|
"Leaving FL" Call
There is one controller in Melbourne (132.2 last night) who has a thing about aircraft reporting, while identified, that they are leaving their cruising flight level.
His favourite trick is to not give a progressive descent clearance- to wait till you are approaching you assigned level and ask for further clearance before saying "OH! Missed your leaving call!" and giving you further descent. I actually fronted him last night (frequency was quiet and I didn't prolong it" and transmitted "That's nit required". He replied with "It's in the AIP". I've searched and while a "leaving" call is party of standard phraseology, I didn't interpret it as being a requirement in a RADAR environment, and no other center in the country seems bothered. I think at best he's being bloody minded, but is he even technically correct? |
It might not be required in the AIP but if he has given you a clearance then asked you to report leaving a level for further clearance there could be a particular reason or it could just be his process to allow him to do his job better, he could be slightly overloaded with the areas he's been given and is doing that to make sure he doesn't miss something. Not going to defend it necessarily but whilst he might be being a bit bloody minded it seems you might also being the same in the whole "It's not in the AIP as far as I'm aware so I'm going to call you out on it".
|
JEPS ATC AU-806 3.5.1.6
|
The former "Left F/L 310" is far better English than "Leaving F/L 310" and means what is says- which is you have departed F/L ??. "Leaving" is a nebulous term loved by ICAO and can be taken to mean "I haven't actually vacated F/L310 yet but hang in there old chap I will be leaving F/L 310 asap.
I haven't a clue of the rationale for changing what was a perfectly understandable Australian ATC phraseology all those years ago. Rather than bend to a nebulous ICAO RT recommendation, it is time to stand up for commonsense English grammar and if necessary file a Difference to an ICAO Recommendation. |
I recall the requirement to report vacating your level in a radar environment went away years ago.
The only reference in the AIP I can find is to report cleared level and passing level when changing frequency. |
Originally Posted by Centaurus
(Post 10687144)
I haven't a clue of the rationale for changing what was a perfectly understandable Australian ATC phraseology all those years ago.
The difference between left and leaving is academic anyway, and has nothing to do with the original question which is one I also struggle with. Wizofoz, you could try my favourite passive-aggressive retort - "My apologies, I thought we were identified (followed by full procedural airspace altitude and position reporting)". |
Left is a direction, hence the change.
no requirement unless asked to report by ATC. |
JEP AU-806
3.5 CHANGE OF LEVELS 3.5.1.6 The pilot-in-command of an aircraft, receiving an instruction from ATC to change level, must report: a. when the aircraft has left a level at which level flight has been conducted in the course of climb, cruise or descent; and b. when the aircraft leaves a level for which ATC has requested a report. JEP AU-902 1.2 SUMMARY OF REPORT AND BROADCAST REQUIREMENTS 1.2.1.4 After any ATS directed frequency change, pilots must advise the last assigned level and, if not maintaining the assigned level, the level maintaining or last vacated level; e.g. “MELBOURNE CENTER (CALL SIGN) CLEARED FLIGHT LEVEL TWO ONE ZERO, LEAVING FLIGHT LEVEL TWO NINER ZERO”. NOTE: The “last vacated level” may be omitted by identified aircraft squawking pressure altitude derived level information. |
Originally Posted by Wizofoz
(Post 10687097)
There is one controller in Melbourne (132.2 last night) who has a thing about aircraft reporting, while identified, that they are leaving their cruising flight level.
His favourite trick is to not give a progressive descent clearance- to wait till you are approaching you assigned level and ask for further clearance before saying "OH! Missed your leaving call!" and giving you further descent. I actually fronted him last night (frequency was quiet and I didn't prolong it" and transmitted "That's nit required". He replied with "It's in the AIP". I've searched and while a "leaving" call is party of standard phraseology, I didn't interpret it as being a requirement in a RADAR environment, and no other center in the country seems bothered. I think at best he's being bloody minded, but is he even technically correct? The odd thing is that Aussie controllers who leave and become expats in the Middle East and Asia are quite the opposite, they're all first class and a joy to work with. This points to either the system or senior managers with "issues". |
Originally Posted by Wizofoz
He replied with "It's in the AIP".
