expedite climb
 

Apologies if this has been previously covered, but can any of you ATC chaps give a rough idea of what you might expect to see when you ask us to 'expedite' a climb. I've seen many seated next to me who insist on turning 300 odd knots into near vertical rocket climb, until appx. 10 knots from the stall, thereafter maintaining same said 'speed' until passing stated level. I'm sure this is not what is required, and it certainly ain't good airmanship.
Poor hosties and pax..!!!!!

thanks fellas

confused 320 driver, now used to +ve G

"expedite" means do not dawdle, be quick. What you wrote looks pretty much like a reaction to a controller saying "immediately". If that was the case, the reaction was good. To a mere "expedite" you can react with 2.500 fpm, especially as you seem to fly an A320, a not very liked acft among controllers for its unforeseeable climb-profile. To americans driving it I can say something like "disregard economy and fly it like a man", to Englishmen I would say a noble "expedite":

As a London TMA controller, if I ask for an expedite I would like to see you climb at the max rate available! 2,500 fpm is what we normally see at the levels that we operate at, so anything less or about the same is not worth an expedite. :D

Well that´s true for a TMA. I am working upper airspace. 2.500 is quite good there!

I am a TC Controller at LTCC. This is what I would expect for jets.
In the climb, on departure, 220kts(ish) max climb power through the level given. If already climbing normally at normal speeds, again full power and reduce the speed to increase climb rate.
In descent, if given a speed restriction, use the brakes and mantain the speed given. If there is no speed restrition, fly the plane to comply with the request using speed and/or brakes as appropiate.
I would expect most jets to give me at least an extra 1000 to 2000 feet in either direction. More if you are a GTI jet
Obviously this does not apply to heavy (weight) aircraft on departure but at least go for max power and try, even if it is only an extra 500'/min.
If in doubt ask!
Many Controllers say '' best rate''. What does this mean? Best economical rate for the aircraft or expedite for ATC. They should always say 'expedite'

As fast as you can as long as STCA etc can keep up!

Thanks guys. The numbers are what I needed to see (2500 - 4000 fpm ish ?). The times I've seen colleagues achieving initially 5000 - 6000 fpm, at the expense of ALL airspeed, seeming to think this is what is required. ie absolute max the A/C can achieve by flying VERY slow. I never have thought that is necessary. 2500 - 3500 fpm is normally quite achievable, reasonably comfortably, certainly at lower to medium levels.

Ta.

OK guys.. in my retirement stupor I'm just recalling the old Seaboard cargo DC-8s full of lead boxes of mercury and the OAT at +30. They had trouble making 2.5 ft per min, let alone 2500!!

Enjoy it while you can..

Bren

The phraseology "expedite climb" doesn't mean anything. Nobody here has been able to give an official response with ICAO definitions. Why? Cos there ain't any, thats why.
stands by to be proven wrong

What it does do, I would hope, is convey a sense of urgency to the pilot, ie: whatever you're doing, do more. To use "expedite" means the controller has made a mistake...or maybe the pilot has made an error, but a conflict has been spotted and its a quick easy way to let the pilot know something needs to be done and it needs to be done now, no questions. It should include some traffic information as well, which should give an idea of exactly what is expected. If an exact or minimum climb rate was required it should be given, ie: "climb with 3000fpm minimum due opposite traffic" but " expedite climb due traffic" takes less time to say.

Basically, if all is well, the word expedite will never be heard, but if, as a pilot, you hear it, you can be sure something has gone wrong, and any reaction is better than none, the more exaggerated the reaction the sooner the situation is resolved.

I am talking in my capacity as an Upper airspace controller in Maastricht, I know that different situations may arise in Approach or other environments which might lead to the word being used under totally different circumstances.

Exactly.
Where I'm working we tell the trainees not to use the term, because it is not specific and open to speculation (as above).

Would be like saying: "Reduce your speed a little bit."

If it is urgent then we use the term "immediately" plus TFC info and/or "max ROC/ROD" (which would make it sound REALLY urgent).

trytofly
 

I expect you to give me a bit more than you are doing at the time.
I know that you can trade speed for height for a few thousand feet and then shallow out to regain profile. It is more transparent if you are given a target to aim at, or for example "expedite through FLxxx" .......a straight "expedite" without qualifier is sloppy controlling.....or possibly a panic measure; it is certainly less than professional.

