Squawk Ident
Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako
Squawk Ident
Question for the controllers- some pilots respond to a squawk ident coming into controlled (IE Centre) with a confirmation and an altitude, which could be good practice.
Personally, I've always done the method by the book, no verbal response, just hit the ident, and then acknowledging after the controller confirms altitude (X-checking to yourself that it's accurate) and any subsequent instructions. (And obv. a "Squawk ident and say passing" garners a response.)
So from an ATC standpoint, do you prefer knowing the indicated alt right off the bat with the ident or not?
Cheers.
Personally, I've always done the method by the book, no verbal response, just hit the ident, and then acknowledging after the controller confirms altitude (X-checking to yourself that it's accurate) and any subsequent instructions. (And obv. a "Squawk ident and say passing" garners a response.)
So from an ATC standpoint, do you prefer knowing the indicated alt right off the bat with the ident or not?
Cheers.
Re: Squawk Ident
Can't speak for controllers' personal preferences, but "squawk ident" is an instruction, and all instructions from ATC require both compliance and an acknowledgement (602.31(1)(a)) so "no verbal response" isn't by the book, as far as I can see. By the book would be to respond at a minimum with your call sign, no?DanWEC wrote: Personally, I've always done the method by the book, no verbal response, just hit the ident,
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
-
- Rank 2
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:24 pm
Re: Squawk Ident
If you don't acknowledge the instruction to squawk ident, then there's no real way to confirm that the ident seen flashing on the screen is actually yours. You therefore should at a minimum include your ident with the acknowledgement to ident.
Re: Squawk Ident
Photo- Do you respond to a "Standby" as well then? 
I've heard both ways on this, just looking for further clarification from ATC as to which is best, however multiple intrawebs searches come up with responses from controllers that state not to respond.
Thanks, RexKrammer. You're an IFR controller?

I've heard both ways on this, just looking for further clarification from ATC as to which is best, however multiple intrawebs searches come up with responses from controllers that state not to respond.
Thanks, RexKrammer. You're an IFR controller?
-
- Rank 4
- Posts: 238
- Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:47 am
Re: Squawk Ident
I've always done DanWEC's "the monkey pushes the button" method. Never been or heard some scolded for not responding to the ident instruction. Curious if I should be responding though.
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1485
- Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:30 am
- Location: the stars playground
Re: Squawk Ident
Standby isn't an instruction, merely an indication the other party is busy. You can use "standby" as well to ATC, yet you are not giving them an instruction.DanWEC wrote:Photo- Do you respond to a "Standby" as well then?![]()
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Re: Squawk Ident
I have no preference if you say "Identing", and/or "Passing through 5,700", or say nothing at all and just press the button. If you say the altitude, it saves me a couple words. If you don't, you save a couple words and I say the altitude.
-
- Rank 2
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:24 pm
Re: Squawk Ident
I'm a VFR controller but do have to identify aircraft before providing traffic or other information to them derived from radar. (Or technically "surveillance" to fall in line with new terminology)DanWEC wrote:Photo- Do you respond to a "Standby" as well then?
I've heard both ways on this, just looking for further clarification from ATC as to which is best, however multiple intrawebs searches come up with responses from controllers that state not to respond.
Thanks, RexKrammer. You're an IFR controller?
Re: Squawk Ident
I got slapped on the pee pee a few months ago from a controller for doing just that. I hit the ident when asked and then was asked to "acknowledge their transmission". I said "IDENT *** 293" but didn't hit the ident button again. Was the controller not hugged enough as a child?
Re: Squawk Ident
Imagine that, a controller sticking to the rules and regulations. What an amateur!NAT2 wrote:I got slapped on the pee pee a few months ago from a controller for doing just that. I hit the ident when asked and then was asked to "acknowledge their transmission". I said "IDENT *** 293" but didn't hit the ident button again. Was the controller not hugged enough as a child?
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Re: Squawk Ident
digits_ wrote:Imagine that, a controller sticking to the rules and regulations. What an amateur!NAT2 wrote:I got slapped on the pee pee a few months ago from a controller for doing just that. I hit the ident when asked and then was asked to "acknowledge their transmission". I said "IDENT *** 293" but didn't hit the ident button again. Was the controller not hugged enough as a child?

