Continue present heading - what does it mean to you?

[Jagohu]

Hi Everyone,

I've just had a nasty situation with a DLH and a KLM. DLH was told to continue on the present heading upon contact in order not to turn into the KLM.
A few minutes later I could observe the DLH turning right around 70 degrees, just as in the FPL route... Headings issued, nothing happened apart from a bit of flashing on the screen.

I can recall a few of my pilot friends telling me always why do we use the term continue present heading, and what is it for, because most of them can't see the point since they're already flying to a point on own nav.
I wonder if there're some pilots reading this thread - would you please share with us your point of view on the subject? Do you usually put the AP into HDG mode or just leave it in LNAV or whatever is it called on the type you're flying with?
Thank you!

[areyoubitter]

I would center the heading bug and then select heading mode, and suggest most would do this.

[126,7]

Pretty obvious to me too. No own navigation as per flight plan, just plain old straight forward.

[Lon More]

To emphasise it, "Continue present heading until advised for separation," doesn't take much longer and is self explanatory.

[Cough]

Press the heading button and keep going straight until someone tells me to do something else...

Keeps the safety report level down...:\

[controllerzhu]

We use "fly present heading" never had a problem with it...CZHU

[Cobalt]

Follow-on question - would you guys consider it good practice to read back giving the heading

ATC: xxxx, maintain present heading
A/C: maintain heading 070, xxxx

?

[coracle]

Cobalt.

At the risk of sounding pernickerty, one should always CONTINUE a heading NOT maintain one.

[Neptune262]

Cobalt - I use "Report and continue present heading"

[ZABatc]

In the US we use "Fly Present Heading" -- fly headings - maintain altitudes

[Pontius's Copilot]

We do as others suggest here - centre the HDG bug and select HDG mode. Always.

It appears to me that the 'DLH' aircraft took the lazy option and decided to leave things alone as the current heading wouldn't change (for the next 70 nm or so, at least); then he probably forgot to select HDG before the up-coming turn point. I guess he anticipated the heading being for just a couple of minutes followed by 'own nav' or 'direct to', and therefore wouldn't need to change anything.

[Jagohu]

Thanks for all the answers guys, that's reassuring. :) I know that from up above sometimes it's hard to see the point of our actions, but at least mostly :) there is a reason why we tell you to do so.

One more question - I've been flying with another European carrier a few months ago in the cockpit. We've had some traffic passing 1000' below and behind us and I was looking out on the left window behind the cpt to see what type was it. Then something happened what was quite surprising (and unacceptable) for me. The cpt just selected heading select (it was a B735) and dialed in a left 30 degrees just to give a better look on that traffic - without ANY ATC instruction. It didn't last longer than ~15 seconds, but now I can remember some occasions where I saw this on the radar - speed vector turning off-track and in 10-15 seconds back... Considering that we're sometimes just waiting for some other traffic to be nearly abeam of someone and give a climb/descend I don't think it's a nice thing to do especially in these busy areas or the world...
When I asked him and some other pilots later they said it's common practice to show the sight for passengers or to have a look below them... Is it really a common practice?

Cobalt: as others said - at least in Europe we use "continue" heading and I'd love to hear all the pilots saying the heading after this instruction, but it seems that most of them doesn't, so I rather use the longer "continue and report present heading"... It would be nice to win a few seconds at every transmission if everyone would say the heading when reading back the instruction.

Lon More: good idea, it just seems a bit long for me adding even the report part, but I'll think about using it, thanks :)

[controllerzhu]

Jagohu wrote: "When I asked him and some other pilots later they said it's common practice to show the sight for passengers or to have a look below them..."

Hope they don't fly through some of the sectors that I work, the passengers would really get an eyeful :uhoh:

CZHU

[Dream Land]

Do you usually put the AP into HDG mode or just leave it in LNAV or whatever is it called on the type you're flying with? Just happened with me tonight, 80 miles from the next fix in NAV, ATC instructions, "XX maintain present heading, descend and maintain FL100", I pulled the Heading knob and due to the winds aloft I was drifting toward the opposite direction traffic in the climb out, in the part of the world I fly in though, many pilots turn to avoid weather first, then secondly ask for permission to turn. :eek:

[Cobalt]

Cobalt: as others said - at least in Europe we use "continue" heading and I'd love to hear all the pilots saying the heading after this instruction, but it seems that most of them doesn't, so I rather use the longer "continue and report present heading"... It would be nice to win a few seconds at every transmission if everyone would say the heading when reading back the instruction.

Thanks. I routinely reply "<whatever> heading xxx, callsign". <Whatever> is the phrase ATC uses, so probably would readback "swim" if ATC told me to "swim present heading." ;)

Am sure I was told to "maintain" my present heading around Brussels the other week...

[javelin]

Press the heading button and keep going straight until someone tells me to do something else...