That is the same as saying that a TCAS RA is as a result of an ATC error!!

Expedite is a fairly clear English term which the dictionary defines as "to accomplish quickly" Therefore if I give an instruction to climb FL110, expedite through FL80 it doesn't mean that I have 'made a mistake' it simply means that I have traffic at or descending to/through FL70 and I just want to get you through it a little quicker. But expedite is not a form of separation I hear you tusk - correct, which is why I will only do it with the a/c on headings (probably converging) and I can then 'tweak' one if the expedite isn't expeditious enough. Without this term, there would be a hell of a lot of a/c stuck down for longer within the TMA

The UK RT Manual (CAP 413) mandates the use of the term 'expedite' when the best rate of climb or descent is required.

If you tell me to expedite, I'll give you the best I can for as long as I can - I've always thought that would be a fairly reasonable thing to do!

Trouble is I fly a 340 and even in the lower levels I'd give my eye teeth to get 2500fpm unless we're not going very far. (As a sustained rate anyway - you can do it while you're bleeding the speed back) :( Luckily the guys behind the radar screens seem to know that - in the UK anyway.

I agree with Spuds, till I came O/S I had practically never heard controllers use the phrase expedite climb/descent. It was saved for the time when you really need it cos someone has screwed up. Over here (Middle East) there are guys who use it 3 or 4 times a shift, and basically expect the pilots every time used to give them a very good rate of climb. My problem with that is the old "Boy crying wolf" mentality. If a pilot gets told to expedite climb every other day, they will start to go "yeh whatever", whereas one day I might really need a guy to squeeze everything out and help me out, and he won't realise this. If I say expedite, I am expecting that within safe levels, you will give me your maximum rate of climb or descent. If I simply want a good rate, I will ask the pilot can they maintain for example, 1,500 ft per minute, if so fine, I will work on that.

Roger Dodge
What do you expect from a pilot when you tell him to "expedite through FL80" ? Do you have his load information/fuel on board/engine perfomance charts in front of you? My point is, if you have traffic at FL70 and you need the guy to climb above, then do a little maths...tell him 2000fpm until FL80, or to cross FL80 in 2 minutes, the term expedite means something different to every pilot, and the day the pilots idea of expedite doesn't meet your requirements you will not have a leg to stand on.

fourthreethree

I guess you do not work in a TMA/busy environment.
Expedite is certainly OK for use in the world of NATS.
In the London TMA, many departures offer ' a good rate on first call' and may be hoping for an expedited climb to give them a short cut.
I do not wish to criticise anyone, but there is more than one way to do the job of ATC.
Using 'expedite' a few times a day, makes my job much easier to perform.

Although this statement is not adressed to me, I DO work in a busy environment.
The busier it is the less one can afford to rely on performances based on non-specific clearances ("expedite climb").
I wanna know by when an aircraft can comply with a given rate, hence I give 'em a specific rate of climb/descent.
Being busy doesn't justify slack phraseology.

Over + Out I told you where I work, so guesswork doesn't come into it. It most definately is a busy environment, and Spuds already said what I wanted to say. I ask you again, what do you expect from a pilot....1000, 2000, 3000fpm?? What will a pilot give you? Are they the same? What if they're not? If it leads to a loss of separation, will you say "well I told him to expedite"? It simply is not a clearance upon which separation can be assured, due to the inherent lack of definition, and the very nature of this thread, the fact that a pilot quite understandably felt the need to ask the original question, shows that to be the case.

Let's not get sidetracked too much by the vagueries of the term expedite. All that I would add is that if you are given this instruction by a radar controller in the UK, a rate of climb of at least 2500 fpm is what is expected. Whether this is bad technique or not is a completely seperate issue.

Show me something to support this statement....it seems to me you have picked a figure out of the air, something you personally expect when controlling. If that is what is expected, then say it in the clearance.

Stop being a stupid pedant.

This is how sectors are operated.

You may have noticed that you, yourself do not stick religiously to the letter of the law as stated in the good book.

Somebody asked my advice so I gave it in the contect of a UK environment.

Not being a pedant, but where does the 2500 fpm stated actually come from ??

