Speed control
Speed control
I've recently been told that my assumptions over the past 25 years have been plain wrong and need the issue clarified.
Heavy jet departing a UK airport-given radar heading half way through the SID with the comment 'No speed control'. Does that give me the opportunity to speed up above 250kts below FL100, or simply alow me to choose my speed for the climb above FL100.
Simple Q with I hope a simple answer-please don't let someone hijack this into a parliamentary question!
Heavy jet departing a UK airport-given radar heading half way through the SID with the comment 'No speed control'. Does that give me the opportunity to speed up above 250kts below FL100, or simply alow me to choose my speed for the climb above FL100.
Simple Q with I hope a simple answer-please don't let someone hijack this into a parliamentary question!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi......."no speed control"....or...."no ATC speed restriction"....or whatever....means just that! Any clearance given by ATC cancels the existing restriction [on the SID chart for example] unless it is re-stated.
HOWEVER...that applies to controlled/regulated airspace. The controller does not have the authority to over-ride the 250-below-100 OUTSIDE controlled/regulated airspace in the UK. Military aircraft are exempt.
HOWEVER...that applies to controlled/regulated airspace. The controller does not have the authority to over-ride the 250-below-100 OUTSIDE controlled/regulated airspace in the UK. Military aircraft are exempt.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by 055166k
The controller does not have the authority to over-ride the 250-below-100 OUTSIDE controlled/regulated airspace in the UK.
Speed limitations
21.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2), an aircraft shall not fly below flight level 100 at a speed which, according to its air speed indicator, is more than 250 knots.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to—
(a) flights in Class A airspace;
(b) VFR flights or IFR flights in Class B airspace;
(c) IFR flights in Class C airspace;
(d) VFR flights in Class C airspace or VFR flights or IFR flights in Class D airspace when authorised by the appropriate air traffic control unit;
............
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Up North UK
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After 25 yrs I guess you're aware that 'No ATC speed' does not absolve the pilot from complying with any speed restrictions published on specific procedures or routes (usually SIDs/STARs and IAPs).
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm...
I disagree I'm afraid. If you're flying a SID or STAR and the controller says there is "No ATC speed control" to me that means that you can fly at whatever speed you wish until further advised, ie. above 250kts below FL100 on a SID and above the quoted speed at the SLP on a STAR.
Correspondingly if you are given a climb above SID levels, unless restated, any level requirements in the interim are overidden. It is the controller's responsibility to ensure that your profile does not interefere with anybody else.
"Any clearance automatically cancels previous clearances" or words to thast effect.
I disagree I'm afraid. If you're flying a SID or STAR and the controller says there is "No ATC speed control" to me that means that you can fly at whatever speed you wish until further advised, ie. above 250kts below FL100 on a SID and above the quoted speed at the SLP on a STAR.
Correspondingly if you are given a climb above SID levels, unless restated, any level requirements in the interim are overidden. It is the controller's responsibility to ensure that your profile does not interefere with anybody else.
"Any clearance automatically cancels previous clearances" or words to thast effect.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the London TMA if a controller tells you 'no ATC speed restriction' whilst you are on departure flying the SID, this DOES cancel the 250kts speed restriction below FL100.
However a controller should only do this for overriding safety reasons or at a pilots request (for a/c configuration).
It should also be noted that when a controller cancels the speed restriction on departure it doesn't necessarily mean the pilot will speed up, due company restrictions below FL100 or climb profiles. Therefore, if the controller does want you to increase speed on departure he/she should use a phrase such as 'increase speed to 280kts or greater'.
Whilst flying a STAR, if the controller uses the phrase 'no speed control' or 'no ATC speed restriction' this canels the requirement to reduce speed at the published SLP's. If a pilot receives NO instructions regarding speed control or is told 'Standard Speeds' then I would expect the SLP's to be adhered to.
Hope that helps, TCRed
However a controller should only do this for overriding safety reasons or at a pilots request (for a/c configuration).
It should also be noted that when a controller cancels the speed restriction on departure it doesn't necessarily mean the pilot will speed up, due company restrictions below FL100 or climb profiles. Therefore, if the controller does want you to increase speed on departure he/she should use a phrase such as 'increase speed to 280kts or greater'.
Whilst flying a STAR, if the controller uses the phrase 'no speed control' or 'no ATC speed restriction' this canels the requirement to reduce speed at the published SLP's. If a pilot receives NO instructions regarding speed control or is told 'Standard Speeds' then I would expect the SLP's to be adhered to.
