IFR Lost Comm Question

[SteveC]

The reason for waiting the ten minutes to begin the climb is actually pretty simple, and helps explain why the clearance is given that way.

Scenario #1, departing a controlled field and you are cleared "....maintain 4000, expect FL270 in ten minutes...". You are initially only cleared to 4000 feet because that is the limit of the airspace of the tower that is letting you depart. They don't know about aircraft that may be above that altitude and they will need a few minutes to coordinate with whomever *owns* the airspace above, whether that be an approach controller or a center controller.

Scenario #2, departing an uncontrolled field and you are cleared "....enter controlled airspace heading XXX, maintain 4000, expect on-course and FL180 ten minutes after...void if not off by....". In this case the controller may not know exactly when you are departing the field so he will keep a small block of airspace clear for you to take off into. If he doesn't hear from you within the time specified in your clearance he will assume that you departed but have had comm failure so he will start to make sure that your anticipated flight path is clear, and will coordinate further down the line as well.

Notice that in both cases the idea is to give the controller a chance to make sure that your flight path is clear of traffic if you lose comm. That is the reason for the ten minutes. If the delay was not in the clearance then they would always have to have a clear path all the way up to your filed altitude prior to your taking off - obviously not a practical answer. This way they only need to keep a much smaller airspace clear for you, then they can clear a larger path if communication is lost - a rare occasion indeed.

 

[EatSleepFly]

I would venture to say that you should stay on the ground and seek some serious retraining--the holes in your education are potentially deadly to you and to everyone who might have the misfortune to share the skies with you. Anyone who would suggest that some memory ditty created by persons unknown is an authoritative reference that trumps a definitive FAA publication (AIM) has absolutely zero business flying, and certainly no business flying IFR.

I would venture to say that you're not as right as you think you are.


The way FAR 91.185 is worded:

(2) Altitude. At the highest of the following altitudes or flight levels for the route segment being flown:
(i) The altitude or flight level assigned in the last ATC clearance received;
(ii) The minimum altitude (converted, if appropriate, to minimum flight level as prescribed in §91.121(c)) for IFR operations; or
(iii) The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.

If I got a clearance to 4,000, expect 10,000 in 10 min., I would go straight on up to 10,000 in the event of lost comms in IMC with zero hesitation. Are you going to tell me I shouldn't be flying and need retraining? Tell me where in 91.185 it says that I am wrong.



In mountainous terrain, if I were to level off at 4,000 for 10 minutes, I'd cover roughly 25-30 miles and could be in serious danger of smacking into something.




Maybe it's you who should think outside of the box.

 

[EatSleepFly]

Oh, and by the way, I'm going to take a nap while I await your response telling me I am a worthless turd of a pilot.

I did edit out my colorful opinion of you about 30 seconds after I posted that. It was rather unprofessional of me. I figured I should make that known in case you managed to quote it before I got rid of it.

That said, you came across as a real ass. You must be a joy to fly with.

 

[GaTechKid]

I always interpreted the 91.185 to mean fly the highest of your assigned, minimum, or expected *after a certain time/point*. I would wait the 10 minutes before climbing again, provided I know I won't smack into the Cascades. However if you lose comms in a mountainous area right after departure then the highest altitude for the route/heading would most likely be your minimum IFR rather than the assigned and I would initially climb up to the grid MORA if on a heading or the MEA if on/intercepting an airway.

 

[VicariousLiving]

If I got a clearance to 4,000, expect 10,000 in 10 min., I would go straight on up to 10,000 in the event of lost comms in IMC with zero hesitation. Are you going to tell me I shouldn't be flying and need retraining?

Given that what you suggest is not consistent with FARs and AIM, yes, you need retraining. Worse, your espoused attitude ignoring very clear and definitive FAA publications is actually more troublesome than your IFR procedural error. IOW, the procedural error is bad enough, but when someone puts the simple answer in front of you (including definitive reference) and you still persist in your original approach it is indicative of some serious hazardous attitude issues.

Tell me where in 91.185 it says that I am wrong.

§ 91.185 IFR operations: Two-way radio communications failure.
...
(c) IFR conditions. If the failure occurs in IFR conditions, or if paragraph (b) of this section cannot be complied with, each pilot shall continue the flight according to the following:
...
(2) Altitude. At the highest of the following altitudes or flight levels for the route segment being flown:
(i) The altitude or flight level assigned in the last ATC clearance received;
(ii) The minimum altitude (converted, if appropriate, to minimum flight level as prescribed in §91.121(c)) for IFR operations; or
(iii) The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.

The important item you apparently missed is marked bold.

Furthermore, as referenced in an excellent previous post:

AIM 6-4-1(c)(3)(b):

(b) Altitude. At the HIGHEST of the following altitudes or flight levels FOR THE ROUTE SEGMENT BEING FLOWN:
(1) The altitude or flight level assigned in the last ATC clearance received;
(2) The minimum altitude (converted, if appropriate, to minimum flight level as prescribed in 14 CFR Section 91.121(c)) for IFR operations; or
(3) The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.
NOTE
The intent of the rule is that a pilot who has experienced two-way radio failure should select the appropriate altitude for the particular route segment being flown and make the necessary altitude adjustments for subsequent route segments. If the pilot received an "expect further clearance" containing a higher altitude to expect at a specified time or fix, maintain the highest of the following altitudes until that time/fix:
(1) the last assigned altitude; or
(2) the minimum altitude/flight level for IFR operations.
Upon reaching the time/fix specified, the pilot should commence climbing to the altitude advised to expect.


