Conditional Descent Clearance'a
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: 30 West
Age: 65
Posts: 926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, when we come off the Ocean and head towards MAN, we get a descent clearance - be 290 abeam LIFFY or DUB. This isn't published anywhere on the arrival planning charts and is given most times but not all. If it were published somewhere it would save precious R/T time. Also, as previously stated, when handed on and given a direct, the restriction automatically comes out and the Big Bus reverts to 1000 fpm. Up 'til now I have asked chaps to maintain the rate but apparently we don't have to. I may be back to these pages in a week or so 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Hongkers
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am intrigued if the UK ATC Manual does in fact confuse the mere issuance of a lower level with the cancellation of a restriction. If I instruct an aircraft "descend to FL130, reach FL150 by X" and hand off to APP 10 miles before X, and they subsequently descend the aircraft to 8000 ft, I still expect you to cross X at or below F150. Nobody said anything about cancelling the restriction!
As Ferris says - isn't that how SIDs and STARs complement each other?
As Ferris says - isn't that how SIDs and STARs complement each other?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Target Descent Points
Well I'll try, but you really will not believe and it is so insulting as to be completely off the scale. You will have gathered that I do Bristol/Brecon/Strumble; I suggested that when issuing target descent point we refer to the point as it is depicted on the STAR chart . The chap in the office thought that [a] pilots might get confused by the multiplicity and complexity of the arrival routes[b] controllers might get confused[c] some controllers don't know which arrival route is which and cover themselves by saying things like "standard arrival" "expect the usual" or just ignoring the process completely. This made a little sense up to the time the LOREL 1S STAR was introduced for EGSS/GW etc. , the chart shows target descent 15 before NIGIT and that is how I am ordered to say it. When I pointed out that this point was on the way to OCK and could I say 42 miles before OCK, the answer was "NO" because it might be confusing!!!!!!One thing you do learn after a quarter century in this outfit is that you can't debate a reasonable and logical point with a closed mind. Nice chatting to you, I,ve had a soft spot for BOAC ever since a fabulous day in 1971 when you chaps took me up to EGSS for 22 circuits in a VC10...ahem! a "super "actually, GASGA
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
0551166k: I agree with what you say about the closed minds in certain areas, I am constantly running up against them!
However, I suppose his/her point was that the LOREL star does not go to OCK (it turns NE well before then, doesn't it?) and in the days of RNAV the crew might well be using Lat and Long reference rather than a range and bearing from OCK. So to refer to OCK might throw them off. I have not checked the STAR and if it does go to OCK then I'm back with you that they are a bunch of idiots!
I often have this debate with people who send traffic direct to LAM and then later tell them to be level at LOGAN. Many, apart from those who know the score, will have deleted LOGAN and would prefer to be told 55DME LAM, but the closed mind scenario takes over again: 'Not my problem, they should know what they're doing!"
However, I suppose his/her point was that the LOREL star does not go to OCK (it turns NE well before then, doesn't it?) and in the days of RNAV the crew might well be using Lat and Long reference rather than a range and bearing from OCK. So to refer to OCK might throw them off. I have not checked the STAR and if it does go to OCK then I'm back with you that they are a bunch of idiots!
I often have this debate with people who send traffic direct to LAM and then later tell them to be level at LOGAN. Many, apart from those who know the score, will have deleted LOGAN and would prefer to be told 55DME LAM, but the closed mind scenario takes over again: 'Not my problem, they should know what they're doing!"
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK guys - I see your problem; but for a simple man, why is NIGIT there, then? Why not xxx radial MID/40nm.? BTW, I DO get level 40 before MID sometimes, so obviously a rebel or two there!! :-))
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOREL STAR From West
Yes the low level STAR LOREL2L goes KENET WESTCOTT but the 1S goes NIGIT OCK VATON BPK etc. for traffic FL180+. Another stomach churning process, now fairly widespread, is the "expect level" e.g.........Descend when ready FL270 expect FL140 40 miles before OCK. This came about because several years ago a foreign pilot missed the descent point .......and of course the famous London overkill sledgehammer to crack a nut philosophy came to the fore. I don't therefore understand why all my traffic gets to the right place at the right level when I have never passed an "expect level" in my life, could it be that my long held and genuine respect for the professionalism of aircrew coupled with the fact that most of them either know the route or have read the STAR is entirely valid. On my watch we even have a chap who says"expect the usual".......talk about nonsense content! By the way I think the original reason referred to above was a result of bad controlling rather than inappropriate flight profile, it must have been difficult to get rid of a lot of height with a stonking tailwind! Good copy on your LOGAN point too, I have a practice of only clearing an aircraft direct to a point which I may subsequently use as a descent target...for the sectors that I do it might for example be EXMOR rather than MONTY for a Manch TMA inbound from the south.
