climb 5000' and climb maintain 5000'
 

Hi gooday to you ,
Does any body knows what is difference between"climb 5000'" and "climb maintain 5000'", by ATC. thanks.::O

Same thing just said slightly differently.

Once on a flight down under, I requested a climb from FL290 to Fl350...I had this clearance " maintain FL350 ". We asked for a recomfirmation that we were cleared to climb from FL290 to FL350, we had an agiatated " maintain FL 350 ". Skipper asked that we were currently at FL 290, are we to maintain that? Came another curt reply, " you are cleared to maintain FL350 ". Well, we reported " vacating FL290 for FL350 ", " roger " was what we got in reply. GO figure.................

I read it to mean, expect to level off, don't call me on reaching, wait for a further clearance.

Could be used during an SID with altitude constraints - in which case it is a climb now and maintain 5000 (do not climb further with the SID until further instructed)

It is basically the same thing...

"Climb to 5000" means if you reach 5000 you are expected to level off there but if it is an intermediate level you COULD receive higher/lower by the time you reach it.

"Climb and Maintain 5000" means you go to 5000 and can expect to be at that level until further consideration.

I do wish we all could standardise our terminology. Sometimes it is only an irritant but sometimes it is a real safety issue. It behoves us all to examine the detail and try to get it right.

Best way is "Climb TO altitude 5000 feet".

I thought we were not supposed to use to and for? As they sound exactly the same as two and four?

"Climb to altitude 5,000 feet" is CAP 413

"Climb to 5000" is definitely not and for reasons already mentioned could be confused.

The instruction "Climb" according to CAP413 is defined to mean "Climb and maintain".

Reading between the lines (probably wrongly) I often interpret "Climb and maintain" to mean the controller knows we want higher but can't give it to us yet.


I often wonder why some controllers use "route direct xxxxxx" and some use "resume own navigation xxxxxx" if you've been on one of their headings. I am half tempted to resume my own navigation to xxxxxx via my destination airfield :)

Own nav means (and forgive me for being less than verbatim as I have imbibed some Guinness) rejoin your flight plan at the next available waypoint.

Direct to means...well, it's obvious init?!

Now, "resume own nav direct to" doesn't really do it for me as its nonsensical.

What's the point with using "altitude", has anyone ever climbed to an heading or what ?

About resuming navigation, by the book we should provide your position too but it's not usualy done becase you would be laughing all the way down to your destination

"Fly Direct to ..." = you have been under radar headings, in which I am responsible for your terrain clearance, I have now given you an instruction under radar guidance, and have checked your terrain clearance to that point.

"Resume own Navigation to ..." = you may track direct to the point (from a traffic & airspace perspective), but your terrain separation and navigation is now your own responsibility.

Really? :hmm: It's because some people climb/descend to a flight level. :rolleyes:

But if ATC already, cleard you to say x000 ft, goes without saying it is an altitude, as opposed to when cleard say climb maintain 250, in this case its a no brainer you've been cleard to a flight level.
In my opinion not necessary to include the word ' altitude', Just lengthens the clearance.

The term "altitude" places a marker between "to" and the altitude assigned.

Flying Tiger Line Flight 66 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I would counter that statement.

In aviation, safety is paramount, and hence clear, unambiguous r/t is essential.

The problem with removing altitude and just leaving ft at the end of the transmission is that its susceptible to being cut-off due to whatever technicalities, and could also be easily missed by a busy crew (or false assumptions made). Hence the use of the word altitude to reinforce the point.

Or at least that's how I see it .... :cool:

(I see Checkboard got there before me, and I think he's provided an excellent example !)

Guys, as long as you realize that CAP413 is one of the many variants on standard ICAO RT...

Some things make sense in CAP 413, like 'altitude' and 'degrees'.
Other stuff is a bit weird, like the whole mantra the approach controller has to preach when everyone else in the world says 'cleared ILS'.
Other things are confusing and bordering on the unsafe, like no double emphasis on the word 'behind' as in 'Behind the landing 737 line up and wait behind' or the 'climb now' instruction.

mmmm are you sure? I've always believed the crew are responsible for terrain clearance - always.

@Mixture,
Whilst i agree with you that safety is paramount and there should be no ambiguity in clearances issued by ATC, i do not see any if you were cleard
"climb five tousand ft", and the word ft is cut out during the transmition as you would have it, you would still know you are climbing to an altitude since you dont climb to levels in tousands,
And better still if in doubt just ask for the clearance again, why would you want to act on a clearance you arent sure about.

@Checkboard
Point taken on the use of altitude between the word "to" and say "5,000",
but remember at the beginning of the thread poster asked difference between "climb 5,000" and ''climb maintain 5,000'', there was no to in between.
For ATC who are verbose and would like to make clearances like "climb to", then the word altitude would suffice.
I know you have quoted the clearnce for tiger 66, but the ATC would have just said descend two tousand fower hundred feet, in this case no need for use of the word altitude, granted clearance was two four zero zero feet, but even as pilots clearances have to be sensible, thats why you check again if in doubt, when last were you asked by ATC to descend 400ft?

corporate-pilot An IFR flight in the EU may descend below the en-route lowest safe altitude when:

1. within 25 miles, and descending to a published MSA
2. Operating under the VFR
3. conducting an Instrument approach
4. under Radar vectors, and above the minimum vectoring altitude
   
5. established in a published holding procedure, and above the minimum altitude for holding.

... I mean, when you get a vector from ATC, you don't say "Hang on a minute, while I plot that on a terrain chart and make sure I have terrain separation.", do you? ;) Not saying you shouldn't remain situationally aware (esp in the second and third worlds!)

and, in addition:

(emphasis mine)