Hope that helps, TCRed
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TCGinger, sorry - red,
Just to amplify your statement....
It works the other way as well....an aircraft could slow down to below 250kts.....
Several operators in the LTMA have recently been taken to task for not informing tower that they will be flying slower than 250kts (jets, not puddle jumpers)... they are being told they must inform the tower before departure, or fly at 250Kts.
The flip side being that these aircraft are within their rights to slow down when the words "no ATC speed restriciotn" are uttered, sometimes hard to spot if the stacks are busy and the SID routes departures under them!!
Just to amplify your statement....
It should also be noted that when a controller cancels the speed restriction on departure it doesn't necessarily mean the pilot will speed up, due company restrictions below FL100 or climb profiles. Therefore, if the controller does want you to increase speed on departure he/she should use a phrase such as 'increase speed to 280kts or greater'.
Several operators in the LTMA have recently been taken to task for not informing tower that they will be flying slower than 250kts (jets, not puddle jumpers)... they are being told they must inform the tower before departure, or fly at 250Kts.
The flip side being that these aircraft are within their rights to slow down when the words "no ATC speed restriciotn" are uttered, sometimes hard to spot if the stacks are busy and the SID routes departures under them!!
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure the SID charts actually say there is a minimum speed of 250Kts ... or do they ?? I thought they say a maximum of 250Kts.
If not stated in the AIP, then pilots can quite legitimately fly slower than 250Kts, whether the speed restriction is lifted or not.
If not stated in the AIP, then pilots can quite legitimately fly slower than 250Kts, whether the speed restriction is lifted or not.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPRuNe Radar
Since the introduction of the 250kts speed limitation in the LTMA, there have been several instances of catch up situations which have not been highlighted on strips.
It's obviously easy to see the problem and therefore apply extra departure separation between say a JS31 and a 737, however the problems have arisen between jet aircraft that have filed speeds in the 400+ Kts range.
Some of them climb out (some A340 operators for example) as slow as 210Kts, and do not mention the fact to either the tower or radar on climbout.
If the tower are using a sporting minute or 2 departure separation this can cause enough of a catch up to become a loss of separation issue.
I know, because I was involved in one such incident when we we extremely busy on easterlies at EGLL, the stacks all very full.
The SIDs fly under the stacks and on easterlies, some of the SIDS are so positioned that we cannot chance a climb against the stack in the way that it works on westerlies.
This means leaving the aircraft on the SID (the whole idea of the 250Kts trial and the supposed 'future' of RNAV ATC)... when busy elsewhere, one tends not to worry too much about two departures on the same route - they should be separated of course after all... however fortunately whilst doing other things I checked on the progress of the leading aircraft, seeing how long it would take to clear the stacks to enable a climb, when I noticed a gradual but ominous catch up.
I had to place both aircraft on vectors to maintain 3 miles. If I had looked up a minute later than I did, then the chances are I would not have noticed the problem... the lead aircraft had cleared the first stack and was just about to fly under the next..... I would not have been able to see it properly due garbling.
If an erosion had occurred under the stack, it would have been very nasty... I would have been very confused - two aircraft that were supposedly separated proceduraly that I could now not see on RADAR due to being under the stack.
Chances are it would have taken me a fair bit of time to work out what had happened. If TCAS had been triggered, we would have had the situation of one aircraft at 6000' being instructed to descend (with other airports SIDS possibly underneath as happens with Heathrow) and the other one being instructed to climb into a full stack above!
Our Ops department have identified this as a potential problem and have toured the various establishments informing them of it.
It does however lead back to what I said in my post above - the crew of an aircraft that is configured to fly at it's best (either due to SOPs or economically) below 250Kts on departure would be within it's rights to reduce speed on the utterance "no ATC speed restrictions"
Since the introduction of the 250kts speed limitation in the LTMA, there have been several instances of catch up situations which have not been highlighted on strips.
It's obviously easy to see the problem and therefore apply extra departure separation between say a JS31 and a 737, however the problems have arisen between jet aircraft that have filed speeds in the 400+ Kts range.
Some of them climb out (some A340 operators for example) as slow as 210Kts, and do not mention the fact to either the tower or radar on climbout.
If the tower are using a sporting minute or 2 departure separation this can cause enough of a catch up to become a loss of separation issue.
