Pilot request for assistance re. Manchester / Scotish airspace classification
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sutton
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot request for assistance re. Manchester / Scotish airspace classification
Hello,
Our company speed policy policy is (in the descent)
Class ABC airspace - 250 knots max, decline ATC offers of faster.
Class DEFG - 250 knots max no ATC discretion for faster.
(My understanding is that this a mandatory ICAO restriction for Class DEFG and below).
I don't have access to my charts at home and have been asked the question can we fly our 737s at 300 knots in the descent (below FL100) between TNT and NANTI.
So the question is what is the classification of airspace between TNT and NANTI ?
Thanks in advance
Our company speed policy policy is (in the descent)
Class ABC airspace - 250 knots max, decline ATC offers of faster.
Class DEFG - 250 knots max no ATC discretion for faster.
(My understanding is that this a mandatory ICAO restriction for Class DEFG and below).
I don't have access to my charts at home and have been asked the question can we fly our 737s at 300 knots in the descent (below FL100) between TNT and NANTI.
So the question is what is the classification of airspace between TNT and NANTI ?
Thanks in advance
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Age: 32
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Class A probably; http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/pamsl...ENR_6_1_4_1_en
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RMC, can you explain your company policy to "decline ATC offers of faster" please? I've only had two adamant that they weren't going to fly 290kts, both got orbits and extended vectors making them last when they were first.......
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sutton
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi 5 Milesbaby....As you know I don't make the rules....this is an ICAO requirment for airspace in which VFR and IFR traffic mix. It is also shown in the link (top left corner) by Diaz.
Personally I don't understand why it is OK to accept free speed in the climb but not in the descent (in the same class of airspace)?
Personally I don't understand why it is OK to accept free speed in the climb but not in the descent (in the same class of airspace)?
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Well I know where I'm not....
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi RMC,
So, presuming that you are operating into GP. It is class A airspace in the DTY CTA.
The only laid down speed restriction you have to follow is the SLP which is 10 before WAL.
Your wording about ATC involvement is interesting. If I were to 'offer' you a higher speed and you elected to not to take it then fine. I would use words such as "speed not greater or less than" giving you the freedom to do what you want.
If I wanted you at a specific speed for separation/streaming purposes then I would issue an instruction to that effect and I would expect to be complied with. If you then said you where unable to comply then, as 5miles has already stated, plan B/C/D etc. would be brought into effect which may mean you lose out.
I wanted to add that I dont mean anything malicious when I say 'lose out' just that I've been in/seen a few situations where policies like this have been inforced and you've got another following. What do you do, slow them up? Well that's hardly fair to make them fly at another companies SOP.
So, presuming that you are operating into GP. It is class A airspace in the DTY CTA.
The only laid down speed restriction you have to follow is the SLP which is 10 before WAL.
Your wording about ATC involvement is interesting. If I were to 'offer' you a higher speed and you elected to not to take it then fine. I would use words such as "speed not greater or less than" giving you the freedom to do what you want.
If I wanted you at a specific speed for separation/streaming purposes then I would issue an instruction to that effect and I would expect to be complied with. If you then said you where unable to comply then, as 5miles has already stated, plan B/C/D etc. would be brought into effect which may mean you lose out.
I wanted to add that I dont mean anything malicious when I say 'lose out' just that I've been in/seen a few situations where policies like this have been inforced and you've got another following. What do you do, slow them up? Well that's hardly fair to make them fly at another companies SOP.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm guessing that
are different to ATC instructions to go faster. I've had pilots of a certain airline, when given "no speed restriction" have said "we can only exceed 250kts if you tell us to".
ATC offers of faster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sutton
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi DTHP,
Correct operate into EGGP these days.
Thanks for the clarification on airspace....got back into work yesterday had a look at the charts and ,as you say, the airspace in question is class A.
According to ICAO rules (for aircraft in the descent)
Class ABC airspace - 250 knots max, decline ATC offers of faster.
Class DEFG - 250 knots max no ATC discretion for faster.
This is an ICAO requirement rather than a company requirement...the only company input into this is that (in class A -C airspace) we should decline OFFERS of speed higher than 250 Knots...but accept INSTRUCTIONS to fly at higher speed.
The implication being that the company would RATHER we keep 250 or less below FL 100 (ie don't seek it) BUT if you give us an instruction to do so then accept it.
In my case going from DTY class A into LPL class D the mandatory 250 knots applies (this is where ,ICAO state, neither pilot or ATC have discretion to exceed 250 knots).
This may sound like word play but we have FDM (Flight Data Monitoring - the spy in the cab) these days and if I am doing 250 knots in class D airspace I will be getting a phone call.
Correct operate into EGGP these days.
Thanks for the clarification on airspace....got back into work yesterday had a look at the charts and ,as you say, the airspace in question is class A.
According to ICAO rules (for aircraft in the descent)
Class ABC airspace - 250 knots max, decline ATC offers of faster.
Class DEFG - 250 knots max no ATC discretion for faster.
This is an ICAO requirement rather than a company requirement...the only company input into this is that (in class A -C airspace) we should decline OFFERS of speed higher than 250 Knots...but accept INSTRUCTIONS to fly at higher speed.