Re: Squawk Ident
Thanks, Hydro, 6 of one and half dozen of the other essentially.hydro wrote:I have no preference if you say "Identing", and/or "Passing through 5,700", or say nothing at all and just press the button. If you say the altitude, it saves me a couple words. If you don't, you save a couple words and I say the altitude.
Re: Squawk Ident
I don't understand why you'd get slapped for that. They ask you to IDENT, you hit the button. Either they got the IDENT on their scope, in which case you've clearly received their instruction and responded to it, or they didn't, in which case you can start talking again and try to determine whose equipment didn't work right.
CAR's require acknowledgement of instructions. They don't require verbal acknowledgement of instructions.
CAR's require acknowledgement of instructions. They don't require verbal acknowledgement of instructions.
Re: Squawk Ident
As an IFR controller this is the way I see it, I may be wrong. I never expect a verbal confirmation of an instruction to ident...I want the ident. I'm not sure of the "rules" for us in this case but I have never heard a controller chew out a pilot because of this. Anyways controllers should never chew out anyone on the freq anyways but that's another story.AirFrame wrote:I don't understand why you'd get slapped for that. They ask you to IDENT, you hit the button. Either they got the IDENT on their scope, in which case you've clearly received their instruction and responded to it, or they didn't, in which case you can start talking again and try to determine whose equipment didn't work right.
CAR's require acknowledgement of instructions. They don't require verbal acknowledgement of instructions.
Last edited by Braun on Fri Aug 12, 2016 9:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Squawk Ident
Thanks Braun, so no preference upon hearing the alt initially though? If not I'll just carry on as I have been.Braun wrote: As an IFR controlle this is the way I see it, I may be wrong. I never expect a verbal confirmation of an instruction to ident...I want the ident.
Cheers
Re: Squawk Ident
If you are instructed to climb, do you just climb or do you read back the instruction as well?AirFrame wrote:CAR's require acknowledgement of instructions. They don't require verbal acknowledgement of instructions.
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Re: Squawk Ident
The difference with climbing is that it takes a while for your altitude to actually change, whereas with ident it appears immediately (along with your callsign, I assume). So if the controllers already have your flashing callsign on their screen, what possible reason would there be to say anything?digits_ wrote:If you are instructed to climb, do you just climb or do you read back the instruction as well?AirFrame wrote:CAR's require acknowledgement of instructions. They don't require verbal acknowledgement of instructions.
Re: Squawk Ident
I'd definitely prefer to have the altitude, that way I don't have to ask you after. As to what is mandatory I don't know, it's one of those things that you do for so long a certain way that you sort of forget why.DanWEC wrote:Thanks Braun, so no preference upon hearing the alt initially though? If not I'll just carry on as I have been.Braun wrote: As an IFR controlle this is the way I see it, I may be wrong. I never expect a verbal confirmation of an instruction to ident...I want the ident.
Cheers
Re: Squawk Ident
If we are going to quote CAR's we need to quote the whole paragraph
602.31 (1) Subject to subsection (3), the pilot-in command of an aircraft shall
(a) comply with and acknowledge, to the appropriate air traffic control unit, all of the air traffic control instructions directed to and received by the pilot-in-command; and
(b) comply with all of the air traffic control clearances received and accepted by the pilot-in-command and
(i) subject to subsection (2), in the case of an IFR flight, read back to the appropriate air traffic control unit the text of any air traffic control clearance received, and
(ii) in the case of a VFR flight, read back to the appropriate air traffic control unit the text of any air traffic control clearance received, when so requested by the air traffic control unit.
602.31 (1) Subject to subsection (3), the pilot-in command of an aircraft shall
(a) comply with and acknowledge, to the appropriate air traffic control unit, all of the air traffic control instructions directed to and received by the pilot-in-command; and
(b) comply with all of the air traffic control clearances received and accepted by the pilot-in-command and
(i) subject to subsection (2), in the case of an IFR flight, read back to the appropriate air traffic control unit the text of any air traffic control clearance received, and
(ii) in the case of a VFR flight, read back to the appropriate air traffic control unit the text of any air traffic control clearance received, when so requested by the air traffic control unit.
Re: Squawk Ident
They should see it fairly quickly if you are climbing. it will take a while to get your final altitude, but a 100 - 200 ft difference should be fairly quickly to spot.CpnCrunch wrote: The difference with climbing is that it takes a while for your altitude to actually change, whereas with ident it appears immediately (along with your callsign, I assume). So if the controllers already have your flashing callsign on their screen, what possible reason would there be to say anything?
The reason to say anything would be to make sure that the person identing is the person they are actually talking to. And because you have to.
One could ask himself if pressing the ident button is a means of acknowleding an instruction, why not press it if you are cleared to climb as well?
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-
- Rank 7
- Posts: 578
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 8:32 am
- Location: CFX2
- Contact:
Re: Squawk Ident
I was taught the only way to respond to a squawk ident was by pushing the ident button.
I have never been criticised for doing it that way.
ATC always returns with Identified through ... (In a 150 you are just about always climbing. ......slowly
I have had to talk with ATC after a transponder failure, and I assured them I was at 5500' (Calgary). Only later when getting the transponder fixed was the altimeter tested an found to have a 300-500' error at 5000'
Hey ATC "discusses" lots of things with me, I don't need to add to the subject list
LF
I have never been criticised for doing it that way.
ATC always returns with Identified through ... (In a 150 you are just about always climbing. ......slowly

