Not above/below XXXXft?

[Capt. Manuvar]

I'm a bit confused by the phrase
"G-**** cleared to transit my zone not above/below XXXXft"
If i'm cleared to transit not above a particular altitude, do i stick that altitude or am i allowed to fly at a lower altitude?
If i have to stick to that altitude, why don't controllers just use something like
"G-**** cleared to transit my zone AT XXXXft" or "maintain XXXXft"
Thanks
Capt. Manuvar

[left outer, right inner]

Hi

The reason that you are not cleared AT a specified level is for the fact that you are VFR and so therefore maywell mot be able to comply with that instruction all the time. Therefore it is easier to say 'GABCD cleared to transit the zone not above alt xxxx QNH' That means you can fly whatever level you want up to that level and subject to the usual legal restrictions.
The reason most probably is to protect IFR departures or arrivals above you.

Maybe a radar guy can give you a better more comprehensive answer.

Hope that helps

LORI

[Turn It Off]

Hi there!

LORI, what you have said seems correct.

It is the responsibility of a Pilor flying VFR to maintain his own terrain clearance, and to remain in VMC, 1000ft vertical 5kms etc etc. If ATC were to specify an altitude or flight level to fly AT, then this may put the pilot in a difficult position. Does he either disregard the atc clearance to avoid cloud or fly into cloud and breach the rules of his license.

To get around this ATC will issue an upper limit based on either a height, Altitude or flight level.

By placing a height restriction eg. Not above altitude 2000ft QNH then a radar controller can vector aircraft on top of them to 3000 ft QNH and maintain vertical seperation.

Whilst in some airspace IFR and VFR do not have to be seperated purely traffic information passed, i am sure that the pilot of a large aircraft doing upto 250 knots and trying to brief for landing etc does not want to be looking out of the window for a light aircraft (!) therefore, controllers will build in the seperation where necessary.

Hope that helps!

Turn It Off

[Jerricho]

A "not above" height restriction can also be used to ensure compliance with airspace, for instance a Class D zone below Class A airspace.

[DJ Mixmaster]

"Whilst in some airspace IFR and VFR do not have to be seperated purely traffic information passed,"

Hold yer horses there boy. Separation in uncontrolled airspace is not provided by ATC, but is nevertheless a requirement and is the responsibility of the PICs.

[360BakTrak]

Seperation in uncontrolled airspace IS provided by the controller between IFR flights participating in an approach control service....or did you mean between IFR and VFR flights?...in which case no.
Wasnt sure if you were giving a specific reply to Turn It Off or quoting from 'the book'?!:confused:

[BOOKLADY]

....participating in an approach control service..

Standard vertical or horizontal separation shall be provided, unless otherwise specified, between:

g) IFR flights in Class G airspace being provided with a service by an approach control unit

Couldn't just leave it alone, could i, it's any service from an approach control unit, which drags us back into the freecalls thread and, oh no, we'll be back to night flying soon.....:(

[Spitoon]

Just to help with the Capt's original question - it may be helpful to explain another technique that may be used by controllers.

If a VFR aircraft calls for transit of a piece of airspace the controller ight ask if the pilot can accept a clearance at X000 feet. What this probably means is the controller would like the aircraft to stay at this level but can't really say this. If the pilot says yes the clearance will probably include an instruction to advise the controller if the pilot needs to deviate from this level. The number one rule for the pilot is to maintain VMC - don't be afraid to tell ATC that you need to climb or descend to stay in wx conditions that you are confortable with.

Different units tend to favour different techniques so you'll hear different clearances.

On the point of separation, ATC are only required to provide standard separation between a VFR flight and other aircraft in Class B or C airspace (VFR is not permitted in Class A). In other classes of airspace you'll be given traffic info on other flights. Some units will issue clearances that keep VFR aircraft apart from others but that's not the same as standard separation - again, different units have their own way of working. Rule number 2 is that pilots of VFR flights remain responsible for keeping a lookout for other traffic and for following the rules for avoiding collisions whatever the airspace and air traffic service that the aircraft may be receiving.