Originally Posted by The AIP
4. CHANGE OF LEVELS 4.1
ATC Approval Required 4.1.1 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. 4.1.2 ATC may require that an assigned level must be reached by a specific time, distance or place. If a pilot in command doubts that the restriction can be met, ATC must be advised immediately. 4.1.3 ATS advised expectation of a level restriction does not authorise a pilot to climb or descend to meet that restriction. 4.1.4 An expectation of a level restriction is not required to be read back. 4.1.5 A requirement to report at a time or place given in the same clearance as a descent/climb instruction does not require the new level to be reached by the specified time or place. 4.1.6 The pilot in command of an aircraft, receiving an instruction from ATC to change level, must report: a. when the aircraft has left a level at which level flight has been conducted in the course of climb, cruise or descent; and b. when the aircraft leaves a level for which ATC has requested a report. 4.1.7 ATC may provide vertical separation between two climbing aircraft, not otherwise separated, by means of a step-climb. Pilots in command, who are subjected to a step-climb, must adopt the following procedure: a. The pilot in command of the lower aircraft must report approaching each assigned level in the sequence. b. The pilot in command of the higher aircraft, on hearing the lower aircraft report approaching each assigned level, must report the last vacated level. 4.1.8 Step-descents reverse the above para 4.1.7 procedure. 4.1.9 ATC may specify a rate of climb or descent. Other considerations are as follows: a. The phrase “STANDARD RATE”, when included in a clearance, specifies a rate of climb or descent of not less than 500FT per minute, except that the last 1,000FT to an assigned level must be made at 500FT per minute. b. In the case of a step-climb or descent, the specified rate will be applicable to all level clearances issued in the course of the step climb or descent. If unable to comply with the prescribed rate, the pilot in command must advise ATC. 4.1.10 Cruise Climb is not used in Australian administered airspace. Where possible, block level clearances will be issued upon request. 4.2 ATC Approval Not Required 4.2.1 In airspace where ATC approval is not required to change level, the pilot of an IFR flight must report present position and intention to ATC approximately one (1) minute prior to making any change |
It's their cricket set, besides I just do what the SkyGods do/say, must be right right?:ok:
|
4.1.6 The pilot in command of an aircraft, receiving an instruction from ATC to change level, must report:
a. when the aircraft has left a level at which level flight has been conducted in the course of climb, cruise or descent; and b. when the aircraft leaves a level for which ATC has requested a report. there’s an AND... clear as mud |
Originally Posted by lucille
(Post 10687169)
Indeed, welcome to Australian ATC. The most pedantic in the world. Lucky for them its a huge area with very little traffic.
The odd thing is that Aussie controllers who leave and become expats in the Middle East and Asia are quite the opposite, they're all first class and a joy to work with. This points to either the system or senior managers with "issues". |
Further to my post above....
The only reference in the AIP I can find is to report cleared level and passing level when changing frequency. Note: The “last vacated level” may be omitted by identified aircraft squawking pressure altitude derived level information. So if I can omit it when transferring to another frequency, why include it on the current frequency? |
Sounds like they need a break.
If I really needed to know it was easier to say “when ready descend to ... report leaving”. Anything else is really just pissing on posts. |
Originally Posted by Ixixly
(Post 10687121)
It might not be required in the AIP but if he has given you a clearance then asked you to report leaving a level for further clearance there could be a particular reason or it could just be his process to allow him to do his job better, he could be slightly overloaded with the areas he's been given and is doing that to make sure he doesn't miss something. Not going to defend it necessarily but whilst he might be being a bit bloody minded it seems you might also being the same in the whole "It's not in the AIP as far as I'm aware so I'm going to call you out on it".
|
Thanks all- does raise the question- why does this seem to be the only ATCO in the country that gives a @@@@ about it.
