相关题目
Read-back requirements have been introduced in the interests of flight safety. The importance of the read-back requirement is directly related to the possible seriousness of misunderstanding. Strict read-back procedures make sure that the clearance or instruction has been received and understood correctly by the correct aircraft. The flight crew shall read back to the air traffic controller safety-related parts of ATC clearances and instructions that are transmitted by voice. The Air Traffic Controller is responsible for checking the completeness and accuracy for the read back. The following items shall always be read back: a. ATC route clearances. b. Clearances and instructions to enter, land on, take off on, hold short of, cross and backtrack on any runway. c. Runway in use, altimeter settings, SSR codes, level instructions, heading and speed instructions and, whether issued by the controller or contained in ATIS broadcast, transition level. d. Other clearances, including conditional clearances, shall be read back or acknowledged in a manner to clearly indicate that they have been understood and will be complied with. An aircraft must include its call sign in the readback, and a failure to do this shall be challenged by the controller. TAXI INSTRUCTIONS When a taxi clearance contains a taxi limit beyond a runway, it shall contain a stated clearance to cross the runway, or a stated instruction to hold short, even if the runway is not in use. Communication with any aircraft using the runway for the purpose of taxiing should be transferred from the ground controller to the aerodrome controller before the aircraft enters or crosses the runway. For more complicated taxi instructions, it may be appropriate to divide the message into segments, placing the clearances and instructions in sequential order, to avoid the possibility of pilot misunderstanding.5. What shall be contained in a controller’s clearance when a taxi clearance contains a taxi limit beyond a runway?
Read-back requirements have been introduced in the interests of flight safety. The importance of the read-back requirement is directly related to the possible seriousness of misunderstanding. Strict read-back procedures make sure that the clearance or instruction has been received and understood correctly by the correct aircraft. The flight crew shall read back to the air traffic controller safety-related parts of ATC clearances and instructions that are transmitted by voice. The Air Traffic Controller is responsible for checking the completeness and accuracy for the read back. The following items shall always be read back: a. ATC route clearances. b. Clearances and instructions to enter, land on, take off on, hold short of, cross and backtrack on any runway. c. Runway in use, altimeter settings, SSR codes, level instructions, heading and speed instructions and, whether issued by the controller or contained in ATIS broadcast, transition level. d. Other clearances, including conditional clearances, shall be read back or acknowledged in a manner to clearly indicate that they have been understood and will be complied with. An aircraft must include its call sign in the readback, and a failure to do this shall be challenged by the controller. TAXI INSTRUCTIONS When a taxi clearance contains a taxi limit beyond a runway, it shall contain a stated clearance to cross the runway, or a stated instruction to hold short, even if the runway is not in use. Communication with any aircraft using the runway for the purpose of taxiing should be transferred from the ground controller to the aerodrome controller before the aircraft enters or crosses the runway. For more complicated taxi instructions, it may be appropriate to divide the message into segments, placing the clearances and instructions in sequential order, to avoid the possibility of pilot misunderstanding.4. What item is not included in the readback requirement?
Read-back requirements have been introduced in the interests of flight safety. The importance of the read-back requirement is directly related to the possible seriousness of misunderstanding. Strict read-back procedures make sure that the clearance or instruction has been received and understood correctly by the correct aircraft. The flight crew shall read back to the air traffic controller safety-related parts of ATC clearances and instructions that are transmitted by voice. The Air Traffic Controller is responsible for checking the completeness and accuracy for the read back. The following items shall always be read back: a. ATC route clearances. b. Clearances and instructions to enter, land on, take off on, hold short of, cross and backtrack on any runway. c. Runway in use, altimeter settings, SSR codes, level instructions, heading and speed instructions and, whether issued by the controller or contained in ATIS broadcast, transition level. d. Other clearances, including conditional clearances, shall be read back or acknowledged in a manner to clearly indicate that they have been understood and will be complied with. An aircraft must include its call sign in the readback, and a failure to do this shall be challenged by the controller. TAXI INSTRUCTIONS When a taxi clearance contains a taxi limit beyond a runway, it shall contain a stated clearance to cross the runway, or a stated instruction to hold short, even if the runway is not in use. Communication with any aircraft using the runway for the purpose of taxiing should be transferred from the ground controller to the aerodrome controller before the aircraft enters or crosses the runway. For more complicated taxi instructions, it may be appropriate to divide the message into segments, placing the clearances and instructions in sequential order, to avoid the possibility of pilot misunderstanding.3. Who shall listen to the pilot’s read-back to ascertain that the clearance or instruction has been correctly acknowledged by the flight crew?
