Abeam the numbers

atcguruaf Rico Suave AZ

Here's your "by the book" answer.

1. Yes, abeam is in the .65. However, "abeam the numbers" is hardly descriptive enough because is the traffic "left and abeam the numbers" or "right and abeam the numbers"? The definition for "abeam" only talks about 90 degrees.

2. Your trainer is right, but for the wrong reasons. If a pilot doesn't know what you're talking about, international or otherwise, they're supposed to ask. And when talking about anything regarding the airport or traffic, it's ALWAYS in relation to the runway in use. By using your trainer's own thought process you can draw the same conclusion from saying "traffic short final" (runway 28, or 10?). Well, in all cases, it's for the runway in use.

3. "Abeam the numbers" is not easy to understand, because it can be left and abeam the numbers or right and abeam the numbers.

4. Your phraseology mentioned above IS in fact incorrect. The correct traffic call would be:

"(callsign) number 2, follow skylane right base, Runway 28R, cleared to land".

So I guess you can say your trainer is right by saying you're using incorrect phraseology.

Just because the term "abeam" is in the regulations doesn't mean you can throw it out there anytime you like. It has to mean something. For example, a situation I may use it is:

let's say you have parallels 28R and 28L. You have a C172 on final 28R, and BE35 on final for 28L. The BE35 is faster and surpassing the C172 on final. My traffic call might be something like:

"N172, traffic, bonanza, left and abeam, on final runway 28L, runway 28R, cleared to land"

"N35, traffic, cessna, right and abeam, on final runway 28R, runway 28L, cleared to land"

(of course I'd use more inflection when stating the runway before landing clearance, and I may even throw in "number 1")

If you had a parallel taxiway (say Alpha) and an aircraft wanted to cross the runway at an intersection (say Alpha 8), but you wanted to hold the aircraft short of of alpha, you might say:

"N1234, hold short of Alpha abeam Alpha 8."

okay, I'm rambling, but let me know if you need clarification on any of this.

ATCinWI Senior Member Illinois

How about "N12345, make right traffic for runway 21, report abeam the runway 21 numbers"? Or "N12345, make right traffic runway 21, report abeam the tower"?

Someone might not understand what "Report midfield downwind" means, either, or "make short approach". If the pilot doesn't understand, it's his responsibility to get clarification. It doesn't preclude a controller from using the term "abeam" something.

Matty13 Senior Member

Very narrow, Googoo. I'm dissapointed. How about "left pattern abeam the numbers". A pilot can also assume that if he/she was assigned a left-hand pattern, the traffic being called will also be on the same side. If not, emphasis for clarity would be called for. "N123, follow the C421 in the RIGHT downwind abeam the numbers, LEFT downwind approved". I can't think of a time when this would be called for, but maybe it exists.

The OP's phraseology is correct. "Abeam the numbers" and "on base" are two different things. What if the traffic was extended downwind for whatever reason? They are not on base, but are abeam the numbers.

atcguruaf Rico Suave AZ

sheesh... okay, well you're right on 1 aspect:

saying "left downwind abeam the numbers" does suffice. However, I was only speaking against the op's phraseology. Not saying "left" or "right" is not enough to be used in conjunction with "abeam the numbers," as the OP had originally stated in his/her phraseology.

The OP's phraseology is still incorrect. here is why:

chapter 3-8-1 in the .65 and the phraseology in 3-10-5.

Saying "Runway 28R, number 2, cleared to land" is incorrect (as stated by the OP).

It should be "... number 2, follow Cessna right downwind abeam the numbers, runway 28R, cleared to land."

That is how the OP's phraseology is incorrect. I know you were just testing me Mateo, just to make sure I was paying attention.

polo708 Epic Member tower

You couldn't be more wrong...

Its "closed traffic approved" and it's simply approving an aircraft to stay in the pattern, has nothing to do with him being the only one. Also, they should technically start their crosswind turn off the departure end of the runway at approx. 800 ft AGL.

"closed traffic approved" should be issued to every aircraft requesting "closed traffic" for the first time.

Matty13 Senior Member

Googoo, I was referring to the OP's first line "I have been told "abeam the numbers" is incorrect phraseology." "Abeam the numbers" is correct. I still say that any pilot would assume that any traffic call would be in the same pattern for the same runway unless told otherwise, so "left" or "right" wouldn't matter unless it was different from what the aircraft receiving the traffic call was doing.

Polo, you got me. I only used "closed traffic" when there was one, because I liked being able to reset the sequence. We had a wide variety of aircraft, so it would sometimes be advantageous to cut the fighter twice inside the heavy.

atcguruaf Rico Suave AZ

that's a dangerous word in our field. Several times I've had traffic follow someone on an opposite downwind. I try not to give any room for the pilots to interpret or assume. As much as possible, I'll paint the picture so there is no confusion whatsoever.

Matty13 Senior Member

"Turn left downwind, follow the C130 abeam the numbers."

Now, where is the C130?

atcguruaf Rico Suave AZ

the C-130 can either be on the left downwind abeam the numbers or right downwind abeam the numbers. I'm not saying that it's wrong to apply common sense, my only argument is that, for tapes, legalities, and all that other B.S., I get a little more descriptive by saying right downwind abeam the numbers or left downwind abeam the numbers. Yes, who else is he gonna follow? but at the same time, as I'm sure you know, if and when something happens, it turns into a finger pointing game... I like fingers pointed away from me.

Matty13 Senior Member

OK, but the first place you look is the left downwind abeam the numbers. It can be in the right downwind, but if it was I would have made a different call. The communication is clear and brief, everything you could want in a clearance.

ATSAP is supposed to relieve us of the blame culture, working pretty well at my facility.