I know, because I was involved in one such incident when we we extremely busy on easterlies at EGLL, the stacks all very full.
The SIDs fly under the stacks and on easterlies, some of the SIDS are so positioned that we cannot chance a climb against the stack in the way that it works on westerlies.
This means leaving the aircraft on the SID (the whole idea of the 250Kts trial and the supposed 'future' of RNAV ATC)... when busy elsewhere, one tends not to worry too much about two departures on the same route - they should be separated of course after all... however fortunately whilst doing other things I checked on the progress of the leading aircraft, seeing how long it would take to clear the stacks to enable a climb, when I noticed a gradual but ominous catch up.
I had to place both aircraft on vectors to maintain 3 miles. If I had looked up a minute later than I did, then the chances are I would not have noticed the problem... the lead aircraft had cleared the first stack and was just about to fly under the next..... I would not have been able to see it properly due garbling.
If an erosion had occurred under the stack, it would have been very nasty... I would have been very confused - two aircraft that were supposedly separated proceduraly that I could now not see on RADAR due to being under the stack.
Chances are it would have taken me a fair bit of time to work out what had happened. If TCAS had been triggered, we would have had the situation of one aircraft at 6000' being instructed to descend (with other airports SIDS possibly underneath as happens with Heathrow) and the other one being instructed to climb into a full stack above!
Our Ops department have identified this as a potential problem and have toured the various establishments informing them of it.
It does however lead back to what I said in my post above - the crew of an aircraft that is configured to fly at it's best (either due to SOPs or economically) below 250Kts on departure would be within it's rights to reduce speed on the utterance "no ATC speed restrictions"
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The scenario is a classic .. and I am sure there a more than a few of us who think of the phrase ''There but for the grace of God go I'' when reading your account.
The filed speeds should have no real bearing on TMA operations. They are after all cruising TAS, which are applicable at cruising altitude in level flight. I think a lot of jets would struggle to do their filed 420-490 Knots below FL100 no matter what speed restrictions were lifted
The point I was trying to make I suppose is that there appears to be no document which says that 250Kts is not only the maximum but also the minimum speed for jet departures in UK TMA environments. If it is not in the pilots documentation (i.e SID charts), then the only way to ensure separation is to state a speed for the aircraft to fly.
In the absence of such a statement, either in written or verbal form, pilots will of course fly at a speed which suits them and not necessarily ATC. Hence I don't think removing the chart speed restriction (which is a maximum) on the RT will cause anyone to slow down as they are entitled to fly at the slower speed anyway by default should they choose to do so.
Unless of course someone can point us to something which states otherwise ??
The filed speeds should have no real bearing on TMA operations. They are after all cruising TAS, which are applicable at cruising altitude in level flight. I think a lot of jets would struggle to do their filed 420-490 Knots below FL100 no matter what speed restrictions were lifted
The point I was trying to make I suppose is that there appears to be no document which says that 250Kts is not only the maximum but also the minimum speed for jet departures in UK TMA environments. If it is not in the pilots documentation (i.e SID charts), then the only way to ensure separation is to state a speed for the aircraft to fly.
In the absence of such a statement, either in written or verbal form, pilots will of course fly at a speed which suits them and not necessarily ATC. Hence I don't think removing the chart speed restriction (which is a maximum) on the RT will cause anyone to slow down as they are entitled to fly at the slower speed anyway by default should they choose to do so.
Unless of course someone can point us to something which states otherwise ??
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correspondingly if you are given a climb above SID levels, unless restated, any level requirements in the interim are overidden. It is the controller's responsibility to ensure that your profile does not interefere with anybody else.
"Any clearance automatically cancels previous clearances" or words to thast effect.
"Any clearance automatically cancels previous clearances" or words to thast effect.
Is this the same on STAR's?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPRuNe Radar
you are entirely correct but there are moves afoot to try to let crews of big jets understand the implication of slow speed climb outs.
It's the very fact that they are not informing the tower - either because there is no rerquirement to do so at the moment, or because they forget that causes the problem... many times it is not due to aircraft limitations, but more to do with company SOPs.... we can (and have done so in the past) ask aircraft to speed up.
A little bit of communication before getting airborne would prevent any problems though and would allow the operator to fly the aircraft as they wanted, either in accordance with SOPs or airframe limitations.
