STAR Clearance limits [Archive]

southoftheborder

14th Aug 2011, 23:09

Ok, I am not entirely sure that I am posting in the correct forum here, but I just wanted to post a question to all you pilots out there. I am an Air traffic controller, working the London TMA, and just recently I have experienced or heard many of my colleagues mentioning aircraft inbound to LHR during busy periods of the day, are missing the hold they are inbound to, and then saying to the controller involved that they were not instructed to hold. As you can all imagine, the London TMA is a very busy small bit of airspace, and OK, yes, the Air traffic controller should really be telling you to expect a hold, but on the rare occasion it may get forgotten, we rely on the fact that the clearance limits in your STAR charts is the hold you are inbound to. Why is it then that there are so many pilots just recently that seem to be unaware of this fact? It can be a safety critical thing for us. Do you expect to be told every time there is a hold that you should hold, or else otherwise you will just continue to make your own approach? I just ask out of curiosity. Look forward to your responses!

jester42

14th Aug 2011, 23:27

Just follow the magenta line, in'it?

The FMC is programmed all the way to the runway.
The IAF needs to be included in the brief as the clearance limit and buttons pressed at that time.
It clearly seems to be missed due to lack of attention from the Pilots.

bucket_and_spade

14th Aug 2011, 23:43

They must be pretty gash operators to come out with that tripe. I fly in to the London TMA and would always slow and enter the hold at the clearance limit point if we hadn't been told differently. I don't think any colleagues would plan to do otherwise either! Thought we were all a bit more pro than that!

southoftheborder

14th Aug 2011, 23:58

To be honest, there has been a trend on the airlines that have been noticeably doing this on quite a consistent basis recently. I just did not wish to discriminate on a public forum, I just wondered if there was something we were missing, as it really can be a big safety issue at times. Just another question then to put to you guys, there also appears to be (across every airline) a bit of laxness in reporting cleared FL on first contact with a new frequency. Again, when we are busy, there is nothing more frustrating than having to ask the pilot to report his cleared level. For us, this is a mandatory requirement, we have to have the cleared FL confirmed in order for us to take positive control of the aircraft. Is this a result of the fact that very very rarely nowadays, there is any sort of familiarisation between pilots and ATCO's?

exeng

15th Aug 2011, 00:10

I work for a West African airline and I can assure you that what you understand and what some of the Pilots understand is a world apart. Look at the callsign (or the transponder code given - which in our case is always 77??) The clue is in the transponder code.

If in doubt make it clear to the aircraft that they will take up the hold at BIG (or whatever). Do not expect the aircraft to auomatiacally take up the hold - despite no onward clearance. The magenta line flows from Biggin onwards and that is what, in some cases, you should expect the aircraft to do.

southoftheborder

15th Aug 2011, 00:19

Thanks for the response. Just one point to note, this should be irrespective of countries and different airlines. It is based on rules and what is mentioned in the STAR charts for the airfield you are inbound to. It clearly states on the STAR charts that you cannot go beyond the clearance limit point (i.e the holding fix) unless otherwise instructed by ATC, Clearance limit point being defined as 'That to which an aircraft is granted an ATC clearance, which may be specified by naming a reporting point, an aerodrome or a boundary of controlled or advisory airspace'. Is it then do you think that maybe some pilots just don't read the small print? The rules are there for a reason.... namely, to keep you, the aircraft safe. I am not certain I understand how us, the ATCO's, and the pilots can understand such different things by this?

exeng

15th Aug 2011, 00:39

Please read my post again.

Regardless of the ideals and 'smallprint' some Pilots just don't get it. They have been brought up in in a totally different environment, trained within a very narrow footprint and have a totally different culture.

The airlines from this area have been approved to operate into Western Europe.

Now you have to help them to operate within the rules - that means making allowances for the things I've mentioned above. Eventually they will get it - but only with help from you.

Sorry to spell it out like this - they are nice people but are just so unused to a 'rule' based system.

You ought to spend a week with Lagos ATC on 127.3 just to see how awful things are.

exeng

15th Aug 2011, 00:52

No disrespect intended, but I believe you should be ready to anticipate problems from Airlines from certain parts of the world.

Everybody should know the 'rules', but the fact is that not everybody does. Much in the same way that if I questioned you about some of your 'rules' you would not know the answer to everything.