|
An example of when you don't need to call leaving but is consistent with the AIP is the frequency change that coincides with your ToD. When you make the intial call to the new frequency you just have to notify the assigned level that you are descending to. Some where in the mists of time there was probably no requirement to report leaving but an aircraft inadvertently left their altitude and ATC didn't realise. The solution was to require pilots to report leaving.
|
Originally Posted by Wizofoz
(Post 10687213)
Thanks all- does raise the question- why does this seem to be the only ATCO in the country that gives a @@@@ about it.
|
Australians........perfecting aviation since 1905
|
I'm with Wizofoz, I have just retired from Line-Flying but I distinctly remember this 'Melbourne thing'. Nobody else, anywhere in the Country seem to want it. Inbound to MEL from SYD it is common to get, "when ready descend to FL250". If you say " Leaving FL...…" old mate will instantly clear you to "continue descent to 9,000ft". If you don't say 'Leaving..blah blah" you will be ignored until on top of 9,000ft. In the end I just placed it into the 'Australian weirdo bin' and remembered to do it their way.
Then there was Darwin! I miss my flying but I don't miss flying in Australia. |
If English is not your 1st language then LEFT could be misunderstood as a direction of turn.Thus the word LEAVING.As to the requirement to report its part of the AIP.
|
Originally Posted by Wizofoz
(Post 10687210)
He DOESN'T ask for a leaving call- he gives "Descend when ready" then assumes you will give the leaving call.
"Leaving" is just as ambiguous as "Left". You could be "Leaving" to climb. |
ATC is, put simply, a control loop involving Radar Screen->ATCO->Pilot->Aircraft.
Control loops can operate in two different ways: The controlling agent can explicitly command and require immediate (allowing for known system latencies) response. Alternatively, the controlling agent can give autonomy to its control objects, in which case it requires to be informed of all relevant changes by those objects through what are normally called "interrupts". Putting that back into human terms. If the ATCo offers a "descend when ready", with the operational advantages that entails, then the courtesy of the "leaving FL for FL" interrupt seems like not too much to ask in return. |
Putting that back into human terms. If the ATCo offers a "descend when ready", with the operational advantages that entails, then the courtesy of the "leaving FL for FL" interrupt seems like not too much to ask in return. |
If you're wondering why QF do it, it's in our FAM. You should hear it when we give it to LAX or DFW and you hear the pause and ".........ah ok thanks...". Not another soul out there doing it. Depends who you're flying with of course...
The good news: it's getting removed next edition (apparently). |
Originally Posted by Bula
(Post 10687187)
4.1.6 The pilot in command of an aircraft, receiving an instruction from ATC to change level, must report:
a. when the aircraft has left a level at which level flight has been conducted in the course of climb, cruise or descent; and b. when the aircraft leaves a level for which ATC has requested a report. there’s an AND... clear as mud |
[QUOTE].If you're wondering why QF do it, it's in our FAM. You should hear it when we give it to LAX or DFW and you hear the pause and ".........ah ok thanks...". Not another soul out there doing it. Depends who you're flying with of course...
The good news: it's getting removed next edition (apparently). /QUOTE] Really? FSO OPS 135/19, dated 14/11/19. |
Originally Posted by ConfigFull
(Post 10687395)
If you're wondering why QF do it, it's in our FAM. You should hear it when we give it to LAX or DFW and you hear the pause and ".........ah ok thanks...". Not another soul out there doing it. Depends who you're flying with of course...
The good news: it's getting removed next edition (apparently). Plenty of US carriers also report leaving - hear it all day long between LAX and JFK... |
According to AIM 5-3-3 pilots “should” followed by “at all times” para a “when vacating any previously assigned altitude “.
