What exactly is an altitude restriction (Jepp)?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK altitude not height, I accept that. What you do not get 172 is that planning a decent below MSA when not positively identified by radar is not in any serious airline’s SOP’s. The original poster obviously was questioned, quite rightly, by ATC. If I had made such a basic error I do not thing I would advertise it here.
The rules of the game are that one stays at or above MSA until reaching a fix on either the approach or STAR. Wandering down from somewhere 40 or 50 miles North without regard to MSA is unbelievable.
I suppose people brought up with EGPWS ETC feel it is a substitute for airmanship.
The rules of the game are that one stays at or above MSA until reaching a fix on either the approach or STAR. Wandering down from somewhere 40 or 50 miles North without regard to MSA is unbelievable.
I suppose people brought up with EGPWS ETC feel it is a substitute for airmanship.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hawker750,
I hear what you are saying and I knew what you meant, your answer was just way too generic to make any sense. The discussion has been about whether FL75 is an applicable level restriction for a direct clearance. I say not, it's a minimum along a STAR segment which the OP wasn't cleared for. Any "safety altitude" given as a Flight Level I cannot take seriously anyway. In the absence of ATC instructions that leaves you with the MSA, unless you are and stay VMC.
Given a direct clearance like that ATC has to help you out with altitudes until DIXIR. Without radar, min. altitudes can still be based on DME.
I hear what you are saying and I knew what you meant, your answer was just way too generic to make any sense. The discussion has been about whether FL75 is an applicable level restriction for a direct clearance. I say not, it's a minimum along a STAR segment which the OP wasn't cleared for. Any "safety altitude" given as a Flight Level I cannot take seriously anyway. In the absence of ATC instructions that leaves you with the MSA, unless you are and stay VMC.
Given a direct clearance like that ATC has to help you out with altitudes until DIXIR. Without radar, min. altitudes can still be based on DME.
Only half a speed-brake
Thus in the absence of waterproof clearance the mnm was 7100 ft given the charts legally required and available onboard.
Despite FL75 not being enforceable, which is 100% agreed, selecting anything below that while approaching DIXIR from the same quadrant as the published low limit shows lack of awareness on how minimum altitudes are eastablished and what purpose they serve. In a non-perfect world.
To me, that is aviatorship, alongside recognising the logical discontinuity soon enough to ask for clarification.
Where is the famed out of the box thinking now? Exactly this case is where it applies, as that toolbox is empty.
Just because 7100 (or 5xxx with Lido) is geometrically safe, and it really is - properly declared too, it does not make it the correct choice given the other data and context available to the crew involved at the time.
Opinions, I know.
Despite FL75 not being enforceable, which is 100% agreed, selecting anything below that while approaching DIXIR from the same quadrant as the published low limit shows lack of awareness on how minimum altitudes are eastablished and what purpose they serve. In a non-perfect world.
To me, that is aviatorship, alongside recognising the logical discontinuity soon enough to ask for clarification.
Where is the famed out of the box thinking now? Exactly this case is where it applies, as that toolbox is empty.
Just because 7100 (or 5xxx with Lido) is geometrically safe, and it really is - properly declared too, it does not make it the correct choice given the other data and context available to the crew involved at the time.
Opinions, I know.
Last edited by FlightDetent; 19th Oct 2022 at 15:26.
Join Date: Dec 2021
Location: London
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FlightDetent. In post #35y you wrote
Now,
Are you looking to change your career to that of MP?
Seriously, if FL 075 is valid on the track 225* into DIXIR, when will descent out of FL 75 be permitted? Why would it not be valid on the clearance received by the OP?
Let me tease with a question. Had the you or the OP received a clearance ALT - DIXIR, what then would be the required level and why.
My choice is FL75 and seek clarification.
Despite FL75 not being enforceable, which is 100% agreed,
Seriously, if FL 075 is valid on the track 225* into DIXIR, when will descent out of FL 75 be permitted? Why would it not be valid on the clearance received by the OP?
Let me tease with a question. Had the you or the OP received a clearance ALT - DIXIR, what then would be the required level and why.
Only half a speed-brake
Not sure we understand each other. I opine the charted restriction before Dixir makes me observe it when routing direct from the north. Your example for an 'overlay direct' is completely bullseye.
Sorry for the perceived incoherence in the parts you quoted form me.
Trying again:
I recognize and agree to other people's claim that for DCT Dixir the STAR restriction of FL75(+) does not apply specifically. Yet still, it would be my choice to observe it regardless, for reasons I struggle to define by quoting the regulations, at least until a clarification from the ATC is obtained.
Are we not singing the same tune? I disagree (to the whole breadth of modern CRM) with anything lower than FL75 but acknowledge running out of legal ammo to prove the posters claiming otherwise to be wrong.