You have seen and observed some airlines not follwing the rules so I hope that the next day you would treat them with a little caution.

If you see an airline continuously breaking the 'rules' then a report to the authorities is an appropriate course of action.

aterpster

15th Aug 2011, 01:07

exeng:

If you see an airline continuously breaking the 'rules' then a report to the authorities is an appropriate course of action.

I can only speak about the U.S. in regards to foreign carriers breaking rules. The FAA has no authority in such matters, other than they can refer the incident to the State Department for a protest to the nation of the offending carrier.

Lots of luck.

Dan Winterland

15th Aug 2011, 03:04

In Asia, holding is rare (I did my first in about a year last night) and it probably wouldn't occur to a Chinese pilot to enter a hold if no clearance is given past the IAF - text in the charts notwithstanding. They would expect to be vectored. If you suspect the pilots are not used to the London TMA, I would spell it out to them.

welliewanger

15th Aug 2011, 04:14

I agree with Dan.
I also work in Asia and know of many airfields where the controllers assume that you'll carry out the STAR (by guesswork) and the approach (again, either by guesswork, or if it's not the ILS, it's stated on the ATIS). Some places you don't get any clearance whatsoever. I've been cleared for takeoff without any SID, had a conflab in the flight deck, I thought we should go direct to our first flight planned waypoint, the capt wanted to maintain runway heading. Apparently neither was correct. We should have guessed which SID was in use (there was only one).

It's not "the right way" to do it. But it is the way it's done here. In fact, if you do it "the right way" it all goes tits up.

I agree with the original poster that people should do it "right". However (as has been pointed out by others) there are people from other countries who have learnt to include some educated guesswork into what they're doing. A solution for your problem would be to give more explicit clearances and not just assume that "certain operators" will read the fine print.

Willit Run

15th Aug 2011, 04:15

Never assume; because it makes an "ass out of u and me"

I have over 12,000 hours, 95 % of that in international operations. I have only once, experienced a "clearance limit" point, and that was in Amsterdam and the ATCO told me that was the CLP. Maybe for some airports, it is a common occurance, but for a GREAT number of folks, entering a hold automatically with no direction, is fairly rare.

I don't want to get into a bashing of certain countries procedures, but, IMO, the Brits seem to make things a little more complicated than I think they need to be.

I f certain airports have certain procedures that are out of the norm, they ought to make sure that the procedures are brought to light somehow. Some folks are so locked into their own little world, they think that is a perfectly normal scenario, when in actuality, its not so.

Not everyone flying into a busy environment is alert and awake, many have been on duty for 18 hours, keeping procedures simple will go a long way in making sure procedures are followed.

I don't think I have ever been into LHR, but i will be on my toes.
Let the fodder fly!!!!!!!!!

billyt

15th Aug 2011, 04:55

Looking at the Bovingdon arrival it is stated quite clearly...

WARNING
Do not proceed beyond
BNN
without ATC clearance

Not very difficult to comply with.

DA50driver

15th Aug 2011, 06:18

It may be related to the issue mentioned a few posts ago about flying a star and sid based upon the ATIS information. In Russia and other former UUSR trained countries it is how they do it. Runway in use is announced on the ATIS, you find a STAR that goes from your last point on the flight plan to the runway and fly it. A clearance is hardly ever issued.

As for SID's its the same way. If you are cleared for take off you are cleared to the first point in your flight plan by the SID that takes you there. (It took having a very good Russian navigator on board to confirm this).

How about your SLP's coming into London? I was yelled at for slowing down to 250 at the SLP a while back. It all ended up with a lot of phone calls and the gentleman that designed the STAR telling the controller in question that the SLP was there to keep us from entering the adjacent sectors airspace.

As for giving the vacated FL on initial check in I try my best, but 20 years of flying and not doing it sometimes it is forgotten. With the enhanced mode S you can see it on your radar though, right? (A little sarcasm related to the expenses incurred to be allowed into the London area, putting equipment in that you don't use).