Read-back requirements have been introduced in the interests of flight safety. The importance of the read-back requirement is directly related to the possible seriousness of misunderstanding. Strict read-back procedures make sure that the clearance or instruction has been received and understood correctly by the correct aircraft. The flight crew shall read back to the air traffic controller safety-related parts of ATC clearances and instructions that are transmitted by voice. The Air Traffic Controller is responsible for checking the completeness and accuracy for the read back. The following items shall always be read back: a. ATC route clearances. b. Clearances and instructions to enter, land on, take off on, hold short of, cross and backtrack on any runway. c. Runway in use, altimeter settings, SSR codes, level instructions, heading and speed instructions and, whether issued by the controller or contained in ATIS broadcast, transition level. d. Other clearances, including conditional clearances, shall be read back or acknowledged in a manner to clearly indicate that they have been understood and will be complied with. An aircraft must include its call sign in the readback, and a failure to do this shall be challenged by the controller. TAXI INSTRUCTIONS When a taxi clearance contains a taxi limit beyond a runway, it shall contain a stated clearance to cross the runway, or a stated instruction to hold short, even if the runway is not in use. Communication with any aircraft using the runway for the purpose of taxiing should be transferred from the ground controller to the aerodrome controller before the aircraft enters or crosses the runway. For more complicated taxi instructions, it may be appropriate to divide the message into segments, placing the clearances and instructions in sequential order, to avoid the possibility of pilot misunderstanding.2. Strict read-back procedures make sure that（ ）.
Read-back requirements have been introduced in the interests of flight safety. The importance of the read-back requirement is directly related to the possible seriousness of misunderstanding. Strict read-back procedures make sure that the clearance or instruction has been received and understood correctly by the correct aircraft. The flight crew shall read back to the air traffic controller safety-related parts of ATC clearances and instructions that are transmitted by voice. The Air Traffic Controller is responsible for checking the completeness and accuracy for the read back. The following items shall always be read back: a. ATC route clearances. b. Clearances and instructions to enter, land on, take off on, hold short of, cross and backtrack on any runway. c. Runway in use, altimeter settings, SSR codes, level instructions, heading and speed instructions and, whether issued by the controller or contained in ATIS broadcast, transition level. d. Other clearances, including conditional clearances, shall be read back or acknowledged in a manner to clearly indicate that they have been understood and will be complied with. An aircraft must include its call sign in the readback, and a failure to do this shall be challenged by the controller. TAXI INSTRUCTIONS When a taxi clearance contains a taxi limit beyond a runway, it shall contain a stated clearance to cross the runway, or a stated instruction to hold short, even if the runway is not in use. Communication with any aircraft using the runway for the purpose of taxiing should be transferred from the ground controller to the aerodrome controller before the aircraft enters or crosses the runway. For more complicated taxi instructions, it may be appropriate to divide the message into segments, placing the clearances and instructions in sequential order, to avoid the possibility of pilot misunderstanding.1. For what purpose has the readback requirement been introduced?