The implication being that the company would RATHER we keep 250 or less below FL 100 (ie don't seek it) BUT if you give us an instruction to do so then accept it.
In my case going from DTY class A into LPL class D the mandatory 250 knots applies (this is where ,ICAO state, neither pilot or ATC have discretion to exceed 250 knots).
This may sound like word play but we have FDM (Flight Data Monitoring - the spy in the cab) these days and if I am doing 250 knots in class D airspace I will be getting a phone call.
Already covered here
The ANO roughly states the following:
The 250kts speed limit does not apply to:
Flights in Class A and B airspace
IFR flights in Class C airspace (currently no class C in UK)
IFR flights in Class D airspace when authorised by an ATC unit
Test flights in accordance with specified conditions
Aircraft taking part in flying displays when authorised by the CAA
Aircraft subject to written permission granted by the CAA
Aircraft not subject to the ANO
It is quite interesting (or perhaps not!) that the ANO is quite specific with regards to class D airspace, in that it infers that ATC have the authority to set the law, as it were, with respect to speed limits.
The 250kts speed limit does not apply to:
Flights in Class A and B airspace
IFR flights in Class C airspace (currently no class C in UK)
IFR flights in Class D airspace when authorised by an ATC unit
Test flights in accordance with specified conditions
Aircraft taking part in flying displays when authorised by the CAA
Aircraft subject to written permission granted by the CAA
Aircraft not subject to the ANO
It is quite interesting (or perhaps not!) that the ANO is quite specific with regards to class D airspace, in that it infers that ATC have the authority to set the law, as it were, with respect to speed limits.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sutton
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good link Del ...I suspect the spanner in the works part of your quote is...
I’ll limit my discussion to the UK to keep things simple. The ANO roughly states the following:
The 250kts speed limit does not apply to:
Flights in Class A and B airspace
IFR flights in Class C airspace (currently no class C in UK)
IFR flights in Class D airspace when authorised by an ATC unit
Test flights in accordance with specified conditions
Aircraft taking part in flying displays when authorised by the CAA
Aircraft subject to written permission granted by the CAA
Aircraft not subject to the ANO
Our bible is the part A....for issue of an AOC it has to mesh with the requirements of the 26 countries we fly to (over 40 bases now...most of them outside the UK).
From what has been said it seems clear NATS will allow greater than 250 knots in class D....our part A (which says no ATC authority to grant speeds in excess of 250 knots) must relate to the most restrictive country we operate into.
I guess this is frustrating for you guys...but we have to stick with what our Part A says....even if it lowest common denominator.
I’ll limit my discussion to the UK to keep things simple. The ANO roughly states the following:
The 250kts speed limit does not apply to:
Flights in Class A and B airspace
IFR flights in Class C airspace (currently no class C in UK)
IFR flights in Class D airspace when authorised by an ATC unit
Test flights in accordance with specified conditions
Aircraft taking part in flying displays when authorised by the CAA
Aircraft subject to written permission granted by the CAA
Aircraft not subject to the ANO
Our bible is the part A....for issue of an AOC it has to mesh with the requirements of the 26 countries we fly to (over 40 bases now...most of them outside the UK).
From what has been said it seems clear NATS will allow greater than 250 knots in class D....our part A (which says no ATC authority to grant speeds in excess of 250 knots) must relate to the most restrictive country we operate into.
I guess this is frustrating for you guys...but we have to stick with what our Part A says....even if it lowest common denominator.
PPRuNe Bashaholic
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 1997
Location: The Peoples Alcoholic Republic of Jockistan
Posts: 1,442
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The quoted text was from a post made in 2004, which is now out of date. As Fat Controller says, lots of Class C in the UK now, as it is the classification for all our airspace above FL195.
PPRuNe Bashaholic
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 1997
Location: The Peoples Alcoholic Republic of Jockistan
Posts: 1,442
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi RMC
When you say that ICAO say it's mandatory for 250 knots maximum in the descent, do you mean at all levels or only on passing FL100 ? If your wording is correct then that could also read that if you are level flight or climbing then the restriction doesn't apply
To recap:
UK Class A has no restriction, unless specified on a SID or STAR.
UK Class C has no restrictions.
UK Class D is 250 knots restriction below FL100, but ATC can lift this. This can either be offered, leaving the decision to the pilot, or an instruction, which is mandatory. In the latter, if you are unable to comply, then advise ATC.
When you say that ICAO say it's mandatory for 250 knots maximum in the descent, do you mean at all levels or only on passing FL100 ? If your wording is correct then that could also read that if you are level flight or climbing then the restriction doesn't apply
To recap:
UK Class A has no restriction, unless specified on a SID or STAR.
UK Class C has no restrictions.
UK Class D is 250 knots restriction below FL100, but ATC can lift this. This can either be offered, leaving the decision to the pilot, or an instruction, which is mandatory. In the latter, if you are unable to comply, then advise ATC.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Well I know where I'm not....
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's interesting reading this developing, I was unaware that UK rules governing speed restrictions differ from ICAO significantly. I learnt my trade from CAA MATS 1&2 and the UK ANO.
