it does become a problem the same principals apply. Just tell them you can’t do it, what do they want you do instead. There’s no rules being violated here or anything just because Mother Nature dictates it’s impossible. To answer the question about fixes, we can identify just about all fixes with RNAV (GPS). Most SIDs require you to have an RNAV system. Many fixes, but not all, can be identified using VOR/DME or crossing two VOR radials. But this is very, very, rarely done in the airline world. Every pilot knows how to do it but it just almost never happens (in the USA). Flying IFR without a GPS isn’t a big deal. Even in a jet. We train how to do it in the simulator and I’ve done it IRL many times in smaller GA airplanes. You do become a little more reliant on ATC assistance though.

If your assigned an altitude it overrides the "Climb Via SID" and you can disregard the altitudes on the SID.

Sometimes they will be more specific and say something like "cleared for abc procedure, cross fix wxyzz at or below 5000" So you have the info ahead of time but also that you don't start to climb too early.(similar on approaches "cross mnopq at or above 2000, cleared ILS 23")

Jake, great question because that clearance was confusing. In our SAF case, they initially stated "climb via the SID, except..." but then said "Correction, climb and maintain 8000" at 3:22. The "climb and maintain" clears us for an unrestricted climb to 8000. If they were issuing a top altitude and wanted us to climb via the SID, they would have said "Climb via the SID, except maintain 8000" or "climb via the SID, maintain 8000" since this SID doesn't have a published top altitude. We heard the "correction" clearly so we didn't request clarification. SIDs are one of the top sources for pilot deviations - and the terminology is a large part of the problem. "Climb and maintain" and "Climb via the SID, except maintain" sound about the same - and they're often confused. And you'll hear a "correction, ..." pretty often. If you're in doubt, ask.

+Aleks Udris oh ok, I did not notice the "correction" until you pointed that out. I appreciate the clarification!

Cris - It was.

They are GPS (RNAV) waypoints. Which all have five letter names.

They use Jeppesen Flight Deck Pro Bryant.

Ok, thanks

Cole Byre hmm... like what a 4 year degree costs?

Cole Byre I was in the same situation, it sucks

@@BOHICA_ to be fair, you also need a 4 year degree to get into the airlines

@@stephensantilli9690 negative. Totally untrue. You don't need a 4 year degree at all for most airlines. Very useful and will help, but not at all required.

Reda - They said "RNAV to TTAPS". "TTAPS" is the first fix on the RITAA Five Departure. The "RNAV to TTAPS" instruction tells us to fly via RNAV, or "area navigation," direct to TTAPS after takeoff. "Area navigation" or "RNAV" is a generic term for any navigation system that allows us to navigate by latitude/longitude waypoints. GPS is the most common form, but most turbine aircraft have flight management systems that combine GPS with VOR and other navigation systems.

amen

VV Kim yep. "Climb via the SID except maintain 4000".

Yeah, that clearance doesn't make a whole lot of sense though. The first altitude is 4000 so "climb via" doesn't really apply if you're going to hold them down at the very first altitude. I'd think a better clearance would be "Cleared RITTA FIVE departure, maintain 4,000'". It would make more sense if they gave something like "Climb via RITTA FIVE departure except maintain 7,000" so that they comply with the altitude restrictions at TTAPS and BOTLL and then level off at 7,000.

Mike Kading Swayne?

thats what i thought

Don't see anything

Probably a Part 91 leg it sounds like.

You are allowed to abbreviate callsigns if there is no similar callsign on freq.

Acey is the callsign for Expressjet.

Which the f/o didn't say most of the time, instead he just says the flight number

But honestly the thing that annoyed me most is he kept saying "with you"..

He did say his callsign, and yes with you isn't proper, and so what it's redundant it's not dangerous. What are you an FAA agent?

Go back to policing the guard frequency.

That's ridiculous. His verbiage was clear and concise. He got his communications across w/o cluttering up ATC. "In the box..." is horrible to you...Really?

Dave5500 Yes, really. Phraseology like that is non-standard, so it ends up being confusing to students (who are tomorrow’s pilots). Imagine if you did this in law enforcement; just kind of “make it up” using cutesy, made-up phrases like, “in the box,” and “with a flash,” and “Dixie” instead of “Delta,” or “unicorn” instead of “Uniform.” You’d be run out of the department. Why should we accept this in aviation- an exacting and procedure-driven endeavor that affects thousands of lives? This is lazy and unprofessional. The AIM exists for a reason. Proper phrases are there for a reason. When professionals throw that out the window and say stupid crap, it makes students think it’s ok to make it up as well. Or to not learn it correctly. Or that using proper phraseology is somehow “uncool.” These kids look up to pilots like this. And when they use crappy phraseology it perpetuates a lack of professionalism. It creates the environment we have today where more and more commercial pilots are using really stupid, made-up phrases and words. I hear it all the time. And explaining it to a student for the 80th time is tiring. Use the right words. It’s as easy-if not easier- than crap like “in the box.” What box? What’s a “fish finder? What’s a flash? Is 11-point-five an altitude? Why did he say “unicorn?” And the list goes on.

@@singermcl1 I see your point. I think student pilots should learn the proper verbiage (as should everyone), BUT at this pilots experience level, saying "11-point-five" instead of 'One-one-thousand-five hundred' gets the altitude/point across in a quick and safe way that's not cluttering up the frequency and ATC. I don't feel like it's a safety concern (again, at that level). I compare it to: When you are teaching a student to climb out in a C-172, of course you teach Vy 73 and Vx 59 (or whatever your POH calls for), but in the real world, a more experienced pilot holding 75 or 60 on climb out isn't something to nit-pick. It actually allows the pilot to keep his/her eyes outside not worrying about a 2-3 knot difference most likely keeping everyone safer. Just my $0.02. I do see your point though.