A recent Eurocontrol study determined that Europe averages about one runway incursion a day and one potentially very serious runway incursion every 14 days. An FAA study of data from 1997 to 2001 showed similar numbers for the United States. Many organizations believe that the problem of runway incursions must be attacked or it is bound to increase with an increase in world aviation activity. In fact, the number of reported incursions has been increasing at a faster rate than the number of flights worldwide has been increasing. One study group determined that a 20 percent increase in aircraft operating at a particular airport produced a 140 percent increase in the possibility of runway incursions. Other studies have used mathematical models which predict a big increase in the potential for runway incursions in the next twenty years. Some Statistics EuroControl Statistical Reference Area (ERSA) has the following data for the number of runway incursions per million flights: ? 1998 – 3 incursions per million flights ? 1999 – 6 incursions per million flights ? 2000 – 10 incursions per million flights ? 2001 – 23 incursions per million flights ? 2002 – 21 incursions per million flights ? 2003 – 40 incursions per million flights Several organizations , including the FAA and EuroControl, had similar data on the major cause of reported runway incursions: ? Pilot Error was determined to be the cause in 51 percent of all reported runway incursions. ? Vehicle or Pedestrian Error was determined to be the cause in 29 percent of reported incursions. ? Controller Error was determined to be the cause in 20 percent of reported incursions.EuroControl also classified several years of runway incursion reports according to seriousness. Their data was similar to FAA data using a similar classification: ? About 31% of reported incursions were classified as having No Risk. ? Another 34% were classified as having Some Risk . ? And 30% were classified as having Significant Risk. That totals 95%. ? The other 5% of reported Incursions were classified as being Extremely Hazardous. We will be coming back to look more carefully at some of this data later in the module. And we will look in great detail at most of the causal factors and at some real world.5. How many levels of runway incursions are there in terms of seriousness?
A recent Eurocontrol study determined that Europe averages about one runway incursion a day and one potentially very serious runway incursion every 14 days. An FAA study of data from 1997 to 2001 showed similar numbers for the United States. Many organizations believe that the problem of runway incursions must be attacked or it is bound to increase with an increase in world aviation activity. In fact, the number of reported incursions has been increasing at a faster rate than the number of flights worldwide has been increasing. One study group determined that a 20 percent increase in aircraft operating at a particular airport produced a 140 percent increase in the possibility of runway incursions. Other studies have used mathematical models which predict a big increase in the potential for runway incursions in the next twenty years. Some Statistics EuroControl Statistical Reference Area (ERSA) has the following data for the number of runway incursions per million flights: ? 1998 – 3 incursions per million flights ? 1999 – 6 incursions per million flights ? 2000 – 10 incursions per million flights ? 2001 – 23 incursions per million flights ? 2002 – 21 incursions per million flights ? 2003 – 40 incursions per million flights Several organizations , including the FAA and EuroControl, had similar data on the major cause of reported runway incursions: ? Pilot Error was determined to be the cause in 51 percent of all reported runway incursions. ? Vehicle or Pedestrian Error was determined to be the cause in 29 percent of reported incursions. ? Controller Error was determined to be the cause in 20 percent of reported incursions.EuroControl also classified several years of runway incursion reports according to seriousness. Their data was similar to FAA data using a similar classification: ? About 31% of reported incursions were classified as having No Risk. ? Another 34% were classified as having Some Risk . ? And 30% were classified as having Significant Risk. That totals 95%. ? The other 5% of reported Incursions were classified as being Extremely Hazardous. We will be coming back to look more carefully at some of this data later in the module. And we will look in great detail at most of the causal factors and at some real world.4. Who should be responsible for the runway incursion according to the passage?
A recent Eurocontrol study determined that Europe averages about one runway incursion a day and one potentially very serious runway incursion every 14 days. An FAA study of data from 1997 to 2001 showed similar numbers for the United States. Many organizations believe that the problem of runway incursions must be attacked or it is bound to increase with an increase in world aviation activity. In fact, the number of reported incursions has been increasing at a faster rate than the number of flights worldwide has been increasing. One study group determined that a 20 percent increase in aircraft operating at a particular airport produced a 140 percent increase in the possibility of runway incursions. Other studies have used mathematical models which predict a big increase in the potential for runway incursions in the next twenty years. Some Statistics EuroControl Statistical Reference Area (ERSA) has the following data for the number of runway incursions per million flights: ? 1998 – 3 incursions per million flights ? 1999 – 6 incursions per million flights ? 2000 – 10 incursions per million flights ? 2001 – 23 incursions per million flights ? 2002 – 21 incursions per million flights ? 2003 – 40 incursions per million flights Several organizations , including the FAA and EuroControl, had similar data on the major cause of reported runway incursions: ? Pilot Error was determined to be the cause in 51 percent of all reported runway incursions. ? Vehicle or Pedestrian Error was determined to be the cause in 29 percent of reported incursions. ? Controller Error was determined to be the cause in 20 percent of reported incursions.EuroControl also classified several years of runway incursion reports according to seriousness. Their data was similar to FAA data using a similar classification: ? About 31% of reported incursions were classified as having No Risk. ? Another 34% were classified as having Some Risk . ? And 30% were classified as having Significant Risk. That totals 95%. ? The other 5% of reported Incursions were classified as being Extremely Hazardous. We will be coming back to look more carefully at some of this data later in the module. And we will look in great detail at most of the causal factors and at some real world.3. What is the average number of runway incursions per million flights from 1998 to 2003 according to EuroControl Statistical Reference Area’s data.