I guess 433's point is that if the figure is not published, then how can you expect pilots to know about it ?? And the figure is most definitely NOT published.

'Expedite' means 'best rate of climb' in the UK. This could be more or indeed less than 2500 fpm for the individual aircraft involved.

'Best rate of climb' is also a wooly term. Best rate in what flight mode .... derated engine use ?? for max economy ?? throttles to the firewall ? in VNAV ? best rate for current speed ? Up to the pilot at the time is all you can safely say.

All open to interpretation, which is a dangerous thing in aviation.

I'll be a pedant too. "Expedite" has no specific meaning and can't guarantee that it will mean anything particular to a pilot.

Busy or not, one day it'll bite you.

Didn't really want to jump into this fray <G>, but for someone to say that saying expedite is poor phraseology is in a British term "rubbish" :D Some places it is perfectly good phraseology and you will use it to convey to the pilot community that you do not want them to delay their climb or descent. You want them to smartly move the aircraft. This may or may not mean a particular rate of climb or descent, but may also mean that when the aircraft is climbing out we don't want you to use econ climb nor do we want you flattening out your climb to pick up speed. We want you to expedite your climb or descent through a particular altitude. That is not real ambiguous in and of itself.

Now, that said, I will also not "assume" that this phrase alone will guarantee separation. I do that with a crossing restriction, however, I may not need a crossing resrtiction for quite a while and to just get them up or down and out of the way quickly will indeed suit my needs. I will monitor the situation and it is not working, then I will come up with plan B or even C. For whoever mentioned that I don't know the fuel load or the weight and other issues, you are correct. But I do have a very good idea of what the aircraft can or can't do by what sort of aircraft it is, who it is flying for and where it is going. What I can't take into account is who is flying it. Everyone flys thier aircraft differently, and if you want to try to get someone to speed things along a bit in a climb or decsent, then that is what the word expedite is for. Let the pilot know what your expectations are, I need you to not dawdle, get that thing moving in the direction that it is headed. If not, then you can expect to do something else... Remember in a constantly changing environment with traffic not always under your own control, you have to grab for all the tools in your bag, and this is but one of them...

regards

Scott

All I am asking Scott, is why can't you ask the pilot what his climb rate will be. Or ask him if he can give you a climb rate of 1,000ft a minute, or 2,000ft a minute. It is obvious from all the varied responses on this and previous related threads that pilots are not sure what is meant by the term "expedite". Some think it is best possible climb rate, others best comfortable climb rate, others 2,500 ft a minute. If the pilots are unsure, why use it. Either give them a crossing requirement, as you said (and you said that may not be needed for a while, well whats the harm in giving it early and letting the pilot set up to meet the requirement now rather than later), or pin them down on what rate of climb they can give you, specify that, and move on.

To the person who said anyone who doesn't use expedite, obviously doesn't work busy airspace, that is a crock. A lot of people around the world, not working London airspace, are working busy traffic, whether that is Europe, the US, Asia, or the Middle East, and just because some of us feel the term expedite is over used or misused, does not mean we are not working traffic at high levels.

In the UK, Middle Earth claims, it means "at least 2500 rpm".

PPRuNe Radar says it means best rate.

In the US, Scott claims, it means "that you do not want them to delay their climb or descent".

Three different opinions/working practices.

Now where's the consistency here, have you guys forgotten Ueberlingen already?
The report says that one of the technical causes of this tragedy was, that the way ICAO prescribed the use of TCAS was inconsistent and contradictory .

If something is open to interpretation, be it a procedure or phraseology, it is unsafe!

Scott
 

Thanks for bringing a bit of reasoning into this thread. It's getting a bit out of hand.

What it has done though is show that there are several ways to skin a cat (or any other domestic pet for that matter).

Hands up all those from LTCC or LACC that say 'expedite' is poor use of phraseology.......

There won't be many. The fact is, there is usually not the time to get into conversations like

"what is your climb rate"...
"ok can you make it xxxfpm til crossing FLAAA?"
"No, OK, how about yyyfpm till FLAAA?"
"That's great thanks"

Some other centres have the time to do this because they only work in, say, a high level environment with a lot less level changes.

