SoCalAprch
Well-Known Member
Yeah I meant the speed restrictions that are outlined in the FARs. Like 250 below 10 etc...
But if there is no jumpseater and you aren't flying a "Heavy" you were just picking up a stiff tailwind if they ask.
91.117 - Aircraft Speed
- Thread starter skyhigh600
- Start date
Yeah I meant the speed restrictions that are outlined in the FARs. Like 250 below 10 etc...
But if there is no jumpseater and you aren't flying a "Heavy" you were just picking up a stiff tailwind if they ask.
SoCalAprch
Well-Known Member
I may be wrong but I remember hearing that it didn't really do anything beneficial to the traffic flow.
PeanuckleCRJ
Poodle Wrangler
No matter what anyone tells you, an ATC is NOT the Administrator. They cannot waive the 250/10 rule by themselves.
The reason why heavies are allowed to exceed 250 below 10 is included in one of the clauses with the rule... it is their minimum safe manuevering speed with a clean wing. It is not always "heavies" either, the MD-90 at max takeoff weight can require in excess of 260 knots to manuver with a clean wing. This isn't a case of ATC looking the other way, it is part of the way the rule is phrased.
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
No one is telling me that an ATC is the administrator. My use of "as" in the above quoted text was incorrect.
The 7110.65 is pretty clear that if an individual controller comes across a circumstance where safety and operational necessity is not clearly dictated in the governing document (7110.65) they must exercise their best judgment to reach a safe conclusion.
That includes the 250 below 10k regulation.
Now, we could sit here and debate certain circumstances where needing to exceed that speed restriction would be warranted, but it's really not even worth it. Moreover, that's not the point I'm trying to emphasis.
Rather, if a circumstance arises that is not dictated with procedural action in 7110.65 a controller is able to use their best judgment (without guidance from the administrator) to facilitate a conclusion.
The 7110.65 is pretty clear that if an individual controller comes across a circumstance where safety and operational necessity is not clearly dictated in the governing document (7110.65) they must exercise their best judgment to reach a safe conclusion.
That includes the 250 below 10k regulation.
Now, we could sit here and debate certain circumstances where needing to exceed that speed restriction would be warranted, but it's really not even worth it. Moreover, that's not the point I'm trying to emphasis.
Rather, if a circumstance arises that is not dictated with procedural action in 7110.65 a controller is able to use their best judgment (without guidance from the administrator) to facilitate a conclusion.
PeanuckleCRJ
Poodle Wrangler
That situation is similar to our discretion on breaking rules- emergency situations. Other than that, they do not have the authority to waive speed limits.
skyhigh600
New Member
7110.65 3-1-11a also states:
3
−1−11. SURFACE AREA RESTRICTIONS
a.
If traffic conditions permit, approve a pilot’s
request to cross Class C or Class D surface areas or
exceed the Class C or Class D airspace speed limit.
Do not, however, approve a speed in excess of
250 knots (288 mph) unless the pilot informs you a
higher minimum speed is required.
NOTE
exceed the Class C or Class D airspace speed limit.
Do not, however, approve a speed in excess of
250 knots (288 mph) unless the pilot informs you a
higher minimum speed is required.
NOTE
−
While one could argue that the document is soley referrencing Class C and D airspace, it specifically says that ATC can not authorize a speed above 250kts (unless required by the a/c due to weight, etc.), implying a cold-hard limit that they (the "delegated authority of the admistrator [FAR 1]") can waive (as you claimed).
14 CFR Section 91.117 permits speeds in excess of
250 knots (288 mph) when so required or recommended in
the airplane flight manual or required by normal military
operating procedures.250 knots (288 mph) when so required or recommended in
the airplane flight manual or required by normal military
While one could argue that the document is soley referrencing Class C and D airspace, it specifically says that ATC can not authorize a speed above 250kts (unless required by the a/c due to weight, etc.), implying a cold-hard limit that they (the "delegated authority of the admistrator [FAR 1]") can waive (as you claimed).
If the pilot has an emergency, he doesn't need ATC's authorization to exceed 250kts below 10,000'. If the pilot does not have an emergency then he can't exceed 250kts below 10,000' (unless required by aircraft performance) even if ATC gives approval.
ATC does not have the authority to waive FARs unless the specific FAR gives them that authority.
ClearedToThe
Well-Known Member
Put yourself in this situation....
A fed was in your jumpseat and saw you "comply" with ATC's instruction to "maintain 280kts" inside their class bravo. He writes you up. In your hearing the FAA asks you to show them where in the regs it says you can go 280kts below 10,000ft (even in class B)? Where are you gonna point? While the AIM is not regulatory, it does gives quite a bit of guidance stating any ATC instruction does not allow you to break an FAR (in this case 91.117), and I'm sure the FAA would reference it during the hearing.
I think it would be alot easier to point to the reg stating why I REFUSED to comply with the atc instruction rather than having to point to the reg allowing me to the comply with the instruction.
A fed was in your jumpseat and saw you "comply" with ATC's instruction to "maintain 280kts" inside their class bravo. He writes you up. In your hearing the FAA asks you to show them where in the regs it says you can go 280kts below 10,000ft (even in class B)? Where are you gonna point? While the AIM is not regulatory, it does gives quite a bit of guidance stating any ATC instruction does not allow you to break an FAR (in this case 91.117), and I'm sure the FAA would reference it during the hearing.
I think it would be alot easier to point to the reg stating why I REFUSED to comply with the atc instruction rather than having to point to the reg allowing me to the comply with the instruction.
USAFplt
Well-Known Member
absolutely correct. Our min maneuver clean often exceeds 250..depending on weight we are anywhere around 270-290ish on a clean wing. Its normally no big deal and if ATC asks us to slow we kindly let them know that we are unable on climbout.