A recent Eurocontrol study determined that Europe averages about one runway incursion a day and one potentially very serious runway incursion every 14 days. An FAA study of data from 1997 to 2001 showed similar numbers for the United States. Many organizations believe that the problem of runway incursions must be attacked or it is bound to increase with an increase in world aviation activity. In fact, the number of reported incursions has been increasing at a faster rate than the number of flights worldwide has been increasing. One study group determined that a 20 percent increase in aircraft operating at a particular airport produced a 140 percent increase in the possibility of runway incursions. Other studies have used mathematical models which predict a big increase in the potential for runway incursions in the next twenty years. Some Statistics EuroControl Statistical Reference Area (ERSA) has the following data for the number of runway incursions per million flights: ? 1998 – 3 incursions per million flights ? 1999 – 6 incursions per million flights ? 2000 – 10 incursions per million flights ? 2001 – 23 incursions per million flights ? 2002 – 21 incursions per million flights ? 2003 – 40 incursions per million flights Several organizations , including the FAA and EuroControl, had similar data on the major cause of reported runway incursions: ? Pilot Error was determined to be the cause in 51 percent of all reported runway incursions. ? Vehicle or Pedestrian Error was determined to be the cause in 29 percent of reported incursions. ? Controller Error was determined to be the cause in 20 percent of reported incursions.EuroControl also classified several years of runway incursion reports according to seriousness. Their data was similar to FAA data using a similar classification: ? About 31% of reported incursions were classified as having No Risk. ? Another 34% were classified as having Some Risk . ? And 30% were classified as having Significant Risk. That totals 95%. ? The other 5% of reported Incursions were classified as being Extremely Hazardous. We will be coming back to look more carefully at some of this data later in the module. And we will look in great detail at most of the causal factors and at some real world.2. The number of reported incursions has been increasing at a （ ）rate than the number of flights worldwide.
A recent Eurocontrol study determined that Europe averages about one runway incursion a day and one potentially very serious runway incursion every 14 days. An FAA study of data from 1997 to 2001 showed similar numbers for the United States. Many organizations believe that the problem of runway incursions must be attacked or it is bound to increase with an increase in world aviation activity. In fact, the number of reported incursions has been increasing at a faster rate than the number of flights worldwide has been increasing. One study group determined that a 20 percent increase in aircraft operating at a particular airport produced a 140 percent increase in the possibility of runway incursions. Other studies have used mathematical models which predict a big increase in the potential for runway incursions in the next twenty years. Some Statistics EuroControl Statistical Reference Area (ERSA) has the following data for the number of runway incursions per million flights: ? 1998 – 3 incursions per million flights ? 1999 – 6 incursions per million flights ? 2000 – 10 incursions per million flights ? 2001 – 23 incursions per million flights ? 2002 – 21 incursions per million flights ? 2003 – 40 incursions per million flights Several organizations , including the FAA and EuroControl, had similar data on the major cause of reported runway incursions: ? Pilot Error was determined to be the cause in 51 percent of all reported runway incursions. ? Vehicle or Pedestrian Error was determined to be the cause in 29 percent of reported incursions. ? Controller Error was determined to be the cause in 20 percent of reported incursions.EuroControl also classified several years of runway incursion reports according to seriousness. Their data was similar to FAA data using a similar classification: ? About 31% of reported incursions were classified as having No Risk. ? Another 34% were classified as having Some Risk . ? And 30% were classified as having Significant Risk. That totals 95%. ? The other 5% of reported Incursions were classified as being Extremely Hazardous. We will be coming back to look more carefully at some of this data later in the module. And we will look in great detail at most of the causal factors and at some real world.1. One potentially very serious runway incursion happened everydays according to a recent Eurocontrol study.
