250kt BLW 100

[Cosmic Wind]

Can anyone West of the River 7 explain why a recent ATSIN has been interpreted as a blanket ban on 250 exceedance blw FL100, your not in the London TMA although I'm sure that you'd like to be!!

Another example of non-standard r/t is the constant use of "mb" for every pressure value, ie above 1000????

[250 kts]

Don't know but always nice to get a mention.:):ok::)

[Bagheera]

Think you've kind of missed the point of the ATSIN. Class D/E/F and G airspace the speed limit has ALWAYS been 250kts below FL100. In class D airspace only, it may at the discretion of the CONTROLLER be relaxed provided they are certain they have a known traffic environment.
the ATSIN specifically refers to the London TMA because it is class A airspace and is a reminder to pilots and controllers alike to exercise caution when using speeds higher than those for which SID flight profiles have been designed.

Heres a link to the airspace classification rules if you cant be bothered to dust off your old Trevor Thom's.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/64/ATS_Classifications.pdf

[GT3]

Another example of non-standard r/t is the constant use of "mb" for every pressure value, ie above 1000????

Some units have this in their MATS2 so it might not be non-standard.

[Bagheera]

Absolutely GT3, along with the requirement to put "degrees" after every heading.
Couldnt really complain about that rant however as most controllers I know agree that they are both nonsensical, certainly with regard to degrees in an approach environment. Adding to r/t at a time when we need less.

[Scuzi]

...agree that they are both nonsensical...
Until you get a yank who has just spent 9 hours over the Atlantic, cleared to descend to an altitude for the first time and reads back "Zero one three on the altimeter".
Does he mean 1013mb, or 30.13in?

Nine times out of ten they will get it right but for the sake of 3 syllables, I'd rather make sure.:ok:

[Bagheera]

I understand what you mean Scuzi and I dont wish to denegrate the need for precision its just that in 15 years of experience I have never come across such a situation. More importantly I have never heard of an incident where this was involved (I stand to be corrected). It appears to be an apochryphal tale.
The adding of the word "degrees" to a heading was what I was really describing as nonsensical in an approach environment. "turn left heading 180". Im sorry is that 180 thousand feet?
Just jobs for the boys, who feel they have to make an impact or else there offices in CTC might go missing.

[eastern wiseguy]

turn left heading 180". Im sorry is that 180 thousand feet?

No but it may be and HAS been construed as a CLIMB to flight level 180. I am surprised with your 15 years of experience you don't see it. Do you work outbounds? There have been numerous events were a heading has been mistaken for climb.The adding of the word "degrees" DOES help prevent it.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<I know agree that they are both nonsensical, certainly with regard to degrees in an approach environment. Adding to r/t at a time when we need less.>>

Well, I did it for all the time I did the Heathrow bit (31 years) and never found it encroaching on my R/T time!! And I always said "millibars" too.

[Cuddles]

At the very least, it's a bit extra for the wife and kids.

[Roffa]

Bagheera,

I understand what you mean Scuzi and I dont wish to denegrate the need for precision its just that in 15 years of experience I have never come across such a situation. More importantly I have never heard of an incident where this was involved (I stand to be corrected). It appears to be an apochryphal tale.

Then I guess you've never worked at an airfield that has numerous flights by airlines from the States in to it.

A brief survey of one, me, suggests saying milibars at such airfields is actually quite important given the number of times over the years the QNH has been read back to me apparently as inches rather than milibars.

I'm all for it.

[MaxReheat]

How can "turn left heading 180" repeat "turn left heading 180" POSSIBLY be taken as an instruction to climb to anyone with even the most rudimentary of aviation English. The desk-bounds at NATS and CAA are suffering from the same fantastical 'what if in the most infinitessimally, astronomically remote chance' mentality that the beaurocrats at the DfT who fantasise about 'security' are afflicted with.

'Turn left - turn right' - your not going to turn in radians, fathoms, millibars or even the ridiculous hectopascals but in DEGREES, the same DEGREES that pilots and controllers use from day one of training throughout the known universe - so save some breath and concentrate on the important things: pilots-flying and navigating and controllers - keeping aforementioned safe and apart. We all carry licences that purport that we are all qualified to do what we are doiung so just get on with it.

[Loki]

It happened to me twice "turn left heading 330" the response was read back correctly, but the aircraft climbed to FL330.....no guarantee that adding "degrees" as we now do, would prevent it from happening again I suppose.