I make the leaving call everytime here in the US however most pilots dont and most controllers appear surpised by the call. |
As oicur says it’s in the FAA AIM -
5–3–3 Additional Reportsa. The following reports should be made to ATC or FSS facilities without a specific ATC request:1. At all times. (a) When vacating any previously assigned altitude or flight level for a newly assigned altitude or flight level. (b) When an altitude change will be made if operating on a clearance specifying VFR-on-top. (c) When unable to climb/descend at a rate of a least 500 feet per minute. (d) When approach has been missed. (Request clearance for specific action; i.e., to alternative airport, another approach, etc.) (e) Change in the average true airspeed (at cruising altitude) when it varies by 5 percent or 10 knots (whichever is greater) from that filed in the flight plan. (f) The time and altitude or flight level upon reaching a holding fix or point to which cleared. (g) When leaving any assigned holding fix or point. |
Originally Posted by WhatShortage
(Post 10687417)
Keep reporting leaving flight levels in Europe in which some airspaces you just need to say you call sign ( Shannon as example) and you'll be laughed at or someone will tell you there's no need for that.
|
Think old ATC Mate needs to get real and spend a few weeks in LGW or LHR :D
|
So is there actually any reason for having to call leaving other than ' because that is what the book has always said'? :ugh:
|
Ridiculous and a waste of airtime unless given a "descend when ready". Under radar control, if I've acknowledged a clearance, then I'll say if I'm NOT doing it.
Is it really necessary to make aviation so flipping complicated? The important stuff is hard enough. |
I have flown with many FO's over the past 18 months who have told me the 'leaving' call is no longer required. I was visiting the ATC center in Melbourne recently and asked the Supervisor there and he said 'the old system would not notify us of an aircraft commencing descent which is why we required a 'leaving' call as per the AIP, the new system does notify us so we don't require a 'leaving' call as we will be notified electronically'. He then said that 'technically it is still in the AIP as there is a huge process to get it removed (underway) so it still should be reported but that most controllers don't care'. So the mentioned controller is technically right but to be honest is being a bit of a prick the way he is going about making his point.
|
Originally Posted by kingRB
(Post 10687305)
let's be realistic here, they can't properly manage crossing times or speeds on STAR's as soon as more than 2 aircraft are arriving somewhere. Leaving the descent profile under the control of those flying the planes is probably going to offer a better outcome for everybody.
The OP was being arrogant by arguing. He is wrong. It is in AIP. Unfortunately whilst many many things in AIP are ignored, you have to be willing to fall on the sword when caught out. KingRB has made an arrogant statement about sequencing when it's clear that he obviously hasn't spent any actual time trying to learn how sequencing in Australia works. Don't forget the system is from pre2000 - the ATCs work with what they have got. Not to mention a set of priorities and procedures which affect sequencing can make it too dynamic in Australia. The point of my post is that this is meant to be a team effort. Without pilots there's no ATC, and without ATC your flight won't be safe. Can everyone just work together and not argue over these ridiculous minutae? |
The Australian AIP is SO poorly constructed and written.
References such as this are hard to find in the jumble and it is written in convoluted legalese with so much excessive and confusing verbage. It needs to be ripped up and rewritten in practical, commonsense operator oriented language. |
Best response so far!
Originally Posted by ramble on
(Post 10687944)
The Australian AIP is SO poorly constructed and written.
References such as this are hard to find in the jumble and it is written in convoluted legalese with so much excessive and confusing verbage. It needs to be ripped up and rewritten in practical, commonsense operator oriented language. |
Quote: "It needs to be ripped up and rewritten in practical, commonsense operator oriented language."
Ramble, the whole Australian regulatory suite needs to be ripped up and rewritten, no chance of that because then they would have to admit they pissed away half a billion+ $ of taxpayer money. They are getting round the comprehension side of the reg's by writing another manual that explains the reg's in plain english, god knows what that will cost but begs the question, why didn't they write them in plain english in the first place? Is it such a big deal? hard to get out of the habits of OZ, I still call leaving overseas, never been chipped once for doing so, can't imagine an ATCO chipping anyone for not doing it here, he see's you leaving on his scope. Maybe the ATCO that had a winge missed out the night before and was a tad frustrated. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 15:25. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.