Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Can't climb due "operational reasons"?

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Can't climb due "operational reasons"?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 29th July 2001 | 22:37
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
From: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
Question Can't climb due "operational reasons"?

Can anyone help explain this to me please?

I was controlling an "Elite" (CMM) Airbus A310 en-route LFPG to CYMX. The climb is going well and as the a/c approaches FL260 I ask what is his requested level. "FL310" he says, to which I reply that I'll let him know.

After a bit of Co-ordination it transpires that FL310 isn't available (RVSM ODL) but FL320 is. On offering this to the A310 he says that he can't accept FL320 "due operational reasons". Okay, I say, assuming that he's a bit heavy on fuel at the moment, "When can you accept FL320?". " We CAN'T," he says, "Due Operational reasons".

Question is this: Any guesses at to the "operational reasons?" Would an extra 1000ft up on an A310, from FL310 to 320 make THAT much difference? And if so why?

I'm just curious. Oh, after a bit of "negotiation" I manged to get FL310 for him.

Rgds BEX
BEXIL160 is offline  
Old 29th July 2001 | 22:51
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
From: Derbyshire
Smile

At a guess I would say aircraft operating on a single air conditioning system. That's the flight restriction on most of the buses for that defect.
the_fat_maintroller is offline  
Old 29th July 2001 | 23:03
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
From: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
Thumbs up

Maintroller...

Thanks for that, I appreciate it. Like everybody else around here I'm still learning something new every day, even after xx years!

Cheers BEX
BEXIL160 is offline  
Old 2nd August 2001 | 00:50
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
From: Gatwick
Post

Could it be that the aircraft had some minor defect causing it to become temporarily RVSM non-compliant?
wysiwyg is offline  
Old 2nd August 2001 | 01:16
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
From: UK
Post

Nah, most likely to be the packs or engine bleed failure. Vaguely remember being limited to FL310 recently on a 320 so perhaps its a standard across the full range.
Carnage Matey! is offline  
Old 2nd August 2001 | 01:17
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
From: Derbyshire
Question

Doesn't RVSM start at FL290.
the_fat_maintroller is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.