Even if someone has difficulty interpreting the FAR reference, it doesn't get any clearer than the precise description provided within the referenced AIM note. A clearance "maintain 4000, expect 10,000' 10 minutes after departure" issues an expected altitude for the route segment beginning 10 minutes after departure--such a clearance does not issue an expected clearance for the route segment immediately upon departure.

In mountainous terrain, if I were to level off at 4,000 for 10 minutes, I'd cover roughly 25-30 miles and could be in serious danger of smacking into something.

First, ATC will take terrain factors into account when issuing an expect further clearance (altitude). Second, MEAs, OROCAs, etc., definitely take terrain into consideration, and, given that the applicable regulation in the first 10 minutes includes "the highest of" assigned, MEAs, OROCAs, etc., in the hypothetical scenario you offer you would be expected to climb to the minimum safe altitude consistent with those MEAs, OROCAs, etc. However, you would not necessarily climb to 10,000' during the first 10 minutes (unless the minimum safe altitude and 10,000' coincide).

Maybe it's you who should think outside of the box.

Maybe you should learn the box, first, and stay on the ground until you do.

 

[adreamer]

6-4-1. Two-way Radio Communications Failure
a. It is virtually impossible to provide regulations and procedures applicable to all possible situations associated with two-way radio communications failure. During two-way radio communications failure, when confronted by a situation not covered in the regulation, pilots are expected to exercise good judgment in whatever action they elect to take. Should the situation so dictate they should not be reluctant to use the emergency action contained in 14 CFR Section 91.3(b).
b. Whether two-way communications failure constitutes an emergency depends on the circumstances, and in any event, it is a determination made by the pilot. 14 CFR Section 91.3(b) authorizes a pilot to deviate from any rule in Subparts A and B to the extent required to meet an emergency.
c. In the event of two-way radio communications failure, ATC service will be provided on the basis that the pilot is operating in accordance with 14 CFR Section 91.185. A pilot experiencing two-way communications failure should (unless emergency authority is exercised) comply with 14 CFR Section 91.185 quoted below:

I see everyone here is correct. :rawk:

 

[meritflyer]

Given that what you suggest is not consistent with FARs and AIM, yes, you need retraining. Worse, your espoused attitude ignoring very clear and definitive FAA publications is actually more troublesome than your IFR procedural error. IOW, the procedural error is bad enough, but when someone puts the simple answer in front of you (including definitive reference) and you still persist in your original approach it is indicative of some serious hazardous attitude issues.



§ 91.185 IFR operations: Two-way radio communications failure.
...
(c) IFR conditions. If the failure occurs in IFR conditions, or if paragraph (b) of this section cannot be complied with, each pilot shall continue the flight according to the following:
...
(2) Altitude. At the highest of the following altitudes or flight levels for the route segment being flown:
(i) The altitude or flight level assigned in the last ATC clearance received;
(ii) The minimum altitude (converted, if appropriate, to minimum flight level as prescribed in §91.121(c)) for IFR operations; or
(iii) The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.

The important item you apparently missed is marked bold.

Furthermore, as referenced in an excellent previous post:

AIM 6-4-1(c)(3)(b):

(b) Altitude. At the HIGHEST of the following altitudes or flight levels FOR THE ROUTE SEGMENT BEING FLOWN:
(1) The altitude or flight level assigned in the last ATC clearance received;
(2) The minimum altitude (converted, if appropriate, to minimum flight level as prescribed in 14 CFR Section 91.121(c)) for IFR operations; or
(3) The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.
NOTE
The intent of the rule is that a pilot who has experienced two-way radio failure should select the appropriate altitude for the particular route segment being flown and make the necessary altitude adjustments for subsequent route segments. If the pilot received an "expect further clearance" containing a higher altitude to expect at a specified time or fix, maintain the highest of the following altitudes until that time/fix:
(1) the last assigned altitude; or
(2) the minimum altitude/flight level for IFR operations.
Upon reaching the time/fix specified, the pilot should commence climbing to the altitude advised to expect.


Even if someone has difficulty interpreting the FAR reference, it doesn't get any clearer than the precise description provided within the referenced AIM note. A clearance "maintain 4000, expect 10,000' 10 minutes after departure" issues an expected altitude for the route segment beginning 10 minutes after departure--such a clearance does not issue an expected clearance for the route segment immediately upon departure.



First, ATC will take terrain factors into account when issuing an expect further clearance (altitude). Second, MEAs, OROCAs, etc., definitely take terrain into consideration, and, given that the applicable regulation in the first 10 minutes includes "the highest of" assigned, MEAs, OROCAs, etc., in the hypothetical scenario you offer you would be expected to climb to the minimum safe altitude consistent with those MEAs, OROCAs, etc. However, you would not necessarily climb to 10,000' during the first 10 minutes (unless the minimum safe altitude and 10,000' coincide).