Intruder

15th Aug 2011, 06:31

OK, yes, the Air traffic controller should really be telling you to expect a hold, but on the rare occasion it may get forgotten, we rely on the fact that the clearance limits in your STAR charts is the hold you are inbound to. Why is it then that there are so many pilots just recently that seem to be unaware of this fact? It can be a safety critical thing for us.
If you allow for the "rare occasion" the controller "forgets," and the less-than-100% of those times where the pilot fails to hold, then you surely must allow for that "rare occasion" when the pilot "forgets" as well...

If it is so safety critical, then the controller must not "forget," either. After all, he's the one sitting on the ground with his tea...

More seriously, though, I have not seen another STAR quite like those I just looked at for Gatwick (I seldom go to London; Stansted when I do). While the STAR chart is clear, it is a bit unusual for a STAR to end in a hold; and even more unusual to be cleared for a STAR and not be alerted of any hold well in advance.

CanadaKid

15th Aug 2011, 07:10

S of the Border,

Perhaps misunderstood training is a part of this problem.

In my previous airline, we were encouraged to leave a discontinuity in the FMS/FMCG at the point where you would need a clearance to continue. The green/magenta line on the ND would stop, a pretty good reminder that something has to be done to move on.

Some trainers encourage students to 'connect the dots', or take out any discontinuities without exception to complete their FMS inputs. Personally, I need all the reminders I can get after a long, long day at the office.

crwjerk

15th Aug 2011, 07:59

Haven't been to LHR for ages, but does " Cleared LAM3A for ILS 09L" not mean you can follow the STAR past LAM?? Frequently HDG 265 or alike anyway......
If holding is required, I often remember being told well in advance.

Topjet

15th Aug 2011, 08:31

You shouldn't be getting cleared for the "LAM3A 27L."

On check in with London (128.160/118.480) you'll be cleared for the LAM3A. Some controllers will say, "LAM3A, Heathrow landing 27L"(for information purposes only and not me I hasten to add) Is this where it may be confused?

nurjio

15th Aug 2011, 08:41

Storm - Teacup. SOTB, keep a note of the miscreants, name and shame, then we'll offer some advice.

The Aerads are quite clear in the blurb, dunno about the Jeps.

You are only ever cleared to to take off, right?

"London, Speedbird xxx, FL380, direct Logan for the Lamb Bhuna 3a". :=

blueloo

15th Aug 2011, 08:41

These are just my thoughts.... I have no idea If I am right or Wrong....

...I have never seen a reference to enter a hold at a clearance limit without an onwards clearance. (Happy to read the Jeppesen world wide text for clarification if you can provide a reference, or maybe I have just forgotten some obscure reference)

I would be ensuring I had been given onward clearance instructions. (I have never not been provided with these, and would assume if having been given a STAR you would proceed in accordance with the STAR)

I would not randomly enter a hold unless specifically cleared or I was in non- controlled airspace and made appropriate calls, or if instructions are written on the STAR to enter a hold without clearance.

Most places provide a clearance such as - Cleared the Tommo 1 Alpha Arrival, Rwy XX, Maintain FL380, Expect to Hold at XX. ... Then if required come back with holding instructions.

Do you have a london (presume Heathrow) STAR chart (Jepps) you could provide a reference to, and where you would expect a Jet to enter a hold without clearance.

(I just had a look at that chart Tommo 1 A, and it is a little unusual with the clearance limit and holding pattern at the end....)

I guess if you are having troubles with compliance, why not remove the confusion and make the Clearance crystal clear - that way the pilot knows exactly what is expected, and you don't get any nasty surprises.

FalcoCharlie

15th Aug 2011, 08:54

There is another good reason on why ATC should tell the aircraft to hold at the CLP if needed. ATC should be ready to give Expected Approach Time at the same time so that crews know what to plan for based on fuel remaining. Even if crews do the right thing as you expect and enter the hold "automatically" , expect frequency clutter when they start asking about their EAT time. It is more efficient if you just tell them to hold, including EAT time.

Microburst2002

15th Aug 2011, 09:26

In some places they write in the small fonts that you keep heading after the clearance limit. In others, like HTR, that you hold. All pilots need to know is the What if?.
In london, since holding is very usual, you might expect to hold even if you haven't thoroughly read the STAR.

And of course, when approaching the clearance limit, an "aproaching Ockham" call is in order.

Regarding takeoffs, in some places they give you a "turn left on course". If you do a DIR TO or intercept an SID you are wrong. You have to intercept the airway.