[tonup]

Booklady

I agree that the book says

Standard vertical or horizontal separation shall be provided, unless otherwise specified, between:


g) IFR flights in Class G airspace being provided with a service by an approach control unit

However

I am intrested to know how given 2 aircraft on your frequency, operating 50+ miles from your aerodrome, neither able to communicate with any other agency, neither flight originating or terminating at your aerodrome, and both requesting a FIS from a procedural approach unit, you can provide any seperation in this instance given that you are not issuing nor able to issue possitive instruction.

[gets off hobby horse]



:D :D

[goddammit]

tonup

I am wlling to recognise that very situation occurs regularly throughout the UK, exceptnot issuing nor able to issue positive instruction


mats1, section3, cahpter1 page2,
1.4.2 ...provide an air traffic control service accordingly

Anyway, back to your main twitter.
Mats1, section3, chapter 1, page 1

1.4.1 ...as determined by the aerodrome operator and approved by the CAA....

So it for the provider to make provision or the ATCO does it by 'the book'.
Are you suggesting that ATCOs just ignore those parts of the Manual that are hard to comply with? Does that include all separation when it gets busy? What other parts have you personally opted out of, and have you notified anybody?

The book is NOT perfect, but its what one will be judged against should things go wrong, in the absence relevant unit instructions. So it is to the benefit of individuals to seek provision from the ATS provider, or for all concerned to get the part 1 made workable.

[BOOKLADY]

Point made for me:ok:

rodan - is being an ATCO just a HOBBY for you???:eek:

[DFC]

Spitoon,

The pilots of all flights are required to keep a lookout. That is regardless of what flight rules they operate under.

The rules for avoiding collisions (give way rules) also apply to all flights.

Thus a VFR flight and IFR flight on a collision course means that the pilots of both aircraft are required to comply with the requirement to look out and comply with the rules of the air for avoiding collisions.

That is another reason why controllers tend to add in some separation in class D between VFR and IFR flights.........it can get a bit embarrasing if we as an IFR flight turn towards another IFR flight in order to avoid (give way to) a VFR flight.

Of course when we are in cloud, there can't be any VFRs in there with us can there? ;)

When operating into an aerodrome outside controlled airspace, we considder all instructions to be advisiory even if procedural service because being told to descend to an altitude may not be a good idea if there is an aircraft unknown to the controller below. Thus we will do what we are told whenever possible but may need to do otherwise.

Regards,

DFC

[rodan]

Booklady:
Point made for me

rodan - is being an ATCO just a HOBBY for you???

Um..... hello. Was it perhaps tonup you were addressing your disparaging remarks to?

[360BakTrak]

DFC....there may not be any VFR's in cloud with you but what about an IFR in class G who wisely decides to not talk to anybody?!

I'm surprised Chilli Monster hasn't chipped in yet!! Still time yet I suppose...........:}

[Chilli Monster]

I'm just amazed all ths has come from a simple question:
I'm a bit confused by the phrase
"G-**** cleared to transit my zone not above/below XXXXft"
If i'm cleared to transit not above a particular altitude, do i stick that altitude or am i allowed to fly at a lower altitude? It's not ambiguous, it means what it says, and yet someone still asks what it means?

Can I suggest night school, GCSE English Language ;)

(And no - don't start me on IMC/VMC flights outside of CAS with no mode 'C' against which I have to take avoiding action because the bastard hasn't called me - even at the 3 mile point on the ILS because "It's outside the ATZ - I don't have to" :* )

[360BakTrak]

Didn't think it would take long Chilli Monster!;)
Funny how far from the original question a thread can get! :}

[BOOKLADY]

Um..... hello. Was it perhaps tonup you were addressing your disparaging remarks to?

oops, sorry, sorry.......sorry rodan, just when we'd started to agree on things:\

[Bern Oulli]

Tonup. At the risk of muddying already murky waters you said

I am intrested to know how given 2 aircraft on your frequency, operating 50+ miles from your aerodrome, neither able to communicate with any other agency, neither flight originating or terminating at your aerodrome, and both requesting a FIS from a procedural approach unit, you can provide any seperation in this instance.......