Some centres even rely on a separation prediction device they affectionately call VERA to do the thinking for the controllers.

Some centres (south of the UK) sometimes don't seem to bother ensuring any sort of separation.

As we all plod our way through our careers, gaining more experience we acquire many different ATC tools for our ATCO toolbags. They all have their use at certain times and as professionals I'm sure we all do our best to apply the one we deem most fit at the time.

Thanks and good night
Vectorline

Drawing a bit of a long bow, aren't you Spuds? If you have nothing else but the expedite ie. no plan B, then yes, you are setting yourself up for a fall.
If, however, you use it like Scott says (and the way I do), then what's the problem? If you can see that you have 2 approaching, and the current climb isn't going to work, ask to 'expedite', reassess, then either it will work or they go on a vector. Some guys like to set the vector up anyway (the belts and braces view), but personally I feel that increasing your workload (by vectoring) can be just as dangerous in busy environments. Asking for a specific climb rate has it's own set of problems, and I feel is no better or worse than the 'expedite'.

We are talking techniques, here, so this is just opinion.


edited to say that I agree wholeheartedly with vectorline (posted the same time)

Its not what I say, it's what the UK CAA say in the CAP 413 Radiotelephony Manual. Available to both pilots and controllers alike.

Not true in my case. We have a lot of vertical movements. And per 1000 square kilometres we have more movements than LACC.

ferris,

If you are working in a relatively small airspace with lots of movements then you don't have much time to monitor, reassess if plan A works and if necessary take plan B out of your sleeve. This doesn't exclude however having plan B in store.

Don't mean to show off, guys, just trying to explain where I'm coming from.
And if you think I'm too cautious with my approach then remember where Ueberlingen happened...

Hence when I said

I have a leg to stand on:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

In your capacity as an upper air sector controller, you, I would hope, should have no need for a faster climb rate. In the TMA world where a/c are constantly having to achieve level changes to get in/out of the 6 airports with SID's/STAR's that cross each other, expedite is an often used and very useful term. As somebody else has mentioned in this thread, we are even offered a 'good rate' on climbout by some crews and as was also pointed out the word expedite is in CAP 413 and therefore acceptable. ;)

Spuds, I do work in a relatively small airspace with lots of movements, which is why keeping them on the rails is seriously encouraged here. Take them off on vectors, and your workload goes thru the roof.
Quoting Uberlingen doesn't help your case- that appeared to be a failure of conflict recognition (for reasons we won't get into), not a failure of conflict resolution . Was the word "expedite" used in that particular case?

Re-read vectorline's post.

ferris,

Check your PMs.

Ok ok this has turned into a bit of a slanging match, and it was most likely my first post on here that started it off down that road, it was not the intention.

I will say this, I never use the term, for the reasons I have outlined, also because when busy I dont have the time to monitor climb rate and "tweak" the headings if its not working, as Roger Dodge suggests. I will give a clearance which is safe without monitoring, be it headings or rates or intermediate levels. Middle Earth calls me a "stupid pedant". Youre welcome to your opinion, and you carry on issuing clearances which you believe are safe, don't attack me for disagreeing with you. I give clearances which are safe and as expeditious as I can, I just choose not to use the word "expedite".

Why would you think that? Our traffic is not just overflights at cruising level, we do need to climb traffic as it departs and requests higher, from FL250 to requested and likewise carry out initial descents, along with requests for higher/lower for all manner of reasons. You say you have 6 airports within your TMA, I have somewhere in the region of 50 airports for which I need to carry out initial descents or climbouts. In a busy airspace with most of the traffic requiring a level change, faster climb/descent rates are always needed. I dont pretend to be fully at one with the job of a TMA controller, hence the comment at the end of my first post. You apparantly do not fully appreciate what goes on in an upper en-route centre, and thats where we will clash....different working methods.
I still disagree with you on one point though. Ok so you monitor the climb after telling the pilot to expedite, then something happens, emergency of some sort, or somebody spills their coffee on you, whatever, but it takes your attention away from the situation. The fact that you have to monitor means it is not an intrinsically safe clearance.

Until the word expedite carries with it an ICAO defined vertical rate which is universally understood I will NEVER use it in order to achieve separation. When I tell a pilot to do something I want him to know exactly what is expected, that is the only way which I can carry out my job to the best of my ability.