Canada Kid

I agree with you. i don't understand why many can't stand a discontinuity on the FPLN. Specially when you "draw" an estimated path to the runway with PBDs and such, and then they clear the discontinuity. If you forget about it you may deviate from clearance. However if navigation reverts to heading, then you wake up. Discontinuities can be used to help you.

plain-plane

15th Aug 2011, 09:49

It is the same at madrid STARs... hold at your clearance limit

southoftheborder

15th Aug 2011, 10:28

Topjet, thanks ;-)

I have obviously caused somewhat of a stir here, now, it may be true that you may not be required to hold in other countries. Surely though, there is some awareness that when you are inbound to one of the busiest airfields in the world, where there are a number of other airfields within a 30 mile radius which also have a reasonable amount of traffic, there may just be some holding required? On the STAR charts it clearly states not to proceed past the hold unless instructed by ATC. Would you just climb to your requested cruising level without ATC Clearance because we have not told you to climb? Or same point, would you make a landing without having received the clearance 'cleared to land Runway.... ' i doubt it very much. That said, for all the doubters out there, i have a link to the LAM arrival into Heathrow
http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadbasic/pamslight-C55F055D5165A30D442DCECDC9275B95/7FE5QZZF3FXUS/EN/Charts/AD/AIRAC/EG_AD_2_EGLL_7-5_en_2010-06-03.pdf

The other STARs for the other holds are the same. Some caution is exercised, but at times during a busy period when you have pilots stepping on each other, we can occasionally miss out the 'hold at....' it is not often, however, this is not a requirement from at ATC point of view. We give that info to AID the pilot for flight planning purposes. The only requirement i have seen for aircraft inbound to LHR is published plainly for all to see..... 'Do not proceed beyond (hold) without ATC clearance.'

Falcocharlie:

In the London TMA, the delays are very usually less than 20 mins.... hence we need to give no EAT. If we were to be in a situation where holding was above 20 minutes, then you could expect the 'Hold at LAM, EAT is....' but on occasions where we don't have EATs in force, and specifically when you have reduced the aircraft to 'holding speed' and then said aircraft still ploughs straight through the hold, it can be most frustrating.

I just wondered if there should be something more that can be done about this. Maybe as others have said, it needs to become another air traffic rule that we have to tell pilots on first contact to hold at ...., just in case, there are the few pilots incapable of reading the STAR chart and complying with the rules.

XLNL

15th Aug 2011, 11:08

Since procedures are different all over the world all we as pilots have to do is read the charts, so there is really no excuse for not joining the hold if no further clearance is received. No so difficult I think...
If there are airlines which don't follow the procedure maybe just contact the airline to remind the pilots of the procedure.

On another note; you were also writing about the numer of calls and in my experience sometimes ATC doesn't help keeping the volume of calls down. Often I check in on a new freq with the cleared level and hdg and instead of receiving an acknowledgement I'm told to maintain the level and hdg I just reported which we then have to read back again. Correct me if I'm wrong but would a "roger" not suffice (saving us from saying the same again)?

southoftheborder

15th Aug 2011, 11:29

XLNL:

You are completely correct with regards to the call, particurlarly on a busy frequency. Roger would more than suffice in this instance :-)

Oakape

15th Aug 2011, 11:36

If you can get the airlines to program the hold in as part of the STAR in the Dep/Arr page of the FMC, you wouldn't have to worry about guys following the magenta line past the hold.

The aircraft would automatically enter the hold as part of the STAR & the flight crew would manually have to exit the hold when given onwards clearance.

Every aircraft with an FMC should be able to have this programming. The airlines just have to be convinced (a few fines should do the trick) & then instruct their data supplier that this is what they require.

j_swift

15th Aug 2011, 12:02

I would think in a busy environment like the London TMA, anyone would be so foolish to endevour a track from LAM without clearance, whether it was started in the charts or not. Anyway the flight plan ends at at the ingress fix in this case LAM. Very unusual to say the least that ATC doesn't come back on the horn to inform of a hold required, with the possible exception of the A380 during early morning arrivals where exemption is given during the curfew periods.
On a different tack, why is transition levels not given during descents into LHR at least not broadcast on ATIS? Are pilots allowed to reset to QNH immediately being given a altutude below transition or to wait after passing transition? Is there any laid down procedure regarding this( in the AIP maybe)? Sorry if this is a newbe question!!!