1. Any aircraft requesting and receiving a FIS will get just that - a Flight Information Service e.g. Regional Pressure Setting, vague knowledge of traffic that may be in the area and perhaps the latest cricket score. There sure as hell ain't gonna be any form of separation.

2. Even if it were a radar unit you would get as above. No ident, nothing more.

So, the short answer to the question is.....you can't.

[BOOKLADY]

Now i know how the nodding dog on the car insurance advert feels!:mad:

[goddammit]

Booklady, calm down, Bern Oulli must be an old instructor. Hopefully the students will read the manual, and thus see through his poor guidance. If they don't, well perhaps they'll all pass, work in CAS and never need to appreciate the nuances of ATSOCA.

[Tower Ranger]

Gdit n B`lady reading the manual may be good for passing exams don`t tell me you`re both gonna start separating anything in class G airspace on a FIS?? Best of luck with that!!

[goddammit]

Gdit n B`lady reading the manual may be good for passing exams

And doing the job correctly, and staying away from srg and legal branch!!

is your local SRG office aware you consider the manual optional? If so then i would prefer to work in your srg region, cos i'm :mad: sure i'm not allowed to opt out !

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

goddammit, surely you're not suggesting that different SRG regions have a different interpretation of the rules? ;) ;)

[tonup]

My original point was that MATS 1 contains conflicting instruction.

Section 1, Chapter 1, Page 2, para 5.1 (c) Flight Information Service "Controllers are not responsible for seperating or sequencing aircraft."

Section 1, Chapter 3, Page 1, Provision of Standard Separation "Standard separation shall be provided, unless otherwise specified, between:......................IFR flights in Class G airspace being provided with a service by an approach control unit"

If providing a FIS which of the above applies. You can't do both.



:confused:

[BOOKLADY]

tonup

The MATS does contain many conflictions. It has been that way for years. It wasn't such a problem in the old days, but we now live in a blame culture. If something were to go wrong some lawyer type, possibly with little aviation experience, will look to lay blame, a process that might start by examining the relevant standardsand procedures - essentially MATS1 and MATS2. Thus it is essential for the 'protection' of the individual that one is provided with workable standards and procedures, where one identifies a discrepancy then provision from ats provider (or someone higher!!) should be sought.
At present there seems to be a lack of an adequate process to rectify the MATS1.

As for those troublesome IFR customers outside CAS :
Section 1, Chapter 1, Page 2, para 5 provides general guidance on the provision of a FIS. This is guidance for all those providing a FIS.
Section 1, Chapter 3, Page 1 provides more specific direction for an approach control unit.

(Section3, chapter1 page1, para 1 details the services an approach control unit shall provide, i.e all three, but this was already explored in some detail in the recent 'freecallers' thread. )

I don't have an answer for how you're supposed to separate them all, but the fact remains the requirement is to do so.


Made more workable the MATS1 would be our friend

[Jerricho]

And maybe the latest NATS pay deal will be acceptable to all.

[Turn It Off]

Peeps,

Sorry if I caused some confusion, I was referring to seperation in relation to IFR and VFR flights.

[vfrflyer]

And maybe the latest NATS pay deal will be acceptable to all.

That depends whether your NATS ATCO/ATSA or not,


Acceptable = loads more , to ATCOs & ATSAs in NATS

Acceptable = pay cut, to everyone else

:)

[PPRuNe Radar]

Wrong thread to discuss NATS pay.

Read the title ;)

[normally left blank]

Capt Manuver

Did this answer your question? ;)

[Spitoon]

tonup, I don't really see your problem. The MATS Part 1 reference that you cite (Section 1, Chapter 3, Page 1) says that you have to separate IFR flights that are participating in the approach control service (from each other) that you are providing.

Are you saying that you have separate them from everything else?