This does explain something that has perplexed me and others for a while with pilots asking for "Hi Speed" whilst operating in Class A. So thanks for that!
The debate now is whether or not your airline would look on you negatively for flying above their SOPS which are based on ICAO. Surely that is a lack of flexibility on your airlines part, if local rules are different. Also you should be able to trust in ATC that if they are issuing you with speeds that they are legal!
Your point about flying and controlling to the lowest common denominator is becoming a real thorn in all our sides.
Take this SID restrictions debacle. For many years pilots seemed perfectly happy to receive a executive instruction from a controller and act on it. Now, because of ICAO trying to implement a policy that was foolish in the first place (RT loading primarily), we are now in a situation where we are constantly having to repeat ourselves when issuing climb instructions. Even when we do use the word now, the non-uk companies are still saying "confirm unrestricted" and if we forget to say to a uk-company climb now, they are saying it too!!
Absoulute sorry state of affairs, brought on by ICAO who where responding to a incident that happened somewhere in eastern europe (I believe). What did I read in April from the CAA: "From the State responses, ICAO has identified that their current provisions have not provided the intended simplicity, efficiency, and global standardisation to ensure flight safety" (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP493S...tion201004.pdf)
Well, Duh! Why do you think the UK refused in the first place, which was a CAA decree after pilots & controllers pointed out the flaws??
Anyway, sorry for the thread hijack but it's a little connected!
This does explain something that has perplexed me and others for a while with pilots asking for "Hi Speed" whilst operating in Class A. So thanks for that!
The debate now is whether or not your airline would look on you negatively for flying above their SOPS which are based on ICAO. Surely that is a lack of flexibility on your airlines part, if local rules are different. Also you should be able to trust in ATC that if they are issuing you with speeds that they are legal!
Your point about flying and controlling to the lowest common denominator is becoming a real thorn in all our sides.
Take this SID restrictions debacle. For many years pilots seemed perfectly happy to receive a executive instruction from a controller and act on it. Now, because of ICAO trying to implement a policy that was foolish in the first place (RT loading primarily), we are now in a situation where we are constantly having to repeat ourselves when issuing climb instructions. Even when we do use the word now, the non-uk companies are still saying "confirm unrestricted" and if we forget to say to a uk-company climb now, they are saying it too!!
Absoulute sorry state of affairs, brought on by ICAO who where responding to a incident that happened somewhere in eastern europe (I believe). What did I read in April from the CAA: "From the State responses, ICAO has identified that their current provisions have not provided the intended simplicity, efficiency, and global standardisation to ensure flight safety" (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP493S...tion201004.pdf)
Well, Duh! Why do you think the UK refused in the first place, which was a CAA decree after pilots & controllers pointed out the flaws??
Anyway, sorry for the thread hijack but it's a little connected!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sutton
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10 W our bible (partA) quotes four cases...interestingly it does differentiate between climb and descent
Fl 100 and below class A,B,C Climb 250 knots (Faster if released by ATC)
Fl 100 and below class A,B,C Descent 250 max, decline ATC OFFERS of faster (but can accept instructions to do so)
Fl 100 and below class D - G Climb 250 Max (can accept ATC instructions to fly faster in class D)
Fl 100 and below class D - G Descent 250 knots max (no ATC discretion for faster).
I understand that the UK allows ATC discretion in the class D climb and descent case but the part A says the fourth restriction is an ICAO requirement. Not sure why ICAO differentiate between class D speed conrol in climb and descent and would welcome any suggestions.
Fl 100 and below class A,B,C Climb 250 knots (Faster if released by ATC)
Fl 100 and below class A,B,C Descent 250 max, decline ATC OFFERS of faster (but can accept instructions to do so)
Fl 100 and below class D - G Climb 250 Max (can accept ATC instructions to fly faster in class D)
Fl 100 and below class D - G Descent 250 knots max (no ATC discretion for faster).
I understand that the UK allows ATC discretion in the class D climb and descent case but the part A says the fourth restriction is an ICAO requirement. Not sure why ICAO differentiate between class D speed conrol in climb and descent and would welcome any suggestions.
PPRuNe Bashaholic
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 1997
Location: The Peoples Alcoholic Republic of Jockistan
Posts: 1,442
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks RMC. 
In my experience, ICAO is a slow and bureaucratic organisation, not so much focused on air safety but more on posturing and politics. The fact that they also seem to regularly get non English speakers to come up with the words for procedures and phraseology detracts from them doing what they should be doing - providing a safe, concise, and unambiguous set of instructions for pilots and ATC alike which are standard across the world.
Many of the UK differences are because the equivalent ICAO words and procedures provide an opportunity for safety to be compromised.
In my experience, ICAO is a slow and bureaucratic organisation, not so much focused on air safety but more on posturing and politics. The fact that they also seem to regularly get non English speakers to come up with the words for procedures and phraseology detracts from them doing what they should be doing - providing a safe, concise, and unambiguous set of instructions for pilots and ATC alike which are standard across the world.
Many of the UK differences are because the equivalent ICAO words and procedures provide an opportunity for safety to be compromised.
