Vacated Level Reports

[Uncommon Sense]

Don't you just hate the way things sneak in to the documents?

Can someone point me to the AIP ref (or JEPPS AU section) about now having to report vacated levels on ATC frequency transfer?

I got asked about it today and I have no idea what it is about (or why it has been introduced).

It does explain why I keep getting told vacated levels all of a sudden when I didn't really need to know - at least I didn't think I did.....

Apparently it could be so I don't get confused - newsflash - it
didn't work.

EDIT: I found it: AIP ENR 10.3.6 . But I still don't get why!?

The question I actually got asked is: What is the last vacated level? (i.e. - is it the vacated assigned level or the actual level passing on descent). My common sense would say the only useful information to me is the level you are zooming through now. But hey, I don't get it in the first place so who asked me?!

[I admit this may be useful in a non-radar environment]

[email protected]

http://****sutonka.port5.com/watchtn.jpg4tw (http://fourthtermwatch.********.com)

[Grog Frog]

Was snuck in around 25/09/04 Jepp ammend

[schnauzer]

Yup, noticed it too. We had a few QF pilots complying with it for a while, but it just seemed to fade away. You could just about see the question marks above the controllers heads when they replied. "Why did they say that?"

You gotta wonder why it's there...

[Kaptin M]

The last vacated level? IMO, it's the either (a) the last level you had been assigned and were maintaining, or (b) the level through which you were passing when you made initial contact on the new frequency following frequency change.
AIP ENR 10.3.6 (http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/publications/current/aip/enr/111110.pdf) is here, and reads as follows,
After any frequency change, pilots must advise the last assigned level, and if not maintaining the assigned level, the level maintaining or the last vacated level eg, “MELBOURNE CENTRE (CALLSIGN) CLEARED FLIGHT LEVEL TWO ONE ZERO, MAINTAINING FLIGHT LEVEL THREE ONE ZERO”.

However, I believe the "eg" given is a poor example, and would be better written as,
"MEL CENTRE (CALLSIGN) MAINTAINING FL310, CLEARED TO DESCEND TO FL210", and for clarification perhaps another "eg" such as, "MEL CENTRE (CALLSIGN) LEFT (or VACATED) FL310, DESCENDING TO FL210".But I still don't get why!? It allows the new ATC'er to confirm that the info he has received on hand-over from the previous ATC'er is correct ("Handing aircraft XYZ to you, he's cleared to FL210"), and that the aircraft pilot has received and UNDERSTOOD the correct level to which he is cleared.
Checks and cross checks.

(But if it's an American crew, then expect to hear something like, "MEL BORN CENTRE YANKEE 69 CHECKIN' IN AT THREE ONE OH FOR TWENTY-ONE") :ugh:

[Uncommon Sense]

Kaptin M,

Sure, but the assigned level always had to be reported before.

The bit I (and others) am/are asking about is why now the requirement to report of the vacated level.

(BTW: Most handoffs are now 'silent' anyway.)

[Howard Hughes]

Heard this on Melbourne departures many moons ago:

"Melbourne departures, Yankee 1-5, outta ate fer fivvve"

As a young trainee when radio procedures were a little more rigid, I was most disgusted, probably would'nt even batt an eyelid now!!

Cheers, HH.

:ok:

[Ultralights]

“MELBOURNE CENTRE (CALLSIGN) CLEARED FLIGHT LEVEL TWO ONE ZERO, MAINTAINING FLIGHT LEVEL THREE ONE ZERO”.

If i hadn't known the context of this, i would have initially taken to to say "I am cleared to descend to 210, but im going to stay at 310!"

[Uncommon Sense]

According to an 'informed source' it turns out this amendment was indeed supposed to say when not radar identified or receiving a radar service.

Apparently a change has been requested to relfect the intent.

[triadic]

What was wrong with:

"MELB CEN ABC MAINTAINING 310, ASSIGNED 210"

??

The wording seems to be all wrong and does not seem to spell the intent - surprise surprise!!

[Johhny Utah]

Shouldn't that be LEAVING as opposed to LEFT in your example Kaptin M?
:rolleyes:

[2daddies]

The new rule only applies to descent and approach (I think - given that it's only in the "Descent and Approach" section!). What confused me initially was;
- Do you have to say last vacated cruising level - ie FL350, OR;
last vacated level - ie FL 264?

And further, do you have to say it on first contact with approach as well? Or just on centre?

And why descent only?

I've asked BNE Centre on a few occasions and not only were they unaware of the exact change, but they reiterated that all they want is level cleared to or, if maintaining, level assigned as well.

So I just do what I always did.

Methinks CASA is trying to be like ICAO without thinking about the best way to actually describe what they mean.

[Hempy]

as 2daddies says, the problem isn't when you are cruising at one level and assigned another (happens all the time ... "when ready descend to FL210, contact centre on 123.45"), it's when you are already on descent. On frequency change, do you report that you have left FL330 when you are now through FL295? If you are now through FL295 do you say "Left FL300"? Or is it "ML Centre, XYZ left FL 295, FL294, FL293 assignedflightlevel210"?

[international hog driver]

On the dark continent we use “vacating level” calls all the time.

Reasons:

No positive control
Sometimes locally crowed airspace (think relief work) with limited levels available.

Helps:

Lets everybody in a hold stack know where you are and whose next down
Enroute separation.

Hindrances:

People BS’ing on position & time (nahh I hear you say)
Clogged radios.


Overview,

Helps in non controlled environment, other times questionable.

Why?