What I say is their explanation is valid but brings dysfunctional / undesirable result. Because in the given case there were blank spots in the clearance needing to be filled, and that is where I personally find anything other than FL75+ plain wrong.
Sorry for the perceived incoherence in the parts you quoted form me.
Trying again:
I recognize and agree to other people's claim that for DCT Dixir the STAR restriction of FL75(+) does not apply specifically. Yet still, it would be my choice to observe it regardless, for reasons I struggle to define by quoting the regulations, at least until a clarification from the ATC is obtained.
Are we not singing the same tune? I disagree (to the whole breadth of modern CRM) with anything lower than FL75 but acknowledge running out of legal ammo to prove the posters claiming otherwise to be wrong.
What I say is their explanation is valid but brings dysfunctional / undesirable result. Because in the given case there were blank spots in the clearance needing to be filled, and that is where I personally find anything other than FL75+ plain wrong.
Last edited by FlightDetent; 19th Oct 2022 at 23:00.
Originally Posted by Hawker 750
If I had made such a basic error I do not thing I would advertise it here.
I suspect pilots have learned lessons from this thread, and hopefully a local will take action to tidy up the obvious inadequacies. All because someone raised an issue (good on them), which you would have buried.
As for your snide remark
Originally Posted by Hawker750
I suppose people brought up with EGPWS ETC feel it is a substitute for airmanship.
Join Date: Dec 2021
Location: London
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But has the OP sent a query off to JEPP?
Flight magazine used to publish a yearly report of aviation accidents in the January of each year. It is possible to find scanned copies of editions online and the number and frequency of accidents may shock. CFIT was the major cause of accidents in aviation long before I (and I suspect Hawker 750) took our first flying lesson.
Last time I look at the stats the major cause of crashes (and incidents) was loss of control with CFIT a close second. Fast-finger-Freddy and the magenta line eh? Still, if the Ray-Bans fit..
Flight magazine used to publish a yearly report of aviation accidents in the January of each year. It is possible to find scanned copies of editions online and the number and frequency of accidents may shock. CFIT was the major cause of accidents in aviation long before I (and I suspect Hawker 750) took our first flying lesson.
Last time I look at the stats the major cause of crashes (and incidents) was loss of control with CFIT a close second. Fast-finger-Freddy and the magenta line eh? Still, if the Ray-Bans fit..
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Neither here or there
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you Capn Bloggs. Words of wisdom. Happy to share my faults, take the blame and kick in the gonads to make aviation safer.
One thing I missed to say earlier was we were subsequently asked by the controller if we were in sight of the surface, and yes we were. The ground was more than 5000ft below us. Have a look, it's flat with no charted spot heights or obstacles. Granted there's a restricted zone there. I cannot find any info on it. But if it was not active at the time then safety, by luck or otherwise, was not compromised.
I will make it my mission to write to the Spanish to get confirmation of their expectation and what the correct phraseology from them should be when on a direct routing to somewhere (like DIXIR) that does not have an explicitly defined altitude/FL restriction like for example VIBIM does. Will report back, I suspect in 90 days
One thing I missed to say earlier was we were subsequently asked by the controller if we were in sight of the surface, and yes we were. The ground was more than 5000ft below us. Have a look, it's flat with no charted spot heights or obstacles. Granted there's a restricted zone there. I cannot find any info on it. But if it was not active at the time then safety, by luck or otherwise, was not compromised.
I will make it my mission to write to the Spanish to get confirmation of their expectation and what the correct phraseology from them should be when on a direct routing to somewhere (like DIXIR) that does not have an explicitly defined altitude/FL restriction like for example VIBIM does. Will report back, I suspect in 90 days
Last edited by CW247; 20th Oct 2022 at 14:59.
Only half a speed-brake
It is a sobering thought there's nothing wrong with the Jeppessen presentation as displayed for this northern arrival segment. Exactly as advertised.
C. B.'s sin list implicitly omits pilots' knowledge and understanding. Simply due to lack of training.
C. B.'s sin list implicitly omits pilots' knowledge and understanding. Simply due to lack of training.
Last edited by FlightDetent; 20th Oct 2022 at 21:09.
Join Date: Dec 2021
Location: London
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nothing wrong with the Jeppessen presentation as displayed for this northern arrival segment. Exactly as advertised.
Only half a speed-brake
The gentleman who asked to discuss the AIP instead of Jepp already with post #2 of the whole thread had valid and honest reason. Let that sink for a while.
Join Date: Dec 2021
Location: London
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FD. You may like to reread your previous posts. You are keep contradicting yourself.
Reminds me of when we used to video sim sessions. A pilot or crew would often swear black was white and they ‘didn’t do that’ and continue to deny it, even when shown the tape replay. Oh happy days.
Anyway, you believe what you will; your obviously a Sky God. Bye.