blueloo

15th Aug 2011, 13:19

Would you just climb to your requested cruising level without ATC Clearance because we have not told you to climb? Or same point, would you make a landing without having received the clearance 'cleared to land Runway.... ' i doubt it very much. That said, for all the doubters out there, i have a link to the LAM arrival into Heathrow

Surely the same goes for entering a hold.... the clearance limit ends there and yes there is a hold their... but many STARs depict holding points throughout the procedure, none of which grant you automatic clearance to enter the hold - unless written specifically on the chart.

Make it easy for yourself and the pilots to avoid confusion. Tell them what you want them to do, otherwise some will decide for you... (and they may not make the decision you want them to - I am just being the devils advocate here)

I am sure its easier to give an instruction such as this, rather than the radio work required to get a stray aircraft and conflicting traffic back to where it all should be.

Failing that, ask for a chart amendment, asking for clear instructions to be written on the chart advising the pilots what they should do in the event of no onwards clearance.

southoftheborder

15th Aug 2011, 13:38

Did you read the link to the LAM arrival into LHR i posted? It is clear as day on the STAR chart, 'WARNING: Do not proceed beyond LAM without ATC clearance.' How much more obvious can it be, than a note on the chart with a Warning attached to it?

maggot738

15th Aug 2011, 13:48

I don't understand the problem. Read the chart, brief the chart, identify the clearance limit and brief what you will do at the clearance limit if no further clearance is received. It's not rocket science. The London charts clearly state "do not proceed beyond (clearance limit) without specific clearance" or words to that effect. That means "Hold unless instructed".
Simples.

Intruder

15th Aug 2011, 14:23

I have obviously caused somewhat of a stir here, now, it may be true that you may not be required to hold in other countries. Surely though, there is some awareness that when you are inbound to one of the busiest airfields in the world, where there are a number of other airfields within a 30 mile radius which also have a reasonable amount of traffic, there may just be some holding required? On the STAR charts it clearly states not to proceed past the hold unless instructed by ATC.
. . .

The other STARs for the other holds are the same. Some caution is exercised, but at times during a busy period when you have pilots stepping on each other, we can occasionally miss out the 'hold at....' it is not often, however, this is not a requirement from at ATC point of view. We give that info to AID the pilot for flight planning purposes. The only requirement i have seen for aircraft inbound to LHR is published plainly for all to see..... 'Do not proceed beyond (hold) without ATC clearance.'

Falcocharlie:

In the London TMA, the delays are very usually less than 20 mins.... hence we need to give no EAT. If we were to be in a situation where holding was above 20 minutes, then you could expect the 'Hold at LAM, EAT is....' but on occasions where we don't have EATs in force, and specifically when you have reduced the aircraft to 'holding speed' and then said aircraft still ploughs straight through the hold, it can be most frustrating.

As others have pointed out, a STAR ending in a hold is rather unusual, so there is no reason NOT to reinforce the STAR clearance with a "Hold at XXXXX, expect approach clearance at YYYYz."

I fly into Frankfurt, New York, Atlanta, Dubai, Hong Kong, Los Angeles and other busy, multi-airport TMAs regularly. NONE of them have STARs ending in holds as the default, and at ALL of them I do NOT expect a hold unless specifically told. I would expect the controllers at the exceptional airports (London) to realize their uniqueness and reinforce the unusual procedures. Not all of us have FMCs, either, so it is NOT "just" a matter of programming a computer in many cases!

Not required to issue an EAT?!? According to the FAA AIM:

5-3-7.
Holding
a. Whenever an aircraft is cleared to a fix other than the destination airport and delay is expected, it is the responsibility of the ATC controller to issue complete holding instructions (unless the pattern is charted), an EFC time and best estimate of any additional en route/terminal delay.
Again, while your local procedures may be different, other countries' pilots expect an EFC/EAT whenever holding instructions are issued. You should accommodate the reality that YOU have the different procedures, and ENSURE that full holding instructions (Hold at XXXXX as published, FLyyy, EAT YYYYz), including EAT are given.