Preparation for wide area implementation of ADS-B me thinks?
:ok:

[Uncommon Sense]

As I posted above it just sounds like a stuff up, and is being fixed but who knows how long and which AIRAC cycle it will come up in.

Really makes you wonder how stuff like this gets right through to print stage without someone operational getting to say: "WTF?"!

In practical terms (this is just my personal view BTW) , if you are already radar identified and MODE C verified I really don't care what level you are leaving/passing - telling me has no consequence except to use up more comm time.

If I REALLY need to know (i.e. I want a reported level as opposed to a MODE C readout which lets me climb/descend you or someone else quicker) I will ask -

Now if you are [i]really bored this is why:

Verification of Mode C data
2.2.10.2 The accuracy of Mode C derived level information displayed to the controller shall be verified prior to its use, or re-verified in instances where it has not been subjected to continuous monitoring.....
...../

2.2.10.4 Subsequent adjacent radar control positions shall accept that Mode C verification has taken place unless otherwise advised by the transferring controller.

2.2.10.5 The controller should obtain level reports as necessary to verify the Mode C level information.

.../...

Mode C data
2.2.10.9 When vertical separation is determined solely by Mode C data, the readouts shall be continuously monitored for the period necessary to ensure that the appropriate separation standard is not infringed.....

.../...

Determination of level occupancy
2.2.10.13 Verified Mode C derived level information may be used to determine level occupancy as follows:
a. Maintaining a level. An aircraft is considered to be maintaining its assigned level provided that the Mode C derived level information indicates that it is within plus or minus 200 FT of the assigned level;
b. Vacating[/b[ a level. An aircraft cleared to leave a level is considered to have commenced its manoeuvre and vacated the previously occupied level when the Mode C derived level information indicates [b]a change of 400 FT or more in the anticipated direction from its previously assignedlevel;
c. Passing a level in climb or descent. An aircraft in climb or descent is considered to have passed a level when Mode C derived level information indicates that it has passed this level in the required direction by 400 FT or more;
d. Reaching a level. An aircraft is considered to have reached the level to which it has been cleared when three consecutive renewals of Mode C derived level information have indicated that it is within 200 FT of its assigned level.
..../....

[karrank]

Whatever you advise as a 'vacated level' we can assign 1000FT from it. The mode C we are looking at may be up to 6 seconds old, so it lags behind your actual. Unless you are maintaining we need to knock off another 200FT (for each aircraft) which is why will ask for levels when running close verts.

If everybody did it the same it would be a wonderful world, but they don't, so it probably doesn't matter if it sticks in Kap's (and friends) craw and he has to say it backwards. We'll cope, and exactly half of us will grumble when he says it, and the other half when it's done properly.

If you tell us FL216, that's fine. If we need the hundreds we'll use them, if not we'll record the info rounded-off.

As to why? There is no why, just more hos****e imported from somewhere else apparantly more important.

Another grey area is what you say between 10,000FT AMSL & the lowest useable flight level. I had 3 in a row call me on climb at a mode C of around 105 on Christmas day. One said "flight level 105", one said "10,500FT" the other said "...erm... 10,000FT" AIP tries to pretend such levels don't exist, so I think all three were probably correct.:8

[Chimbu chuckles]

I guess when RT procedures get dicked with often enough and long enough confusion is bound to get a foot hold...I've yet to see a phraseology modification since 1980 that was better/simpler/easier or safer than what went before it...or at least enough of one of those to warrant the change in the first place.

[Hudson]

The problem with saying "Leaving" instead of "left" an altitude can give the perception that maybe you are intending to "leave" and haven't quite left yet - but in a couple of seconds, maybe. It may be an ICAO term but a dodgy one. The original Australian AIP term of "Left" an altitude is unambiguous and safer than "leaving".

[kimwestt]

AND A LITTLE BIT MORE[/B]
but it would REALLY sound good when prefixed with:
THE q/vb/ etc !!!!!!!:E

[Capn Bloggs]

CASA has admitted that this amendment was a balls-up. All it was supposed to do was replace and re-order the old "assigned" call, but it didn't turn out that way. They've suggested that we say this:

"MEL CENTRE, XYZ, Cleared FL190, Maintaining FL310".

Why the order change, I don't know. Perhaps ATCs can only remember one number, so it's best putting the assigned level first instead of last?! :D

Wait one for a change to AIP.

[yarrayarra]

However comma is this the norm in Europe? Reasoning:- because aircraft may be on climb or descent as they traverse from ATC centres using different radar sensors/ interfaces, the level vacated is required to be reported in order for each sector controller to verify the Mode C level as the aircraft calls. Saves the controller asking the aircraft to "verify level"---just a thought

[A/F Armed]

KKRANK, with regard to the 10000ft, 10500ft, FL105 calls, wouldn't the correct RT be the Altitude in ft until you are through FL110. The 1000ft between 10000ft and FL110 is a transition altitude and should be referred to in feet. Anything above FL110 would be referred to as a Flight Level.

And while we are on that last week i heard so many calls "maintaining Level XXX" what happened to the Flight bit at the front. When did FLXXX become LXXX? Just a minor point really anything to get a windup.

Reference the Leaving / Left call. The AIP states if you are within 200ft of the vacated Altitude / Flight Level it is a "leaving" call, if you are > than 200ft it becomes a "left" call. Once again just a minor point, but is it just me who gets tired of hearing slack RT.

"Sydney departures United 123 climbing 5000" What happened to the turning passing climbing heading etc?

Thats all I have to say about that.