Question for a US controller - 250kts <10

[tired]

I know this has been asked before, but I can't remember the answers and can't find the thread in the search area!

As a LHR-based long haul pilot who operates into the US quite frequently I have always been under the impression that the 250kts below 10 000' rule is actually a legal restriction mandated by law and cannot be lifted by anyone, ATC included - except in an emergency, I suppose. Yet departing out of LAX we are frequently told to maintain 280kts whilst well below 10 000' and the other night departing out of JFK we were specifically instructed to increase to 280kts as we were passing 4 000'

So, have I been labouring under a misapprehension all these years, or has the law changed, or were the controllers breaking the law??

Thanks in advance.

t

[Jerricho]

In North America (can't quite remember the AIP reference), the 250 knots below 10,000 feet doesn't apply on departure. I'll see if I can find the reference.

[West Coast]

"doesn't apply on departure. I'll see if I can find the reference"

Untrue in the US. FAR 91.117 is where its published.
LAX is home for me. Its normal to be issued the maintain 280 kt clearance. ATC expects you to accelerate out of 10,000 to that speed. Some controllers say it the way you indicate, others will say "when able maintain 280Kts"

[Jerricho]

I humbly apologise Westy. I thought it were a whole North America thing.

[West Coast]

Noooo problemo...

[vector4fun]

Jerricho,

There was a test program going on at Houston for a while allowing the departures to exceed 250, but that ended some months back, and I doubt it will return.


tired,

I can only imagine that West Coast is correct. The controllers want you at 280 kts as soon as legally possible. They just don't use 20 words to say it always. It's also legal some distance from shore, but my memory fails me at the moment. (Don't get the opportunity to use that loophole)

[West Coast]

I believe its twelve miles but not a 100%.

[av8boy]

Yup. 12 miles. 91.1 says that Part 91 broadly applies "within the United States, including the waters within 3 nautical miles of the U.S. coast," and then goes on to say that certain sections apply all the way out to 12 miles. 91.117 is in the list of those that go to 12 miles. However, keep in mind that if airspace which falls under 91.117(c) is beyond 12 miles (trying to think whether that's possible, but too sleepy...), then you're going to have to comply with 91.117(c) even though you're better than 12 miles out.

I'd also point out a distinction within 91.117 that is important...

(a) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, no person may operate an aircraft below 10,000 feet MSL at an indicated airspeed of more than 250 knots (288 m.p.h.).
(b) Unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC, no person may operate an aircraft at or below 2,500 feet above the surface within 4 nautical miles of the primary airport of a Class C or Class D airspace area at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph). This paragraph (b) does not apply to any operations within a Class B airspace area. Such operations shall comply with paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) No person may operate an aircraft in the airspace underlying a Class B airspace area designated for an airport or in a VFR corridor designated through such a Class B airspace area, at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph).
(d) If the minimum safe airspeed for any particular operation is greater than the maximum speed prescribed in this section, the aircraft may be operated at that minimum speed.

There's a reason that (a) says "the Administrator" and (b) says "ATC."

I believe that your local FSDO will tell you that, although you MAY fly at the minimum safe airspeed for your operation even if it is more than 250k (ala (d)), and that ATC can certainly authorize different speeds under subparagraph (b), ATC is NOT empowered to OK speeds above 250k below 10,000 feet. If you want to ignore the 250 below 10 rule and your operation doesn't require you to fly faster than 250, you're going to need a waiver from your local FSDO. The controller can't approve it. That's because "the Administrator" means the actual FAA Administrator or someone he/she (and actually, I think the reg still calls the Administrator "he...") delegates. This one has been delgated to Flight Standards, not ATC.

So when the assigned speed is 280 (or 380 or whatever), that means beyond 12 miles or above 10,000, unless your operation requires it. Of course, as always, I strongly suggest you get verification from the FAA on something like this. And if I've somehow gotten this wrong, tell me.

Dave

[tired]

Thanks for the replies, guys, I'm very glad I asked the question because I seem to have been labouring under a misapprehension all these years.

Just to confirm I've got it straight - if you tell us to maintain 280 kts, you don't mean "do it now", you actually mean "do it when you pass 10 000 or 12 miles"?

It's a bit different this side of the Pond, when a controller gives us a speed to fly here he means "do it ASAP" - he'd have a fit if we only did it in 5 minutes time! Yet another difference to put in my little black book!