You started this thread with the admission that controllers make mistakes EVEN WHEN USING THEIR OWN LOCAL PROCEDURES, but still seem to be unwilling to accept the fact that pilots might also make mistakes when attempting to use MANDATED NON-STANDARD PROCEDURES! Why is that?

avtur007

15th Aug 2011, 17:10

Just read the charts and follow the instructions, its crystal clear. Who cares if its different to everywhere else, its there for a reason particular to that area. Its the same as not receiving your Atlantic crossing clearance from Shanwick in time, your clearance limit is the entry point (assuming you have been cleared as far as that!) and you would be expected to hold there until getting clearance to enter the NAT region. There are no holds mentioned on the charts for this, but you would still be expected to do it. By the sounds of it, some folks here would go bumbling in without a clearance anyway, because they cant or wont follow a few simple rules.:(

Dream Land

15th Aug 2011, 18:44

Yes London is a unique destination as far as ATC procedures, professional crews should'nt need extra prompting by busy controllers, yes it's a different system, get over it.

Stuck_in_an_ATR

15th Aug 2011, 19:15

Being a new (but now frequent) guest to London TMA, I have initially found this "clearance limit" stuff rather surprising. Never encountered mandatory hold requirement elsewhere and hadn't I been given a warning by my more experienced colleagues, hold would the last thing I'd do in case of reaching the last point of the STAR, as I always thought the ATC were not expecting this and it could really mess up the traffic behind... To make things worse, the STAR chart we use most often had had the "clearance limit" disclaimer recently removed - I wouldn't know about it if I hadn't been told by someone, who has flown there before...

Call me uneducated, or whatever, but I think these procedures aer not as obvious to the pilots as the ATC would think...

Del Prado

15th Aug 2011, 19:21

[lights blue touch paper]

You could always transfer them to director in sufficient time so they can tell the pilots to hold before they reach the clearance limit.

[/stands well back]

;)

Intruder

15th Aug 2011, 19:31

Yes London is a unique destination as far as ATC procedures, professional crews should'nt need extra prompting by busy controllers, yes it's a different system, get over it.
I see... You agree with southoftheborder and the former FAA Administrator who started enforcing a policy that controllers were allowed to make mistakes, but pilots were NOT allowed to. She effectively made pilots responsible for all the controllers' mistakes by not requiring controllers to correct inaccurate clearance readbacks.

I also find it interesting that you don't seem to think pilots are busy during the arrival...

Dream Land

15th Aug 2011, 20:02

What kind of an airline sends there aircraft to such a destination without some type of line training involved, if you work at an outfit like that, guess what, it's your responsibility as a pilot, is that too hard on flight crews? :confused:

At ORD, the uniformed got to go to the penalty box.

southoftheborder

15th Aug 2011, 20:42

I am not saying that ATC can be exempt from any sort of responsibility here. What I was asking was why does this happen, it seems fair to me, to say that it is written clear enough on the STAR charts, however, after discussions with a colleague of mine who works one of the London sectors that aircraft may talk to on arrival into Heathrow, I was informed that on occasion the controllers may say 'cleared (insert STAR here) for landing R27 L'. Now, maybe this is confusing to some pilots, as it seems a sort of onward clearance has been given. That will have to be looked into from our side. However, my colleague did say this was given just as an information aid, and it was only the odd ATCO that did this as far as he was aware.

Intruder:

Yes, you are right, and we do tell pilots the rough estimates of how long they are expected to hold. Usually they are informed this by the first London sector they reach, and then retold again and again until they come into contact with the guy who works the holding stack. My bugbear here is that I have heard colleagues of mine tell an aircraft, 'expect a 10 min delay at ...' but the aircraft still ploughs through the hold. An EAT is a totally different matter... an EAT is the time at which there is holding expected of over 20mins, and it is the time that the aircraft can expect to leave the holding facility to commence an approach to land'. Our rules are such that if delays are over 20 minutes, then we have to give the aircraft an EAT. Furthermore, ATCO's are just as responsible for any mistakes we make due to incorrect clearances etc etc. There are consequences if we make mistakes aswell.

Del Prado, as a fellow ATCO I am quite surprised to hear you say that. If you are TMA then you know more often that not that we hold rather high at some of the stacks. Shall we just change the highest release level to more than FL120 and let LL DIR deal with all the aircraft holding high and en-route?