Pera
In the UK if a clearance to climb above the SID level is given, it overrides any of the limitations of that SID... by giving the climb you are cancelling the level portion, though not the track of the SID. If the controller requires an aircraft to stick to the level restrictions they would be
a) Silly to complicate things by giving a climb (the extra climb is done to get the aircraft up and out of the way... the process of giving away a climb infers that you want the aircraft to climb straight away)
and
b) Should reiterate any required level restrictions in the new clearance to climb.
It is exactly the same as clearing an inbound aircraft to lower level than one given by, for example, a previous sector... the new descent cancels any level by restriction unless it is re-stated.
you are entirely correct but there are moves afoot to try to let crews of big jets understand the implication of slow speed climb outs.
It's the very fact that they are not informing the tower - either because there is no rerquirement to do so at the moment, or because they forget that causes the problem... many times it is not due to aircraft limitations, but more to do with company SOPs.... we can (and have done so in the past) ask aircraft to speed up.
A little bit of communication before getting airborne would prevent any problems though and would allow the operator to fly the aircraft as they wanted, either in accordance with SOPs or airframe limitations.
Pera
In the UK if a clearance to climb above the SID level is given, it overrides any of the limitations of that SID... by giving the climb you are cancelling the level portion, though not the track of the SID. If the controller requires an aircraft to stick to the level restrictions they would be
a) Silly to complicate things by giving a climb (the extra climb is done to get the aircraft up and out of the way... the process of giving away a climb infers that you want the aircraft to climb straight away)
and
b) Should reiterate any required level restrictions in the new clearance to climb.
It is exactly the same as clearing an inbound aircraft to lower level than one given by, for example, a previous sector... the new descent cancels any level by restriction unless it is re-stated.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Up North UK
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cartman's Twin, I'm not clear whether you were disagreeing with me, but just to clarify - 'No ATC speed control' (for separation purposes) is not the same as any speed limits imposed for other reasons. Where a maximum speed is stated on part of a published SID (for procedure/airspace design purposes), it must not be ignored even though ATC advise no speed control for traffic separation.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm Mr PC, we do indeed have a different opinion
My understanding (and indeed that of all my ATC colleagues - I hope, and pretty much every pilot I've spoken to) is that if you are flying a SID (for example) that is your initial clearance issued by the TWR controller and save a whole host of time rather than saying "after departure intercept the XYZ radial and at 2 DME turn left to point B crossing B at 4000' or above, speed restriction 250kts or less below FL100 etc etc". It saves a lot of time for all to say DVR 2M!
Now the SIDs and STARs are very carefully planned to allow for noise pref routings, keep a/c inside controlled airspace and indeed keep you well separated from all other SIDs and STARs within the airspace. They also provide for a clearance limit for the purposes of radio fail procedures and so forth. All of which, I'm sure, is no news to you guys.
Well once you are in contact with ATC in the air, any amendment to the issued clearance (the SID/STAR) removes the published restriction unless it is reiterated in the clearance and that includes speed. For example the STAR SLP may be 250kts by point X but if you are the only a/c in the sky or indeed if the controller wants you to be no. 1 of a series then they can cancel this restriction or indeed instruct you to maintain a higher speed until advised. It is then incumbent on the controller to ensure this information is passed to the next controller so they can allow for this 'non-standard' speed to be born in mind further down the line. As was previously mentioned this is within the class A airspace of a TMA type environment rather than 'The Bundhu of class G'.
The same applies for SIDs. The controller can cancel the published speed limit by saying 'no ATC speed restriction' and then the pilot has THE OPTION of increasing speeds if they wish. After all, the SID is simply a concise version of a verbal clearance that would have to be issued by the TWR bod. The next controller amends the clearance and unless reiterated, it cancels the previous.
That is my understanding and opinion although I'd welcome any other people's input too....
My understanding (and indeed that of all my ATC colleagues - I hope, and pretty much every pilot I've spoken to) is that if you are flying a SID (for example) that is your initial clearance issued by the TWR controller and save a whole host of time rather than saying "after departure intercept the XYZ radial and at 2 DME turn left to point B crossing B at 4000' or above, speed restriction 250kts or less below FL100 etc etc". It saves a lot of time for all to say DVR 2M!
Now the SIDs and STARs are very carefully planned to allow for noise pref routings, keep a/c inside controlled airspace and indeed keep you well separated from all other SIDs and STARs within the airspace. They also provide for a clearance limit for the purposes of radio fail procedures and so forth. All of which, I'm sure, is no news to you guys.