Many thanks for all the replies.

t

[av8boy]

I think it's important at this point to remember that you’re the one who makes the final decision, and you’re responsible for accepting or rejecting speed assignments (among other things). If the controller assigns a speed that’s contrary to the regs or flies in the face of the safe operation of your airframe, you’ve got to reject that speed assignment. The fact that the controller has done something that he or she “may not do” is really a second issue. An issue, yes. Something to be addressed, yes. But the fact that you busted a speed limit may or may not be mitigated by the fact that the speed was assigned by ATC. I think the key here is to do what’s right and advise ATC of your plan…

This issue is covered in the regs as well as the 7110.65 (controller’s handbook), the AIM, and elsewhere. Here’s what the AIM says. I call particular attention to the NOTES and paragraph (h) (and remind you that the AIM is not a regulation, but rather, is meant to help explain the regs):

d. When ATC assigns speed adjustments, it will be in accordance with the following recommended minimums:
(I’ve snipped 1 through 3)
4. To departing aircraft:
(a) Turbojet aircraft, a speed not less than 230 knots.
(b) Reciprocating engine aircraft, a speed not less than
150 knots.

(snip)

NOTE-
The maximum speeds below 10,000 feet as established in 14 CFR
Section 91.117 still apply. If there is any doubt concerning the manner in which such a clearance is to be executed, request clarification from ATC.

(more snipping)

g. The pilots retain the prerogative of rejecting the application of speed adjustment by ATC if the minimum safe airspeed for any particular operation is greater than the speed adjustment.

NOTE-
In such cases, pilots are expected to advise ATC of the speed that will be used.

h. Pilots are reminded that they are responsible for rejecting the application of speed adjustment by ATC if, in their opinion, it will cause them to exceed the maximum indicated airspeed prescribed by 14 CFR Section 91.117(a), (c) and (d). IN SUCH CASES, THE PILOT IS EXPECTED TO SO INFORM ATC. Pilots operating at or above 10,000 feet MSL who are issued speed adjustments which exceed 250 knots IAS and are subsequently cleared below 10,000 feet MSL are expected to comply with 14 CFR Section 91.117(a).

(snip)

A reminder... 91.117(a) is the "250k below 10,000" part of the reg, (b) is the "200k within 4 miles of a primary airport within Class C or D airspace, (c) is "200k in airspace underlying Class B or a VFR corridor," and (d) is "go ahead and operate at minimum safe airspeed even if it faster than (a) through (c) allow."

So, for me (and I've probably already said enough to get flamed here), if I'm working LA departures (and I haven't for a while now) and tell you that I want 280 knots, I'd expect an answer something like, "Roger. Once we're out of ten thousand we'll accelerate to 280." If that elicits a less-than-gentle response from the controller, so be it. As an aside, like I said, I haven't worked LA departures for quite a while so forgive my asking... could this not be a restriction holding you to a speed no greater than 280k after 10,000? To me it looks less like a "go fast" call from LA departures and more like a "go slow" call from LA Center which is being passed by the departure controller.

Finally, keep in mind that on at least a couple of LA SIDs you have a chance of going more than 12 miles offshore and then coming back to the shoreline while still below 10,000. The LOOP and LAXX come to miind. Therefore, even though you've been outside of 12 miles and can accelerate, the 250k restriction will come back when you cross the 12 mile line eastbound if you're still under 10.

Dave

[West Coast]

"could this not be a restriction holding you to a speed no greater than 280k after 10,000?"

With the word "maintain", I take it to be the exact speed they want.

[av8boy]

I wasn't as clear as I should have been... I'm just wondering whether it is a LA departure speed to get you moved out of the way or a Center-imposed speed because they need 280 (read "slower than usual") for in-trail farther down the line. I'm leaning toward the latter. I do understand that they're giving you a hard speed of 280 rather than telling you not to exceed 280. Sorry I didin't make that clear.

Dave

[West Coast]

I'm not sure of it either. The one thing I know is I'm up and out of a lot of airspace quickly, I wonder if that or some MIT program could be the reason.

[tired]

that's more or less the way I've understood this over the years - 250kts below 10, unless it's below minimum clean speed, in which case fly min clean. (Believe me, if you ask me to fly slower than I think is safe, I'll tell you :) ) I also see both sides of the argument about whether it's a "go-slow" or a "go-fast" instruction. The thing that confuses me, and i think I probably speak for a lot of my colleagues, is why on earth anyone would issue an instruction when we're passing 3 or 4 000' when they know perfectly well that we cannot comply until we pass 10 - it makes no sense. If you want us to fly 280, or whatever, at 10k why on earth issue a (very ambiguous) instruction at 3k, why not wait till 9 or 9.5? I really don't see the point. It's going to take us 5 minutes to get from 3 to 10, so there's no rush. (Yes, I fly a Bus, but even those mighty Boeing machines don't go upwards all that fast at the beginning of a long-haul sector. Even a short-haul twin is going to take a couple of minutes to climb 7000', so why not wait until we're passing 9k at least???)