Keeps the safety report level down...

Nah - you have to pull heading on a modern aeroplane :E

[ron83]

well " Maintain present heading till advised" might help :E sometimes if situation allows :" Report heading, after getting answer,turn left/right by 5 degrees",this way they will switch to HDG mode:E

[DFC]

so I rather use the longer "continue and report present heading"...

If that is what you actually used thenI can see perhaps why you had a problem - Non-standard R/T and language understanding problems / confusuon.

ICAO R/T is;

Fastair 345 report heading.........Heading 350 Fastair 345

Fastair 345 continue heading 350......continue heading 350 Fastair 345

I think that "Fastair 345 continue present heading and report it" is acceptable also.

However, "continue and report present heading", to me means keep doing what I am doing now i.e. own navigation and let you know what my heading happens to be.

I would question such a request because I am not sure exactly what you want.

If told to "continue present heading", like everyone else I will select heading hold and I do respond with the heading so that the subsequent turn if there is one can be given with less R/T. Always come across plenty ATCOs who don't record the heading I gave and again ask later.

As for watching the sights - it is often done. We at times even avoid weather by a tad left or right - say up to 1nm off to avoid a little bump. All provided that we are on own navigation and are in RNP5 airspace.

Ever watch a new right seat pilot hand flying and trying to track a VOR in gusty conditions - more heading changes than you can believe! :)

Regards,

DFC

[Jagohu]

DFC: actually I wrote it wrong - I use "continue present heading and report heading".
As for the 1 nm off - please don't do it at least if you see some traffic in the near... It can cause a lot of paperwork if you decide you go off-track (which of course you can do since it's RNP5), but it would mean we end up with 4 nm iso 5... or so...

[Wojtus]

but it would mean we end up with 4 nm iso 5... or so...
That's exactly why ATCO should say "continue present heading for spacing" in such situation. I was taught to issue vectors always when providing minimum lateral separation.

[Hoover Pilot]

My opinion into the discussion is that if I am instructed to "Maintain heading" I hit the heading hold knob and reply "Maintain heading XX123".

I do not say what my heading is - as this is uncessary RT.

In the same way that if instructed to "Maintain runway heading" I do not state what the runway heading is.

Uneccesary RT is something to cut down on and if you want to hold me on my present heading and be informed what it is, I expect to hear "Maintain heading and report it" (or some other version of the instruction/question.)

ATC are in control and I follow obediently. But that cuts both ways. Please don't expect to get something extra outside the procedures (because you would prefer it). If you want the extra information then simply ask - I don't want to start down the road of assuming to know what you want.

Cheers HP

[Philthy]

All provided that we are on own navigation and are in RNP5 airspace.


Slightly off topic, but I see some of us are under a misconception: RNP5 guarantees that your navigation accuracy will contain you within 5NM of track 95% (I think) of the time, as long as you are navigating on the nominal track.

It does not, repeat NOT, authorise deviation off the nominal track without clearance AT ALL.

[Jagohu]

That's exactly why ATCO should say "continue present heading for spacing" in such situation. I was taught to issue vectors always when providing minimum lateral separation.

As it is in 99.9% of the cases... At least I don't used to issue headings just for fun... It is always for separation - if not from other traffic then from a shooting range or sg. else. If by any chance it is not, that is when I tell the pilot - "for shortcut", etc.

Philty: thanks a lot, that's good to know :)

[refplus20]

What is your expectation if we are in a turn and told to maintain present heading?

[Jagohu]

What is your expectation if we are in a turn and told to maintain present heading?

"Radar, we're in the turn towards XXX, the new heading will be ZZZ, do you want us to continue on that heading?"

[DFC]

In the same way that if instructed to "Maintain runway heading" I do not state what the runway heading is.

I hope that the controller would know what the runway heading was (or refer to the map that tells them).

---------

Philthy,

I am aware on the 95% containment but unless I am actually outside the 5nm for more than 5% of the time, there is no way that anyone can say anything never mind 1 or even 2nm off track. If it only worked when exactly on track then there wouldnot be flyby waypoints or VOR overheads.

Regards,

DFC

[Philthy]

I am aware on the 95% containment but unless I am actually outside the 5nm for more than 5% of the time, there is no way that anyone can say anything never mind 1 or even 2nm off track. If it only worked when exactly on track then there wouldnot be flyby waypoints or VOR overheads.


How do you know you are only 1 or 2 NM off track? You only know by what your navigation system is telling you, and under RNP5 that could be up to 5 NM out while showing you 'on track'!

Flyby waypoints are designed as such, similarly radio navigation tolerances allow for the 'cone of silence'.

I repeat, RNP5 (or any other navigation performance standard) does not EVER permit you to leave the nominal track without clearance to do so.