[eastern wiseguy]

How can "turn left heading 180" repeat "turn left heading 180" POSSIBLY be taken as an instruction to climb to anyone with even the most rudimentary of aviation English.

Happens on a regular basis. I have filed an Airprox based on EXACTLY that.


Perhaps when you are cruising at FL330 it is different...but when you are down and dirty and there is traffic descending ONE thousand feet on top there is little margin for error.

[MaxReheat]

To action and confuse a TURN allied to a CLIMB/DESCEND instruction is very easy to do eg 'turn left heading 120, climb flight level 130' but the executive words, which are unambigous, are TURN and CLIMB. The inclusion of degrees achieves nothing, IMHO - why not suffix 'flight level 130' with 'feet'? QED - quite nonsensical!

I spent one career at the console and another in the cockpit and not once in the former did I ever have anyone descend or climb to a heading, in the latter I have never turned on a climb/descend instruction nor, having dealt on a regular basis with our cousins from across the pond, did I see or hear reported any problems with confusion over millibars and inches.

Like so much of the current trends in society, aviation is afflicted with dumbing down to cater for the lowest common denominator. In our professions, they should not have to be catered for and, if found incapable, should be invited to leave.:D

[Tower Ranger]

Max

Please don`t spill your Pimms but I think you are a little out of touch with what goes on in the Regions at places bereft of Sid`s and Star`s.
For example, in my little part of the world one of the standing agreements means outbounds are climbed to FL90 before transfer to the next agency. Hence Pilots can become conditioned to hearing a climb to FL90 so sometimes when they were given heading 090 without the "degrees" they have climbed or read back that they were climbing to FL90.
Now with the degrees on the end it is almost a thing of the past. If it bothers anyone that much why not use heading 085 or 095 then there is no need to say the dreaded "D" word.
I`m afraid that in our proffessions you will always have to cater for the lowest common denominator as their number is increasing steadily. Everyone has a licence to drive a car but there are wildl variations in driver abilities and our licences are no different. Passing a few exams doesn`t make you good at your job it simply gives you a chance to become good.

[The Fat Controller]

I always use "degrees" now with ALL my heading instuctions as I also have to allocate quadrantal levels on Advisory Routes.
I have yet to have an incorrect readback following this method of operation.
As for the 250 kts below FL100, as has been mentioned it has always been a requirement unless lifted by ATC.
At ScACC we are often asked if the speed limit applies by transatlantic arrivals west of Glasgow and we have to explain that out there it is mandatory and ATC cannot lift the limit.

[Roffa]

Max, you must have controlled and now fly in your own little bubble of perfection. For the rest of us in the real world there are enough reports/incidents on file to show that these are real issues that need to be guarded against.

If, by adding an extra word on occasion, a level bust is prevented then it's a very small price to pay. The exceedingly brief amount of time it takes to say millibars or degrees is easily mitigated against if much of the other extraneous bolleaux that is said on the r/t from both sides is limited (hello, goodbye, it's the <insert callsign here>, what number am I, errr, umm, etc, etc).

[apron]

when told to turn heading 185 do you put the degrees after this??? Obviously 180 would have degrees after but does headings ending in 5?

[250 kts]

"Perhaps when you are cruising at FL330 it is different...but when you are down and dirty and there is traffic descending ONE thousand feet on top there is little margin for error".

easternwiseguy-I know it's probably a long time since you did an area course but even in the sticks you must know that we use 1000ft at FL330 nowadays!!:):)

It must be the way you say it if it is happening on a "regular basis".

[eastern wiseguy]

Area always was a black art..........:}:}

Actually my point was more the proximity to terrain and other aircraft. If they get it wrong at 3/4000 feet there can be a lot less wiggle room than FL330:)(Tower Ranger and I would agree I suspect:))

[anotherthing]

Max Reheat -
The inclusion of degrees achieves nothing, IMHO - why not suffix 'flight level 130' with 'feet'? QED - quite nonsensical!

Because [pedant mode on] A FL is not a number of 'feet' it is a line of constant atmospheric pressure that the aircraft flies along [pedant mode off]

[ImnotanERIC]

where work it is very busy. I have a high r/t loading most of the time but I always say degrees after "0" ending headings and always use millibars below 1000. My r/t loading is obviously higher with these additions. But can you imagine how high i twould be if i did not take these precautions and I had to dish out some speedy avoiding action. I would sooner save my heartbeats for later life!!