Until the other night I had only ever encountered this ex LAX and I had always assumed (yes, I know, rule number 1 - never assume :( ) that it was because we were past the distance limit, which I have always thought was 3 miles. I'm not sure - will try and keep track on my next trip - but I doubt that we exceed 12 miles from the coast on the LAXX dep that we do - but we're under radar vectors so the only controller knows what the plan is, we don't. However the other night, ex JFK, we were still over Long Island and just out of 3k, when we got the "maintain 280" call, so I really can't see the point of that if the controller knew that we couldn't (shouldn't?) comply till out of 10 - unless, of course he was acting on the "if he does it that's his problem" principal.

Once again, thanks for the replies, at least I now know the score - I'm glad I asked. :) Next time I shall refuse, or at least request confirmation, which seems a pity in an already-busy RT enviroment, but there you go.

Yu'all have a good weekend now! I was planning to watch the Woman's Final at Wimbledon, but I see that the nice Russian girl with the loooooong legs has been knocked out, so there's no point anymore! :) :)

t

[West Coast]

Tired
I'm not having a go at you, honestly.
ATC has the expectation that the pilots they are controlling will know regulations appropriate to the airspace they are in. With regard to the 280 kt thing, they expect you will comply out of 10K. Not ambigious to them. I can understand someone who doesn't ply the skies here to question it (understandably so), but how many standards need they conform to?

As to time/alt of issuence, I can only imagine they are trying to stay ahead of the game. The clearance is no more than a small number of minutes away from being acted upon. When I receive an approach clearance for the ILS (assuming all other considerations are met) I mash the appch button on the panel. I don't wait till the loc is alive for fear of missing it because I wanted to wait. Perhaps out of 9 or so is when the controller tries to hand you off to the next controller, who knows.
You and I strive to be ahead of the plane, imagine ATC does the same.

[tired]

Hi Westie!

Don't worry, I didn't think you were trying to have a go at me, and I understand exactly were you're coming from - as you say, both sides of the microphone are trying to stay ahead of the game. I also take your point about knowing the regs associated with the airspace that we're working in, but I must point out that the average long haul pilot, certainly in my company, anyway, operating into LAX might go there half a dozen times a year - in between trips I'll operate to 5 or 6 other destinations in as many countries, and will have overflown maybe another 20. Of course we try and be au fait with every countries regs and local peculiarities, we all have "little black books" with local differences and the company is pretty good about supplying us with briefing material etc, but at the end of the day it's not possible to be as clued up on any one airport as the locals are. I think most pilots know that there's a 250kt limit below 10k in the US, but how many know that it's a hard and fast law that may not be broken, even in controlled airspace and even if given a specific ATC instruction? As far as I can remember, this particular law is unique to the US, even Canada is different, and in other countries ATC has the authority to issue any speed they want in controlled airspace.

I guess this just highlights - once again - the difference between how ATC works on your side of the ocean and on mine. Over here, if ATC gives a speed restriction without conditions, they expect instant compliance, not at some time in the future, and we're used to complying immediately (but of course we will refuse any instruction if it endangers the aeroplane, just like you guys do.)

And it still seems to me that the instruction is superfluous in the first place - if it is meant as an instruction to go faster, then it's redundant ,there is an automatic speed incvrease built into the system at 10 000' - how many pilots do you know that won't increase speed as soon as they pass 10k? If it's a "slow down" instruction, I still think that it's badly timed and ambiguous - it's relying on pilots' "local knowledge" (ie that the instruction is not to be complied with just yet) and with all due respect, any system, especially at a major international airfield like LAX, and JFK, that relies on local knowledge is not a good system. I've been operating into the US for 15 years in various jobs and it's never once crossed my mind that an instruction to maintain a given speed should be obeyed at any time other than the present - the same goes for all those that I've been flying with, as far as I can remember. So there are an awful lot of people doing "the wrong thing" in US airspace, not willfully or out of ignorance, but because of an instruction that is at best ambiguous and at worst redundant when seen from the perspective of the enviroment that we're used to operating in.

Whilst on the subject, as mentioned earlier in the thread, some of these instructions do include the words "when able, maintain 280". Again, it has never crossed my mind, nor that of any of my colleagues that I can remember, that this means anything other than "when your aircraft is clean and you are able to fly that fast, then do so". Apparently it means something different to a US pilot - another difference between the 2 sides of the ocean!

Please don't think I'm trying to have a go at anybody here, I'm not. As I keep saying, I've learned something here which had never even crossed my mind before, and that has to be a good thing. I'll try and spread the word amongst my colleagues too and I hope that if any US controllers are reading this, it might make them realise that not everything has the same meaning to us as it does to you.

Once again, thanks for all the replies.