Well once you are in contact with ATC in the air, any amendment to the issued clearance (the SID/STAR) removes the published restriction unless it is reiterated in the clearance and that includes speed. For example the STAR SLP may be 250kts by point X but if you are the only a/c in the sky or indeed if the controller wants you to be no. 1 of a series then they can cancel this restriction or indeed instruct you to maintain a higher speed until advised. It is then incumbent on the controller to ensure this information is passed to the next controller so they can allow for this 'non-standard' speed to be born in mind further down the line. As was previously mentioned this is within the class A airspace of a TMA type environment rather than 'The Bundhu of class G'.
The same applies for SIDs. The controller can cancel the published speed limit by saying 'no ATC speed restriction' and then the pilot has THE OPTION of increasing speeds if they wish. After all, the SID is simply a concise version of a verbal clearance that would have to be issued by the TWR bod. The next controller amends the clearance and unless reiterated, it cancels the previous.
That is my understanding and opinion although I'd welcome any other people's input too....
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pontius's Copilot,
Cartman is correct I'm afraid... certainly from an ATC perspective and in this scenario, that's really the only perspective that counts as it is ATC that has the big picture (as far as traffic is concerned) and is providing the separation.
How they achieve that is up to them.
Any utterance of "no ATC speed restriction" means just that - you as a pilot can fly whatever speed you like.
It is up to the ATCO to ensure that is a safe instruction, in the same way that if you are on a SID which has stepped climbs within it's profile and the ATCO instructs you to climb to a level above the final SID level, you should climb to that level straight away.
The ATCO has used his or her knowledge of what else is happening at that point in time to determine that the stepped climb (to stop you from conflicting with other SIDS for example) is not needed. The argument you give above is not a valid one - by implication you are saying that you must still adhere to climb restrictions as well.
The SID/STAR is an ATC clearance; any new instruction cancels the old clearance unless the restrictions are re-iterated within the new instruction.
As an example, there are several SIDs from EGKK that turn through almost 180 degrees on climbout. This causes them to come into confliction with several EGLL SIDS.
Because of this, there are height restrictions on the EGLL SID - (cross point x/y/z at or above...) and similarly there are height restrictions on the EGKK SID (Cross x/y/z not above...). Further to that, as an ATCO, you are taught very early on that on these EGKK SIDS, the speed restriction must not be lifted until the aircraft has completed the turn, because as you rightly say, this will change the track profile, thus potentially bringing the aircraft into confliction with the EGLL departure, (and even at times, traffic manoeuvring on intermediate approach in the EGLL RMA) even if the height limitations are observed.
So in a nutshell,
a) Any new clearance cancels an old clearance - whatever format the old clearance was issued in (either as a full set of detailed instructions or as a procedure - i.e. an abbreviation for a full set of instructions)
b) ATCOs are responsible for providing separation
c) ATCOs are very highly trained and are aware of the implications of their actions
None of the above detracts from the pilots right to question or even refuse to carry out an instruction if in their opinion, that instruction would put the aircraft in harms way.
None of the above detracts from the premise that the safety of the aircraft is ultimately the pilots responsibility.
None of the above dismisses the fact that ATCOs and (Pilots) are only human and can (and will) sometimes make mistakes either through error of judgement or poor technique.
Cartman is correct I'm afraid... certainly from an ATC perspective and in this scenario, that's really the only perspective that counts as it is ATC that has the big picture (as far as traffic is concerned) and is providing the separation.
How they achieve that is up to them.
Any utterance of "no ATC speed restriction" means just that - you as a pilot can fly whatever speed you like.
It is up to the ATCO to ensure that is a safe instruction, in the same way that if you are on a SID which has stepped climbs within it's profile and the ATCO instructs you to climb to a level above the final SID level, you should climb to that level straight away.
The ATCO has used his or her knowledge of what else is happening at that point in time to determine that the stepped climb (to stop you from conflicting with other SIDS for example) is not needed. The argument you give above is not a valid one - by implication you are saying that you must still adhere to climb restrictions as well.
The SID/STAR is an ATC clearance; any new instruction cancels the old clearance unless the restrictions are re-iterated within the new instruction.
As an example, there are several SIDs from EGKK that turn through almost 180 degrees on climbout. This causes them to come into confliction with several EGLL SIDS.