Reminds me of when we used to video sim sessions. A pilot or crew would often swear black was white and they ‘didn’t do that’ and continue to deny it, even when shown the tape replay. Oh happy days.
Anyway, you believe what you will; your obviously a Sky God. Bye.
I guess the question I'd ask the OP is, if FL75 isn't the minimum altitude at DIXIR (and I agree it is not unless on the STAR), then what IS the minimum altitude? What altitude would you be prepared to descend to prior to DIXIR and where are you finding that information?
To me, the Jepp provides a few numbers, FL75 on the XOLSI - DIXIR track, 7100 in the grid, and 4700 in the sector just as you get to DIXIR. None of these numbers are 4100. You don't get 4100 until past DIXIR. I think it's confusing and I'd be asking questions of ATC if it was me.
Questions for ATC, "Descend via what procedure?"
If the answer is "The ILS", then I'd be asking what altitude do you want before we get to the ILS.
To me, the Jepp provides a few numbers, FL75 on the XOLSI - DIXIR track, 7100 in the grid, and 4700 in the sector just as you get to DIXIR. None of these numbers are 4100. You don't get 4100 until past DIXIR. I think it's confusing and I'd be asking questions of ATC if it was me.
Questions for ATC, "Descend via what procedure?"
If the answer is "The ILS", then I'd be asking what altitude do you want before we get to the ILS.
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Around latitude 0
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canadians makes it simple i think , I quote from their instruments flight rules-arrival procedures-approach clearance : A clearance for an approach may not include any intermediate altitude restrictions. The pilot may receive this clearance while the aircraft is still a considerable distance from the airport, in either a radar or non-radar environment. In these cases, the pilot may descend, at his/her convenience, to whichever is the lowest of the following IFR altitudes applicable to the position of the aircraft:
a.Minimum Enroute Altitude (MEA);
b.published transition or feeder route altitude:
C.Minimum Sector Altitude (MSA) specified on the appropriate
instrument approach chart;
……
I agree that FL75 is a minimum published (MEA) between to fixes, but that one still apply at DIXIR. If in doubt in these situations I would seek ATC clarification or stating intention to which altitude we intend to descend initially,if ATC is not okay with that they let you know that way.
a.Minimum Enroute Altitude (MEA);
b.published transition or feeder route altitude:
C.Minimum Sector Altitude (MSA) specified on the appropriate
instrument approach chart;
……
I agree that FL75 is a minimum published (MEA) between to fixes, but that one still apply at DIXIR. If in doubt in these situations I would seek ATC clarification or stating intention to which altitude we intend to descend initially,if ATC is not okay with that they let you know that way.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Neither here or there
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The response...
1.) Although the MEA for segment XOLSI-DIXIR is FL075, this implies it's also the restriction for DIXIR.
2.) When asked why the restriction is explicitly stated for other airport arrivals, they say it's because those are PBN procedures
3.) They acknowledge it can be a point of confusion and will include this altitude restriction in the ILS approach chart ASAP
1.) Although the MEA for segment XOLSI-DIXIR is FL075, this implies it's also the restriction for DIXIR.
2.) When asked why the restriction is explicitly stated for other airport arrivals, they say it's because those are PBN procedures
3.) They acknowledge it can be a point of confusion and will include this altitude restriction in the ILS approach chart ASAP
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice one 
ENAIRe themselves seem a little confused though, the difference between the FL75 and 7500. With a QNH of 980 that is about 1000 ft. Hope they pay better attention to the numbers when they publish charts than answering e-mails.
ENAIRe themselves seem a little confused though, the difference between the FL75 and 7500. With a QNH of 980 that is about 1000 ft. Hope they pay better attention to the numbers when they publish charts than answering e-mails.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As others have remarked before, the question is not so much wether the FL75 restriction applies at DIXIR, but on what basis the thread starter decided to descend to 4100 (below MSA), passing DIXIR at 6000. What procedure were they following?
The controller instructed them to descend ‘according to procedure’. So honest question to the thread starter: what procedure did you follow in response?
We have all been in this situation, but it’s not ‘crapy’ Spanish ATC, Jeppesen or Airbus that concern me in this topic, it’s the ‘blind’ decent to 4100.
The controller instructed them to descend ‘according to procedure’. So honest question to the thread starter: what procedure did you follow in response?
We have all been in this situation, but it’s not ‘crapy’ Spanish ATC, Jeppesen or Airbus that concern me in this topic, it’s the ‘blind’ decent to 4100.
Flying from XOLSI to the next waypoint D015V to DIXIR, you would descend down to FL75.
Direct to DIXIR without flying the arrival, no restriction (One would advise not below 4700 due to MSA until reaching DIXIR).
Any doubts - ask ATC what they want you to do.
Direct to DIXIR without flying the arrival, no restriction (One would advise not below 4700 due to MSA until reaching DIXIR).
Any doubts - ask ATC what they want you to do.
