Originally Posted by 250 kts
Maybe it is time to put pressure on to get the AIP amended.
250 kts, I don't think that is necessary. Further to my post above, referring to the CAA Safety Leaflet -
RTF DISCIPLINE - ADVICE TO PILOTS, I have now found an appropriate reference in MATS Part 1, at Section 1, Chapter 4, Page 4, which reads as follows:
7 Amendments to Clearances
7.1 When an amendment is made to a clearance the new clearance shall be read in full to the pilot and shall automatically cancel any previous clearance. Controllers must be aware, therefore, that if the original clearance included a restriction, e.g. 'cross ABC FL 150 or below' then the issue of a revised clearance automatically cancels the earlier restriction, unless it is reiterated with the revised clearance.
7.2 Similar care must be exercised when a controller issues a clearance, which amends the route or vertical profile of an aircraft on a standard instrument departure (SID). For example, 'Climb FL 120' automatically cancels the vertical profile of the SID. If the profile contains a restriction which provides vertical separation from conflicting traffic on another SID route, the restriction must be reiterated, e.g. 'climb FL120 cross XYZ 5000 feet or above', unless separation is ensured by other means.
7.3 Similarly, when controllers issue instructions, which amend the SID route, they are to confirm the level profile to be followed e.g. 'fly heading 095 degrees, climb FL 80' or 'route direct to EFG, stop climb at altitude 5000 feet'.
Originally Posted by DTY/LKS
I am saying that because the aircraft is being transferred between sectors, the receiving ATCO believes the pilot is complying with the standing agreement issued by the previous ATCO and then he gives his own clearance of FL??? In real life the restriction given by the previous ATCO is never mentioned as it is expected that the pilot is complying with it.
I hesitate to disagree with you,
DTY/LKS (as I guess this is your Validation), but I think in view of the above reference from your "Bible", MATS Part 1, you must be incorrect. I cannot find anywhere that says that, on change of frequency/controller, any previous restriction must be adhered to on re-clearance. Surely paragraph 7 above must be definitive, unless decreed otherwise elsewhere in CAP 493?
Surely the answer is that, on handover, the pilot will clearly be expected to continue to comply with the clearance given by the previous Sector; however, in the event of further amendments to his clearance by the second Sector, Paragraph 7 (above) MUST apply.
JD