Because of this, there are height restrictions on the EGLL SID - (cross point x/y/z at or above...) and similarly there are height restrictions on the EGKK SID (Cross x/y/z not above...). Further to that, as an ATCO, you are taught very early on that on these EGKK SIDS, the speed restriction must not be lifted until the aircraft has completed the turn, because as you rightly say, this will change the track profile, thus potentially bringing the aircraft into confliction with the EGLL departure, (and even at times, traffic manoeuvring on intermediate approach in the EGLL RMA) even if the height limitations are observed.
So in a nutshell,
a) Any new clearance cancels an old clearance - whatever format the old clearance was issued in (either as a full set of detailed instructions or as a procedure - i.e. an abbreviation for a full set of instructions)
b) ATCOs are responsible for providing separation
c) ATCOs are very highly trained and are aware of the implications of their actions
None of the above detracts from the pilots right to question or even refuse to carry out an instruction if in their opinion, that instruction would put the aircraft in harms way.
None of the above detracts from the premise that the safety of the aircraft is ultimately the pilots responsibility.
None of the above dismisses the fact that ATCOs and (Pilots) are only human and can (and will) sometimes make mistakes either through error of judgement or poor technique.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to add some clarification to the above as thinking about things, it can be a bit messy... If when on a SID someone utters "No ATC speed restriction" but nothing else, you are expected to still comply with any height restrictions i.e. cross x/y/z/ at or above... Although the climb profile changes with speed, it is up to you (most often via the FMS) to ensure that any lifting of speed still allows you to meet those criteria.
It's the same as if you are arriving to be told, 80 miles out, that you have a 20 minute delay... of course, you want to slow down as much as you can to absorb some of the delay on the way to the hold... you may be told "no ATC speed restriction" in this instance as well - if there is nothing behind you catching you up.
Unless you have been told otherwise, you still have to meet any old 'descend, be level by' restrictions - so yes you can slow down, but as long as you can comply with the restriction!
It's the same as if you are arriving to be told, 80 miles out, that you have a 20 minute delay... of course, you want to slow down as much as you can to absorb some of the delay on the way to the hold... you may be told "no ATC speed restriction" in this instance as well - if there is nothing behind you catching you up.
Unless you have been told otherwise, you still have to meet any old 'descend, be level by' restrictions - so yes you can slow down, but as long as you can comply with the restriction!
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Up North UK
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK gents, just before I wind my neck in, please check this out ...
EGBB / BHX 'Trent' SID off Rw15 goes towards 'HON' with a 150deg left turn to establish the 018R from 'HON' - the text says "Max speed 210 kts until established on the 018R". My guess is that that is imposed to ensure the aircraft remains inside acceptable limits (airspace? but in other places it could be terrain or obstacles) in the turn; are you saying it's OK - with "No ATC speed control" - to exceed that speed and 'bust' whatever that speed limit was intended to achieve?
I'm looking for an answer that is generic/principled, and applicable throuout the UK, not just at your airport.
EGBB / BHX 'Trent' SID off Rw15 goes towards 'HON' with a 150deg left turn to establish the 018R from 'HON' - the text says "Max speed 210 kts until established on the 018R". My guess is that that is imposed to ensure the aircraft remains inside acceptable limits (airspace? but in other places it could be terrain or obstacles) in the turn; are you saying it's OK - with "No ATC speed control" - to exceed that speed and 'bust' whatever that speed limit was intended to achieve?
I'm looking for an answer that is generic/principled, and applicable throuout the UK, not just at your airport.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: united kingdom
Age: 63
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Simple answer to your question is yes
That said, all the controllers know when a SID has a speed restriction on it that is in place for separation standards etc. A good example is LGW or LUT departures where is it is quite common to here phrases such as "After the right turn is complete, no ATC speed restriction."
That said, all the controllers know when a SID has a speed restriction on it that is in place for separation standards etc. A good example is LGW or LUT departures where is it is quite common to here phrases such as "After the right turn is complete, no ATC speed restriction."
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be clear in every clearance to avoid confusions
ATC controllers should be clear about every clearance they give and avoid statements that create confusion.NO SPEED Restriction implies that the pilot can slow down or speed up. in certain parts of the world pilots ask for high speed below 10000 and they have the clearance to do so by the controller by saying no speed restrictions.In the states there are three airports that can wave the 250 below 10000 as they understand that the best rate of climb clean speed or the green dot speed is higher than 250 and that helps in expediting the flow of traffic as well.
