PDA

View Full Version : Descent Clearance


wilco77
14th Dec 2018, 23:04
Hi everyone,
When given a descent clearance other than at pilots discretion, what is the stipulated time I have to commence my descent and where does it say in the regulations.
thanks
wilco

Check Airman
15th Dec 2018, 00:50
AIM 4-4-10-d

d. When ATC has not used the term “AT PILOT’S DISCRETION” nor imposed any climb or descent restrictions, pilots should initiate climb or descent promptly on acknowledgement of the clearance.

AmarokGTI
16th Dec 2018, 08:17
Hi everyone,
When given a descent clearance other than at pilots discretion, what is the stipulated time I have to commence my descent and where does it say in the regulations.
thanks
wilco

Where are you based? Under Australian rules you have one minute.

The pilot in command must commence a change of level as soon as possible, but not later than one (1) minute after receiving that instruction from ATC, unless that instruction specifies a later time or place.

wilco77
17th Dec 2018, 07:35
Where can I find this information for the Australian regs

westhawk
17th Dec 2018, 07:47
Check Airman's response appears to quote the Aeronautical Information Manual published by the US FAA.The 7110.65 (FAA controller's handbook) informs controllers that pilots are expected to commence descent "promptly" upon receipt of the instruction, so it's likely what ATC expects of all pilots when operating in US airspace.

But it is nice to know that should i ever visit Australia, I can take my time starting that descent! :)

KRviator
17th Dec 2018, 08:46
Where can I find this information for the Australian regsThe AIP, the latest version of which can be found HERE (https://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/current/aip/complete_08NOV2018.pdf). The actual reference is AIP ENR 1.7.4.1.1. Easiest way to find it is to CTRL-F "ENR 1.7 - 7". Make sure you have spaces either side of the hyphen. That'll take you to the right page in this version.

aterpster
17th Dec 2018, 14:30
The AIP, the latest version of which can be found HERE (https://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/current/aip/complete_08NOV2018.pdf). The actual reference is AIP ENR 1.7.4.1.1. Easiest way to find it is to CTRL-F "ENR 1.7 - 7". Make sure you have spaces either side of the hyphen. That'll take you to the right page in this version.
What happens in Australia stays in Australia. :-)

One minute would be waaay too long on a rush hour arrival in the New York City area.

underfire
17th Dec 2018, 17:53
[QUOTE]Where are you based? Under Australian rules you have one minute.

The pilot in command must commence a change of level as soon as possible, but not later than one (1) minute after receiving that instruction from ATC, unless that instruction specifies a later time or place.
/QUOTE]

This phrase is under Cruising Flight Levels section.
Isnt this phrase only used for a change of flight level, not an approach descent?

KRviator
17th Dec 2018, 22:19
Where are you based? Under Australian rules you have one minute.

The pilot in command must commence a change of level as soon as possible, but not later than one (1) minute after receiving that instruction from ATC, unless that instruction specifies a later time or place.


This phrase is under Cruising Flight Levels section.
Isnt this phrase only used for a change of flight level, not an approach descent?No, it's not. Cruising Flight Levels is chapter 3, not 4 (that contains the phrase).

LeadSled
19th Dec 2018, 07:40
Folks,
The Australian" one minute" entry in the AIP has been there since traffic movements in Australia were measured in movements per day, not per hour ---- and I am far from certain that this entry has a legal head of power.

However, with the forthcoming CASR Part 91 all this will resolved ---- anything from ATC will be legally considered an order, with the PIC bound to comply, on pain of criminal prosecution , with the exception of an emergency.

This contrasts with the present legal (and ICAO/Rest of the World) position, where ATC clearances/instructions are for the consideration and acceptance or rejection by the PIC, with the PIC having ultimate authority and responsibility.

As ATC screens in Australia do not show Cb/TS --- expect a lot more Maydays every time they vector you into a Cb/TS. Given an ATC union that is, at times, quite militantly anti-pilot***, this could be interesting.

Tootle pip!!

*** Look up Flight Safety Foundation articles some time ago ---- a survey of Australian air safety, where the ATC union nominated pilots as the biggest threat to air safety. In the same survey, pilot opinion nominated Australian ATC as the biggest threat ---- indeed the whole survey was a good example of: "Don't confuse me with facts, my mind is made up".

aterpster
19th Dec 2018, 14:15
This contrasts with the present legal (and ICAO/Rest of the World) position, where ATC clearances/instructions are for the consideration and acceptance or rejection by the PIC, with the PIC having ultimate authority and responsibility.

In the U.S. a clearance has always been considered open for negotiation where an instruction requires compliance unless it causes a safety of flight issue.

LeadSled
19th Dec 2018, 15:10
In the U.S. a clearance has always been considered open for negotiation where an instruction requires compliance unless it causes a safety of flight issue.

aterpster,
I suggest you look at the proposed CASA Part 91 , and compare it to, say, FAA FAR 91.3, to see what I am getting at.
Tootle pip!!