:ugh:

[anotherthing]

Lon More and others

Although I understand your sentiments, I disagree. If I tell an a/c to maintain heading I expect it to do so unless I am told it cannot do so for a very good reason.

Appending the statement '...for separation" etc should not make a bit of difference.

Or are you, by that very statement, saying that if it is not "..... for separation", it is acceptable for an a/c to disregard your instruction?

Standard R/T is there for several reasons - Clarity and brevity being two of the most important. I'm all for protecting my license but we are in danger of dumbing down professional aviation if we continue to 'dumb' down standard instructions etc.

Just my tuppence worth - I re-iterate, I understand your reasoning, but just do not agree with it :ok:

[Avman]

As a slight aside, I estimate that more than 75% of crews who are instructed to 'continue heading' reply with, 'roger, maintain present heading'. Why?

[Driscoll]

I use the phrase "continue present heading through [NEXT WAYPOINT]" if anyone turns onto planned track after that I may get upset.

[Dream Land]

As a slight aside, I estimate that more than 75% of crews who are instructed to 'continue heading' reply with, 'roger, maintain present heading'. Why?My guess is it's just like, "airplane 123, climb and maintain FL360" "roger, airplane 123 climbing FL360"

[Aspen20]

Dreamland O wise one. I expected a more profound answer from you

[Longhitter]

Gents,

Methinks that confusion can also be avoided when using the proper wording. I'm not claiming to be correct with regards to CAA / JAA terminology, but isn't it true that a controller should say: "continue present heading as a radar heading / radar vector", indicating that the you're under radar vectors and that the controller is responsible for routing, obstacle clearance and separation.

Some controllers ask you to report the heading, others don't. I always say the actual heading in my readback, even if the controller doesn't ask for it specifically.

LH

[rodan]

Nope. The phraseology is "Continue Present Heading". Nothing more.

[Longhitter]

I stand corrected, 'continue present heading' is official CAP 413 stuff. However: CAP 413 differs in some areas from ICAO Doc 9432. CAP 413 actually states some phraseology / procedures as UK only. Examples being the well-known:

Cleared ILS approach / descend on the ILS
Behind aircraft on final ..... behind / after the landing aircraft .....
Go ahead / pass your message
Line up runway XX and wait / line up runway XX
Etc.

Don't want to go into a discussion on 'what is better' but could anyone shed some light as to what the ICAO Doc says on the matter of radar phraseology?

Cheers,

LH

[DFC]

when an aircraft is given a vector diverting it from a
previously assigned route, the pilot should be
informed, unless it is self-evident, what the vector is to
accomplish and, when possible, the limit of the vector
should be specified (e.g. to ... position, for ...
approach);

Regards,

DFC

[Wojtus]

What is your expectation if we are in a turn and told to maintain present heading?

Usually we _expect_ aircraft to continue the heading flown before the turn! Radar situation is delayed by few seconds and ATC may not be aware you have commenced the turn already.

Best action for the crew in such situation (beside claryfing the instruction) is to stop the turn and fly straight.

Anyway, giving "continue present heading" to aircraft in turn is a bad practise for ATC. If ATC is aware of the turn, he should use "stop turn on present heading", or better "stop turn heading 120".

[tescoapp]

Can I ask please what type of aircraft the offending turning aircraft is.

The reason why I ask is that older aircraft which arn't fitted with LNav tend to be on heading mode all the time.

Now some of us when put on a heading swing the beam bar 90 degrees to the heading as a handy reminder that we ain't choosing the heading ATC is. It also allows you to check that your PF knows there on a heading when they turn the bar.
Personally I think this a nice easy method of reminding you that your on a heading. Some training types disagree and reckon the beam bar should be pointing at something. "I am using the RMI for SA" doesn't work.

The problem with some EFIS types after the TCAS and egws upgrades is that you only get that info on certain screens. And the debates about which screen you should have up is endless. Personally both people don't need the tcas screen up you don't need and legally can't use the information on it. So personally I would prefer to have the old fashion rose up with beam bar at 90 degrees. And the PNF can have the TCAS screen up.

I have never yet seen anyone turn off a heading with the beam bar at 90 deg.
But what do I know. Its a 50/50 with the training types if you are going to get it in the ear or praised for good airmanship.

[speedrestriction]

I have (once or twice:ooh:) centered the heading bug but not actually entered into a heading mode or, the reverse, of been given a direct to, punched it into the box but not actually engaged LNAV. Its just one of those things which occasionally happen. That may be why they don't let me up front on my own:\.

sr

[tescoapp]

I am glad someone else thinks its maybe a human factors cockup.

RT call in the middle of checks, 4th sector of the day which is on day 3 of earlies.

Must admit I thought by the grace of god one of my cockups hasn't got aired on here.

If the crew are anthing like our pilots, the self bollocking they will be giving themselves will be way worse than anything the company/ regulators will dish out.