I have had to talk with ATC after a transponder failure, and I assured them I was at 5500' (Calgary). Only later when getting the transponder fixed was the altimeter tested an found to have a 300-500' error at 5000'

Hey ATC "discusses" lots of things with me, I don't need to add to the subject list

LF
Women and planes have alot in common
Both are expensive, loud, and noisy.
However, when handled properly both respond well and provide great pleasure
Both are expensive, loud, and noisy.
However, when handled properly both respond well and provide great pleasure
Re: Squawk Ident
It's one thing to argue whether a read back is required with CARS or MATS(manops). To say that starting a climb, or pressing a button without a full readback is comparable to pressing Ident without a verbal readback is a poor comparison.digits_ wrote:
One could ask himself if pressing the ident button is a means of acknowleding an instruction, why not press it if you are cleared to climb as well?
With a climb, it's not just the act of climbing but what altitude you will stop climbing. You need verbal or electronic confirmation. In an IFR environment seeing a target on a discrete transponder code identing after being asked (without a verbal read back) is clearly different. Acknowledgment and performing the instructed task (Identing) is done without confusion.
If you interpret a flash on screen as an electronic confirmation, then there's an answer for no verbal read back required.
A VFR control zone with multiple 1200 codes, may be different.
Re: Squawk Ident
But your callsign appears with the ident (assuming you are squawking the correct code). So ATC can immediately see whether or not the correct person is identing, unless my understanding of the system is incorrect.digits_ wrote: The reason to say anything would be to make sure that the person identing is the person they are actually talking to. And because you have to.
Re: Squawk Ident
I don't recall reading anywhere that a flashing ident is in anyway equivalent to or can be used in place of a verbal acknowledgement of an instruction from ATC. Except in the case of a radio failure, when ATC may ask you to acknowledge an instruction by "squawk ident." I do however recall reading instructions NOT to squawk ident as a means of acknowledging an instruction.
Therefore I can't see why the squawk ident should suddenly, uniquely, and without reference be adequate to serve as the acknowledgement of its own instruction.
On the other hand it would be stupid to ignore the fact that people do lots of things that don't follow the rules, and that sometimes ATCOs like it when people don't follow the rules, and sometimes people don't know they're not following the rules, think the rules are best when not followed, or that their different-from-the-rule-but-I've-always-done-it-that-way rules are the best.
Therefore I can't see why the squawk ident should suddenly, uniquely, and without reference be adequate to serve as the acknowledgement of its own instruction.
On the other hand it would be stupid to ignore the fact that people do lots of things that don't follow the rules, and that sometimes ATCOs like it when people don't follow the rules, and sometimes people don't know they're not following the rules, think the rules are best when not followed, or that their different-from-the-rule-but-I've-always-done-it-that-way rules are the best.
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.