Cheers People:)

fourthreethree,

Spot on. :ok:

Ferris, I have to say that I know we won't agree on this one, and thats fine. I would say that anyone can say whatever they like and whatever works for them, is also fine, except that I do worry that the day I use the term "expedite" I want the pilot to really pull his finger out and give me his best rate of climb, not just bump up his economical climb a little cos he has been told to expedite his climb/descent 3 times already that day.

How hard is it to look at the cross, in 1 second work out you have a comfortable 5 minutes till the cross and tell the pilot to maintain 1,500 ft or more on the climb, as you have worked out that is what you need. That takes no time to work out, and unlike "expedite" you have separation assurance, and while yes still monitoring it as you always must on radar, you can move on to other things a lot more comfortably.

As everyone has said, different techniques work for different people, but I do worry about the "boy crying wolf" a dozen times a shift with some people.

Oh and Spud and 433, I agree :ok:

Because you are starting to tell the pilot how to fly. There are ramifications for what you are doing (maybe not in your 1500fpm scenario) which I don't think we can be expected to keep abreast of. eg. how much speed will drop off for a given rate increase, what mode change is required to control the climb rate and what effect will that have, how economical is that solution etc. etc.? We are supposed to service our customers as well as possible these days, and I'm not sure we are if we are taking control of how the a/c fly to such an extent. Something to think about (please, nobody come back with "it's not economical if they hit" etc.). How about:
More pilot liaison required.
Famil flights reinstated.
"expedite" formally defined (outside the UK).


And at the end of the day, it's about technique. It will vary.

BTW, I didn't think this was a slanging match- just a discussion? What gave you that idea?

As if I'd cry wolf, ANSA :eek:

Ferris
Actually it was used....when the controllre noticed the two aircraft converging he issued a descent clearance to the T154 to descend FL350 using the phraseology "expedite, I have crossing traffic."

Although this was not a factor in the tragedy, it does throw up an interesting point.....the B757, following his TCAS RA, descended with 1500fpm as instructed by TCAS. Does it not follow therefore that the T154 also descended with the same rate? This would infer that the Russian pilot understood 1500fpm to constitute an expedite descent.

Not an attack....your post just got me thinking, and I did a little reading up.

While I'm here, Vectorline I re-read your post also, and would like to answer your badly disguised dig at Maastricht controllers. VERA, (Verification of sEparation and Resolution Advisory, is a tool which predicts lateral separation between two selected tracks, based on radar derived speed and direction, which stays dynamic with each radar update. It also provides a suggestion on resolution, which is utter toilet, and nobody even looks at it. It is used as a tool, an indication, nothing more, to suggest we let it do the thinking for us is a bit rich. It is not uncommon for Clacton or North Sea controllers to call Maastricht and ask us to use VERA on their traffic, and why not? It is a very useful tool to have at your disposal.

This was supposed to be added to my last post, but I got sidetracked...ie told to get the hell off the pc by Mrs 433:uhoh:

I'm sorry, I don't understand your post at all Ferris. You say it is about customer service, yet pilots here have said that when told to "expedite" many pilots perform what is tantamount to an emergency climb or descent. You say we can't be expected to keep abreast of how a pilot flies their aircraft, which is exactly why I suggest a climb rate, and leave it up to the pilot to advise if they can't comply. I consider that to be positive controlling, rather than plucking a misunderstood word out and hoping that will solve the situation.

As you did say, the term needs to be clearly defined, the world over, and until that time arrives, I won't be using it. Considering every man and his dog is using it as a routine instruction, I will also have to think up a new phrase for (heaven forbid) my own emergency "I screwed up" situation. I guess rather than expedite, I will have to use the old chestnut "climb like your life depends on it..."

I know it means very little in the big scheme of things but a quick straw poll at the centre showed that about 50% of guys were vehemently against using expedite, other than in an emergency situation, 30% thought it was fine to use, and the rest couldn't give a toss either way. I know, statistically an irrellevant number of people to ask, but it just highlighted how split ATC'ers are over this issue, at least in this part of the world. I would be very interested to conduct a poll of pilots, asking them what they understand the term to mean and ask them how they fly the aircraft after being told to expedite.