Overall though, for me, this has been quite a learning exercise. It is very interesting to see the differing opinions, obviously us in the UK have slightly different procedures to the rest of the world, however, this may be due to the relative complexity and small amount of airspace with so many airfields in it. I guess the STAR charts are supposed to take any ambiguity away as to whether you should hold or not, they obviously don't. So a question then, if you are inbound to an airfield on a busy frequency, you can kind of guess that it might be busy, if you haven't been told to hold by the ATCO working you, and you are approaching the clearance limit point, then surely, a quick 'London, we are approaching BIG/OCK/BNN/LAM, are we to take up the hold' is surely the most common sensical thing? It is quite a scary thought to read that there are quite a few pilots out there who would be willing to fly through airspace without a clearance in such a busy section of airspace, just because the ATCO hadn't reinforced what is written down on the sheet in front of them. I understand, people make mistakes, we are human after all, ATCO's not reinforcing that you should hold = mistake, pilots ploughing straight through someone elses airspace because they havent read the STAR sheet properly = mistake, however, it has started to become a fairly common occurrence just recently, which was why i posed the question in the first place.

CAT3C AUTOLAND

15th Aug 2011, 20:49

I am based at LHR and know the score, but this is part of our briefing when discussing the approach. I always make a point of saying, if we are on the STAR, without an onward clearance we will enter the hold as this is the clearance limit and talk about the hold and the axis etc.

This is always dictated on the approach plate, so I dont really see an excuse if a brief between the pilots is done properly.

Capt Sly

15th Aug 2011, 22:19

I fly all over the place and on 99% of occasions the only holding I do is at LHR (my base). Other operators may not be so used to the fact that for 70% of the day you'll have to go into the hold at LHR, so you have to imagine being in their shoes. Also some pilots may be using the latest charts which now include an intermediate approach (whereas the old charts from 5 years ago merely had the STAR's and final approaches). Finally some people may just be having finger trouble - forgetting to press the 'execute' button or similar.

How to solve your problem is another matter. The best suggestion I have is to get the airlines involved in the misdemeanors to write the information in their RIM's (Route Information Manuals) if they have them, or get them to write something in their briefings (for example a NOTAM) to highlight the potential problem. The entry should include 'pilots should generally expect to hold at LHR, and if there is any doubt then one should clarify the clearance limit/holding pattern with ATC' or similar.

Alternatively perhaps you guys can have a leaderboard of airlines that make the mistake - much like airlines that do CDA's, and publish the results!

Having more crap on the ATIS is not an option I would like to see used - the weather takes up 2 lines, and the disclaimers these days seem to take up 20 lines! Wing tip clearance, readbacks etc.

Good luck with the challenge.:E

P.S> I have trouble with holding patterns in the US - "hold 070 SW patterns" is just really confusing to me especially after 12 hours at work!

Intruder

15th Aug 2011, 23:55

What I was asking was why does this happen, it seems fair to me, to say that it is written clear enough on the STAR charts, however, after discussions with a colleague of mine who works one of the London sectors that aircraft may talk to on arrival into Heathrow, I was informed that on occasion the controllers may say 'cleared (insert STAR here) for landing R27 L'.
OK...

What EXACTLY does your controllers' handbook (or whatever you call your governing document) say you are supposed to say? What is the EXACT WORDING you are supposed to use when clearing an airplane on a STAR toe end in a hold at the STAR clearance limit?

If this document is accessible to the public online, a URL and paragraph citation will do.

Once again, you admit that controllers occasionally make mistakes, and you also admit that controllers occasionally use confusing phraseology. Still, you indicate that the number of times the pilot fails to hold where required is less than the number of times the mistake or confusing phraseology is used. Why is it that you still have to ask the question as to why pilots occasionally make mistakes or misread an approach plate? The "human factor" is at work in both the cockpit and the control room. If we could expect that every pilot and every controller is perfect, then we could dispense with check rides, inspectors, etc...

Pilots, like controllers, rarely INTENTIONALLY bust a clearance. However, with the plethora of rules around the world, you can expect occasional confusion. You deal with one set of rules; we deal with too many to count!

I suspect that "Dream Land" is exactly there, not in the real world...