Originally Posted by RP4858

I have been told "abeam the numbers" is incorrect phraseology. For example: I am a tower controller, I have a VFR in the pattern and another one calls inbound. I issue traffic "(callsign) follow Cessna Skylane abeam the numbers, Runway 28R, number 2 cleared to land."

My argument:

1) Abeam is in the pilot controller glossary.
2) 3-1-6 b. states "Describe the relative position of traffic in an
easy to understand manner, such as ?to your right? or
?ahead of you.?"
3) AOPA (and other aviation publications) use the term in publications.

His argument:

1) Which set of numbers (if 4 runways, 8 sets of "numbers")
2) What if an international pilot doesn't know what that means.

Personally I say they know the numbers refers to the ones they will be using, but I do understand also that could be considered an assumption on the controllers part. Also, international pilots are required to know the rules (abeam is in it).

I understand in training to just do as told. But I want to hear what you think based on the book. To me abeam the numbers is pretty easy to understand. Plenty of AOPA articles use that term, most pilots have reported abeam the numbers before. But this person is still convinced. What's the consensus out there?