JMC 250Kts Below FL100
Guest
Posts: n/a
JMC 250Kts Below FL100
Why do JMC insist on 250Kts below FL100? The rest of us are prevented from flying high speed descents because of the JMC log jam ahead. Yesterday an ATC request to maintain 280Kts for sequencing was politely refused causing ATC problems. I know SOP’s Are SOP’s but I think this one needs changing.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Major Cong, did this occur outside of controlled airspace? I'm sure you are aware that 250 below 10 is mandatory outside of CAS. Although there is always the temptation to wind it up when someone is behind us. Some ATC units will waive the speed restriction when they do not have the right to.
In my company, the descent profile is normally designed with 250/100 but if circumstances require it, there is nothing to stop us exceeding it legally (although the little birdies hitting the windscreen at 314kts are reckoned to a bit more dangerous than their slower friends).
In my company, the descent profile is normally designed with 250/100 but if circumstances require it, there is nothing to stop us exceeding it legally (although the little birdies hitting the windscreen at 314kts are reckoned to a bit more dangerous than their slower friends).
Guest
Posts: n/a
Major Cong
JMC seem to have the same SOP as easyJet. You were probably just unlucky to get stuck behind a training flight or something. Most/all of us would comply with an ATC request for high speed when we can although a "no speed control" is insufficient reason to ignore SOPs.
JMC seem to have the same SOP as easyJet. You were probably just unlucky to get stuck behind a training flight or something. Most/all of us would comply with an ATC request for high speed when we can although a "no speed control" is insufficient reason to ignore SOPs.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Bono Vax, you are talking rubbish, it has nothing to do with the airfield, on passing 10,000' you will probably be nowhere near the airfield's control area, as long as your are still inside controlled airspace (nearly always) and descending you can do greater than 250 below 10.
If you need to do 320 kts to get the height off and the a/c ahead of you is doing 250 can soon catch him up. Why do you think that London ATC often ask one a/c to maintain 280 or greater and another to maintain 280 or less. If it made no difference they wouldn't bother!
I often find that JMC often lack consideration of what is going on around them and who is doing what in front and behind them. I am not advocating doing things that will make the crew uncomforatble but a bit of consideration, please?
If you need to do 320 kts to get the height off and the a/c ahead of you is doing 250 can soon catch him up. Why do you think that London ATC often ask one a/c to maintain 280 or greater and another to maintain 280 or less. If it made no difference they wouldn't bother!
I often find that JMC often lack consideration of what is going on around them and who is doing what in front and behind them. I am not advocating doing things that will make the crew uncomforatble but a bit of consideration, please?
Guest
Posts: n/a
It has everything to do with which airfield, as (outside the London TMA) the airspace classification varies considerably between airports.
By way of an example, descending in the Scottish TMA below 6000 feet inbound to Edinburgh, you are in class E airspace until 10dme - that means 250kts or less; ATC have no authority to waive the 250kts rule.
Inbound to Glasgow, it's class D for most profiles, so ATC can let you do whatever speed you like.
By way of an example, descending in the Scottish TMA below 6000 feet inbound to Edinburgh, you are in class E airspace until 10dme - that means 250kts or less; ATC have no authority to waive the 250kts rule.
Inbound to Glasgow, it's class D for most profiles, so ATC can let you do whatever speed you like.
Guest
Posts: n/a
shlittlenellie and Bono Vox,
If ATC requested the guy to do 280, then why all your usual talk of uncontrolled airspace and minimal time gain?? They ask him for a reason. And there could easily be many many trackmiles to go, when descending below level 100.
I see this behavior often with BA and Air France when they approach my home port. Irritates me, not because I might arrive 2 min. later if getting stuck behind one of them, but because of the situation they sometimes unnecessarily put the controller in.
If ATC requested the guy to do 280, then why all your usual talk of uncontrolled airspace and minimal time gain?? They ask him for a reason. And there could easily be many many trackmiles to go, when descending below level 100.
I see this behavior often with BA and Air France when they approach my home port. Irritates me, not because I might arrive 2 min. later if getting stuck behind one of them, but because of the situation they sometimes unnecessarily put the controller in.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I personally think that it is a very poor SOP. It removes a very useful tool for energy management in ones descent profile. Sadly in the JMC SOP’s there is a very ‘fly by numbers’ approach which hopefully with some senior retirements next year will change.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Man do I agree with youm Mcrit.
It certainly took the fun away from the flying for me as well...
Lets see, burns more gas, reduces options, and is generally a miserable idea. Lets go for it...
Right about the time that the policy was instituted life as I knew from Airworld ceased being fun. The wrong management team survived the first shakeup!
Cheers
Wino
It certainly took the fun away from the flying for me as well...
Lets see, burns more gas, reduces options, and is generally a miserable idea. Lets go for it...
Right about the time that the policy was instituted life as I knew from Airworld ceased being fun. The wrong management team survived the first shakeup!
Cheers
Wino
Guest
Posts: n/a
Why all this JMC bashing??
From an ATCO's perspective, I've never had a problem with them. If anything, I'd say when it comes to R/T discipline and complying with ATC instructions, they are one of the better operators.
Only one thing that DOES bug me about them.....the God-awful climb performance of those bloody 300s.....makes a 146 look like a home-sick angel :-(
From an ATCO's perspective, I've never had a problem with them. If anything, I'd say when it comes to R/T discipline and complying with ATC instructions, they are one of the better operators.
Only one thing that DOES bug me about them.....the God-awful climb performance of those bloody 300s.....makes a 146 look like a home-sick angel :-(
Guest
Posts: n/a
Not quite sure but off the top of my head I think in the EMB145/135 you can do about 280 @10,000 derceasing to 250 by 8,000 or the soothing high speed alarms will remind you of your error, making comms with ATC all but impossible. If on autos the aircraft will pitch up to try and mantain the limit.
Guest
Posts: n/a
It seems to me that most of you have forgotten one thing, none of you were present on the JMC flight deck at the time and it was that Captains decision to accept or reject the speed. It is very arrogant of some of you to question his decision without all the relevant information?
Guest
Posts: n/a
ATC saying "no ATC speed restriction" does not constitute a request so the company limit remains binding. If ATC requires more speed the wording would have to be different - "request 290kts (until clear of Bovingdon zone)-(as long as possible)" etc.
Hint - hint.......
Hint - hint.......
Guest
Posts: n/a
Didnīt Major Congīs post say exactly that. ATC requested 280 to maintain separation. Well, as shake rattle and roll said, it is a decision made entirely by the crew/captain but please, some (most often British and French operators) make it sound like 250+ is getting dangerous. Come on!
Guest
Posts: n/a
For all you guys who like high speed at low levels, consider this---
One ten pound bird (estimated size) thru:
radome,
forward pressure bulkhead,
cockpit door and,
splatered all over the F/C lounge.
Oh yes, it broke the F/O's left leg in the process.
Viewed the aircraft, NOT a pretty sight.
Imagine if it had hit the windscreen.
One ten pound bird (estimated size) thru:
radome,
forward pressure bulkhead,
cockpit door and,
splatered all over the F/C lounge.
Oh yes, it broke the F/O's left leg in the process.
Viewed the aircraft, NOT a pretty sight.
Imagine if it had hit the windscreen.