I fly an old airbus that will quite happily ignore any climb constraints in the fms;that has an extremely noisy flightdeck and has poor anr headsets.Many atc calls to us get missed because we are frequently adjusting the volume as airborne transmissions always are much louder than atc transmissions,add in these conditional climb clearances and I will be spending most of my time fixated on the tcas display on our 6cm VSI.

The other gotcha with this is altimeter setting errors. Don't most people set standard when cleared to a flight level? Of course those of us in newer equipment will highlight this, but for those in older equipment?

And yes, we know we should set std passing transition but setting std when cleared to a flight level was introduced as a good idea because it is!

This is an incident/accident waiting to happen.

Like dixi188 already said. What about us who fly the vintage stuff? No VNAV etc. Better run of to the copier to get some more spare ASR's.

Why can't we just stay with the basics. ATC tells you to climb to xxx and you just do us your told. A bit like being at home for us lads... :=

I'm not sure I understand this. Why would the aircraft revert to LVL CHG just because you pressed HDG SEL? One is a lateral mode and the other vertical.

If you select HDG in an airbus, does it revert to OP CLB even if you haven't pulled the ALT KNOB?

Hello TB,

If you are in "managed" in the modern Airbus (A318-321, 330-380) and you select HDG during the climb it will indeed revert to OP CLB - the theory being you cannot be on a "managed path" (LAT+VERT) if you're in HDG (same for descent - I think). If you're in ALT* it will revert to V/S -even more problematical! If in ALT* - DON'T TOUCH the FCU if you want to stay level!

A4

This is not a recent change but it changed already in nov2007 (that's when it was implemented by ICAO) (over 1 year ago) they are just very late in implementing it.

More ASRs
 

Fortunately despite loading the FMS with countless Sids (and Stars), it is an extremely rare day when I actually fly to further than the first waypoint before ATC take over the nav. Therefore once on a heading, this new demented edict from ICAO will cease to be in force.

My point being that since it is very rare to fly the full SID, on the odd occasion that it is required, one has to now remember that the ATC level clearance written down should NOT be followed.

This should be Chirped and represented as a DANGEROUS procedure through FSOs and FOIs at the earliest opportunity.

This should be fun in our steam gauge, Litton 92 equipped, DC10's:eek:

fullyspooled, funny you should mention that, as in the UK they don't use this standard phraseology...:ugh:

as for this new procedure... :eek: what ARE they thinking?

If you are given a heading to steer then surely that cancels the SID, therefore OP CLIMB is ok as the restrictions only apply if you are following the SID?

TotalBeginner:

While I don't fly either Airbus or Boeing, I'm sure the logic is similar to my type, in that VNav will only engage if LNav is engaged. Also if LNav is then deselected, VNav will be replaced by another vertical mode.

Similar crossing altitude gotchas have been in place in China and some other countries for a while now. A couple of my colleagues have learned the hard way about some fine print in the J-Aid. I always try to get clarification whether a climb or descent is unrestricted.

Another inconsistency is the old U.S. policy of implied clearance to cross other runways when given a taxi clearance. Often if you ask to make sure, the controller would act annoyed, particularly at some haughty place like JFK. Those guys are good, some of them just aren't very polite, and yes, I understand that it's cultural up there. I am told that U.S. taxi clearances will soon require explicit crossing instructions after the FAA has got hot on runway incursions lately.

Fortunately, conditional landing clearances are not allowed in the U.S. I've never cared for them and have seen them issued with a plane making the turnoff and another on short final. If you decide that the plane turning off is the landing traffic it could ruin your whole day.

Boeing will happily fly VNAV without LNAV engaged.

Sorry RadAlt - just goes to show I'm not not up to speed on all of the various differences used by all of the countries Worldwide, and come to that, the many RT differences within JAA land.

Perhaps there is a definitive source reference document - or I guess, a rather thick manual somewhere?

Agree with BOAC on this. We mustn't be scared of change, we should ask ourselves, 'how can we do this safely?' Robust SOPs and good preemptive training are essential. It is obvious that the current system is also far from perfect and level bust statistics support this. Also current procedures are not optimal or efficient we are wasting thousands of tons of fuel per day! We need to move towards a better system and as far as I am concerned this is just the beginning of a move towards 4D nav based on RNP and Time. Hopefully mode S et al will start to show significant safety benefits.

The concerns are, multi mode mixing of traffic, ie A300's and GA into the new system. Lack of time available for Operators to Inc this into their training systems and, most daft of all, introducing such a fundamental change just as the summer busy period is about to kick off!

How can we do this safely?

To be fair, with the changes to ATSOCAS due on the same day it won't be the only problem for many operators, but I still can't see how it will improve things.

I think it's the first step in many changes to come. The advantage is predicability of flight path which will ultimately lead to the Time element of 4D nav to take shape.

Point taken but I don't know about you but I am faced with some sort of change nearly every few days or so!

But why aren't those who are working on the "shop floor" asked what they think of a change before it's implemented? Tom Peters, an experienced management guru, says that managers in industry need to get a "daily dose of reality". By this he means they need to go down on the shopfloor and even actually do the job themselves for a while. This means they mix with the "worker drones in the collective" and maybe learn something new.

It still sounds to me as though this change has not been thought through. Yes if we have to work it we will all do our best but that doesn't mean it's the best way! If it ain't broken then don't fix it!

Two Points,
1 Its not new. At most icao airports you ask for a flight level on start up.
Your clearance will include a sid and the flight level after that. The sid controls the altitude until cancelled or finished
2 Someone mentioned altimeters. Only the UK switches when cleared to a FL or alt either up or down. Its a difference to ICAO. ICAO is to keep qnh until TA and allows for switching to qnh on the way down when cleared below the TL and for approach.

Therefore the only people with a problem will be UK carriers as most ICAO carriers stay on QNH until TA .
Same in reverse in countries like Turkey where the TA can be high. Everyone below it is on qnh except Brits cleaered to a FL who have switched as per the UK difference.
Now whether the country or operator rules are paramount is another arguement.
I know a certain large middleeastern carrier for one who when climbing stays on qnh until TA and when descending stays on Standard until approaching TL and cleared for the approach in the UK.

This instruction will only cause more confusion, there is absolutely nothing wrong with th phraseology as is.

If you are instructed to climb by ATC, that means now, without stopping off at any levels on the way, unl;ess this has been reiterated n the climb clearance. The instruction cancels the previous clearance, be that a previous climb instruction or a SID.

I find it incredible that some posters on here can correctly grasp the idea that if you are given radar vectors whilst performing a SID, these vectors mean that you have been taken off the SID i.e. you can disregard the SID level restrictinos, yet do not understand that if you are given a climb above the SID level, this does the same.

SIDS are designed for many reasons, deconfliction from other routes is a major reason when you have SIDS with altitude restrictions. Taking someone off the SID route means these altitude restrictions are no longer effective...

Similarly when told to climb, you climb now! ATC should not give a conditional climb clearance as this is dangerous.. therefore a climb instruction without any level restrictions added to it means climb continuously to the given level.

If in doubt - ask, however this new procedure and phraseology will only cause more confusion. The system worked previously, so why fix it... it certainly isn't an improvement.