LookingForAJob
19th Dec 2018, 23:44
aterpster,
I suggest you look at the proposed CASA Part 91 , and compare it to, say, FAA FAR 91.3, to see what I am getting at.
Tootle pip!!
What proposed CASA reg?

Pera
20th Dec 2018, 01:39
One minute is the answer in Australia. Most initial descent clearances are given as 'when ready' so the one minute doesn't apply in that case.

Off topic but ATC will always facilitate an alternate clearance where possible. If they cannot due traffic or airspace then of course you have to do what you need to to keep your aircraft safe and ATC will continue to provide a SIS but you won't be getting a control service. I've seen aircraft fly through active restricted airspace (no longer receiving a control service and with ATC declaring an emergency) to avoid thunderstorms. Paperwork was submitted (as required) but there was no problem for the pilot or ATC. Everyone did their job and the outcome was a safe as possible. It is team work in the end.

LeadSled
20th Dec 2018, 05:01
What proposed CASA reg?

LFAJ,
I hope you are not in Australia --- if you are, and anything to do with aviation, how could you have missed the decades long, billion $$$ "Regulatory Reform Program".

The one that has given us the licensing disaster, the pilot shortage, the completely screwed up maintenance rules, and the impending Part 91/135/121 that will decimate large sections of light GA.

You have obviously not been paying attention ---- or believe the CASA spin??

Tootle pip!!

LookingForAJob
20th Dec 2018, 19:38
LFAJ,
I hope you are not in Australia --- if you are, and anything to do with aviation, how could you have missed the decades long, billion $$$ "Regulatory Reform Program".

The one that has given us the licensing disaster, the pilot shortage, the completely screwed up maintenance rules, and the impending Part 91/135/121 that will decimate large sections of light GA.

You have obviously not been paying attention ---- or believe the CASA spin??

Tootle pip!!
A really helpful reply - thanks. Are you referring to the Civil Aviation Safety Amendment (Part 91) Regulations 2018 which were enacted on 6 December? And in particular part 91.265? If so, you do appear to be being a bit of a drama queen or king. Paraphrasing the legislation, it says that pilots have to follow a clearance unless it's not practical to get an alternative clearance before deviating and it's for reasons of safety......much the same as most other states, and clearly implies that any clearance is open to negotiation.

The FAR that you mention is about a different topic, the pilot-in-command's ultimate responsibility, and I can't help feeling that this will be implemented somewhere in the Australian legislation, but I guess you will know that better than I.

For whatever reason, what has in the past been considered to be common practise and normal operating procedure is increasingly being transposed into legislation - I'm sure there are good reasons for it although they escape me. In European Union airspace you now are in breach of legislation if you use non-standard phraseology, from what I recall this applies even if one makes a slip of the tongue which is then corrected. Obviously such law is not applied rigorously and, presumably, is intended to be used in cases of blatant and intentional disregard of the legislation. As a non-lawyer it seems to me to be poor law that only gets applied in some cases and, effectively, criminalises minor departures from the norm. But we're stuck with it for the moment in many situations - fortunately in most jurisdictions prosecutors and the judiciary appear to be taking a sensible approach to such law for the moment but, of course, there's no guarantee for the future or for an individual that gets caught up in a messy situation.

And for what it's worth, I have almost nothing to do with the Australian environment and most certainly have little knowledge of regulatory policies currently being pursued.

LeadSled
20th Dec 2018, 22:56
Are you referring to the Civil Aviation Safety Amendment (Part 91) Regulations 2018 which were enacted on 6 December? And in particular part 91.265? If so, you do appear to be being a bit of a drama queen or king.

And for what it's worth, I have almost nothing to do with the Australian environment and most certainly have little knowledge of regulatory policies currently being pursued.

LFAJ,
As you say, you have little to do with the AU environment, therefor you probably do not understand the significance of the "Australian Way" --- and our "practice" of containing the most trivial matters in strict liability criminal law, with a system of liberally applied administrative fines --- that can and do produce serious limitations on a person's international travel --- quite apart from all the other expense and inconvenience, up to and including having your career abruptly terminated.
I have spent to much time assisting people in trouble with CASA, and at appeals to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, to NOT understand the literal and extreme way of interpretation and enforcement in AU.
Tootle pip!!

Capn Bloggs
21st Dec 2018, 05:24
Leadsled, please take your ranting some place else and stay on topic.

"Commence descent within one minute". Pretty simple really.

aterpster
21st Dec 2018, 14:51
aterpster,
I suggest you look at the proposed CASA Part 91 , and compare it to, say, FAA FAR 91.3, to see what I am getting at.
Tootle pip!!
I don't see what you're getting at.

LeadSled
21st Dec 2018, 23:28
I don't see what you're getting at.

Aterpster,
If you can't spot the difference, I can't help you, I would have thought it was pretty obvious.
Bloggsie,
As I said on my first post on this thread.
Tootle pip!!

Capn Bloggs
21st Dec 2018, 23:42
As I said on my first post on this thread.
Yes, totally irrelevant to the thread. Stay on topic or rant elsewhere.