RVSM Question

[Greg_ATCO]

Looking for info here guys and couldn't find a thread that was more suited to ask... - aircrafts that are RVSM approved fly between FL290 and FL410 with a minimum vertical seperation of 1000 feet. I assume other aircrafts that can fly at this altitude can do so...but if they are not RVSM approved they have to be seperated vertically by 2000 feet? Is this correct? If so...what type of aircrafts are still around that do not comply with RVSM that would fly at these altitudes? Thanks in advance!

[beamwidth]

most non rvsm aircraft are banned from rvsm airspace. the main exceptions are state/military flights. in this case 2000 ft must be used between non-rvsm and rvsm aircraft in rvsm airspace. hope this helps

[controllerzhu]

Plus, you have the non-RVSM acft that want to transition up above RVSM altitudes. Like the jets or pilots that are not yet certified and or qualified to operate in RVSM and are not an exception aircraft. There use to be a lot more transition requests, here in the US, but I've seen a steady decline of requests as more become certified.
CZHU

[jumpuFOKKERjump]

what type of aircrafts are still around that do not comply with RVSM that would fly at these altitudes? RVSM airspace is not exclusive here in Oz so we still get a lot of requests, probably because the pressure is not on the operators to upgrade. The list here would be:

* Older jets, including WW24 & B727 freighters that whizz around the country at night,

* Older turboprop like BE20, that only stagger up to FL310 on a real long trip.

* Old military tactical aircraft (the only ones we have),

* Any aircraft in a formation, new or old,

* Aircraft with a systems failure that lets them continue flying non-RVSM.

I notice Ozjets' old B737-200s now have RVSM, I didn't think it was particularly easy to get approvals for old bangers.

[45 before POL]

Aircraft transiting FL290-FL410 non rvsm are banned from transiting UK FIR at these levels, unless they are as said before ......mil flights, exempt approved by CAA. Others are those climbing to a level above ..eg egph departure requesting FL450...This is approved to climb through the rvsm airspace....but dependent on destination may have to descend below rvsm before the uk fir boundary

[ron83]

Non RVSM approved aircraft can't enter RVSM airspace,so has to fly not above FL290

[smellysnelly2004]

45 Before,

Is that true for all flights?
There's a bit in the AIP about the UK and Scottish FIR's being a transition area for Non-RVSM equipped a/c which are intending on flying over the atlantic and there's a similar area the other side of the pond to descend back below RVSM airspace.
Does this also apply to a/c operating within the UK FIR????

[PPRuNe Radar]

Non RVSM approved aircraft permitted in the UK RVSM area are:

State aircraft

Aircraft approved by the UK CAA (e.g calibration flight, air test, etc).

Aircraft arriving from the North Atlantic (NAT) Region above FL410 which are landing in the UK.

Aircraft arriving from the North Atlantic airspace above FL410 which are landing in the EUR RVSM area. These will be descended to FL290 or below before leaving UK airspace.

Aircraft departing from the EUR RVSM area which will be transitting the NAT Region above FL410.

Aircraft departing from outwith the EUR RVSM area which enter the EUR RVSM area at FL290 or below but will ultimately be transitting the NAT Region above FL410.

RVSM aircraft which lose their RVSM MASPS in flight. They will be cleared out of RVSM airspace as soon as practicable, and before leaving UK airspace at the latest.

And that's it ......

[TC_Ukraine]

happened in ukrainian airspace week ago: non approved RVSM traffic requested FL 300 to avoid weather (no horizontal maneuvers were requested). Controller cleared it, and provided 2000ft with other RVSM traffic. Now this event is investigated, as like it was mentioned before "most non rvsm aircraft are banned from rvsm airspace".
What is your opinion?

[ron83]

Personally my opinion that it is ok as far as separation not infringed. If 2000 ft was provided, I can't see any reason why it's not allowed to do,especially if it helps to avoid weather.

[The Fat Controller]

TC Ukraine, depends on your rules there.

If I did it in the UK I would be issuing an illegal clearance unless satisfying PPRuNe Radar's list.

Also, the operator would probably be operating outside the terms of his licence and invalidating his insurance, unless he had declared an emergency.

[rab-k]

ICAO rules pertaining to the NAT Region permit non-RVSM within RVSM airspace where:


Non-RVSM flights are permitted to climb/descend continuously through RVSM airspace provided they don't stop off at any intermediate level.
Formation flights comprising 2xC17 using station keeping equipment are classed as a single aircraft and can operate in RVSM airspace.
Altitude Reservations can be established for certain types of non-RVSM flights to enable them to operate within RVSM airspace. These being:



delivery flights,
those who have lost their RVSM approval and are being ferried for maintenance/repair or to an HMU to reobtain approval,
those flights which are of a humanitarian nature.


If I needed to deviate from the procedures for any reason then I'd be inclined to run my proposal past my Sup' who, in applying logic and common sense which these individuals always do, would approve of my proposal and be sure to back me up when the office Stasi come sniffing around for the whos, whys and wherefores.:E

[zonetalk]

could someone please tell why RVSM is limited to FL410 and not above that. This question is being asked in exams...

[provo]

Zonetalk

I was under the impression that it was about reduced levels of accuracy of altimeters above FL410. Stand to be corrected though.