Maybe you should learn the box, first, and stay on the ground until you do.

During a recent IPC, the DE told me to start up immediately to the 10,000 after losing comms. The only reason they issue the 10 min. clearance limit is for the purpose of lost comms and where you would be expected to fly in such an event.

 

[VicariousLiving]

During a recent IPC, the DE told me to start up immediately to the 10,000 after losing comms. The only reason they issue the 10 min. clearance limit is for the purpose of lost comms and where you would be expected to fly in such an event.

Take the AIM section to your DE and see what s/he says. If s/he doesn't change his/her answer you should consider finding a more competent DE/CFI.

BTW, sit back and think about it for a minute or two. If the militantly stupid on this thread are correct and ATC expects you to climb immediately to the expected further clearance altitude, why does ATC bother stipulating a time? The answer is that ATC issues the 10 minute portion of the expected further clearance because ATC expects you to wait 10 minutes before climbing if you go lost COM. If that weren't the case, they could skip the extra words and just tell you to expect the higher altitude--which, BTW, they often do, i.e., "Expect one-seven-thousand as a final altitude."

 

[EatSleepFly]

OK, I will be sure to turn in my certificates when I get home tonight. :whatever:

What I suggest IS consistent with the FAR's. The AIM is no more regulatory than the PHAK.

You did not tell me how I would be violating 91.185 by immediately climbing to the expected altitude. You can't, because I wouldn't.

(2) Altitude. At the highest of the following altitudes or flight levels for the route segment being flown:
(i) The altitude or flight level assigned in the last ATC clearance received;
(ii) The minimum altitude (converted, if appropriate, to minimum flight level as prescribed in §91.121(c)) for IFR operations; or
(iii) The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.

The important item you apparently missed is marked bold.

A route segment cannot be defined by time. From FAR 1.1:

"Route segment is a portion of a route bounded on each end by a fix or navigation aid (NAVAID)."

So, it seems the FAR's contradict what the AIM says. I'll stand by what I said, and would not hesitate to climb immediately to an "expected" altitude, as long as they didn't say to expect it after a certain fix.

If the militantly stupid on this thread are correct and ATC expects you to climb immediately to the expected further clearance altitude, why does ATC bother stipulating a time? The answer is that ATC issues the 10 minute portion of the expected further clearance because ATC expects you to wait 10 minutes before climbing if you go lost COM.

Is that the answer? Or is it:

EXPECT (ALTITUDE) AT (TIME) or (FIX)- Used under certain conditions to provide a pilot with an altitude to be used in the event of two-way communications failure. It also provides altitude information to assist the pilot in planning. <emphasis added>

Those "conditions" are most often that the controller issuing the clearance can not clear you to the altitude, so he tells you to expect it. As in, expect it from the next sector. Why do you think that sometimes at smaller airports with smaller approach controls that it's 5 minutes instead of 10?

This isn't about traffic, it's about controller's sectors. Ask a controller sometime what happens when you squawk 7600. They will clear the airspace, believe me.

Every single night I get, "climb maintain 10,000 expect 12,000 in 5 minutes," when departing from a particular podunk airport. Do you suppose there is traffic there EVERY single night? No, it's because Podunk's sector only goes up to 10,000. The clearance to 12,000 has to come from Center. I suppose the ground controller issuing my clearance could get me a clearance all the way up to 12,000, but he'd have to get on the landline with Center and get permission from him. It's much simpler for him to tell me to expect my filed altitude from the Center controller.

You would not be in the wrong by climbing immediately to an expected altitude as long as it wasn't to be expected after a fix.

 

[Bandit_Driver]

Speaking from a large aircraft P.O.V. I would follow the regs and clearance given and try to restore radio contact inflight. Of course it's a lot harder for the large guys to turn around because it would involve fuel dumping or an overweight landing.

IF you follow AVE F and MEA you will make your life and the life of the controllers a lot less stressful. Doing anything outside of the regs, especially IMC and or near a busy field is asking for trouble.

 

[VicariousLiving]

What I suggest IS consistent with the FAR's. The AIM is no more regulatory than the PHAK.

Plenty of NTSB busts have hung on a pilot ignoring AIM...if you climb immediately when the EFC included a time you would be in violation of a number of FARs, but ignoring AIM would seal the 91.13 bust (as it has in the past, upheld by the NTSB).

You would not be in the wrong by climbing immediately to an expected altitude as long as it wasn't to be expected after a fix.

You would be ignoring the clearance as well as clear AIM guidance. If that isn't "wrong" by your standards perhaps boating is a more appropriate past time.

 

[EatSleepFly]

Plenty of NTSB busts have hung on a pilot ignoring AIM...if you climb immediately when the EFC included a time you would be in violation of a number of FARs, but ignoring AIM would seal the 91.13 bust (as it has in the past, upheld by the NTSB).

We're talking about comm failure in IMC here.

I am anxiously awaiting specific examples, relevant to this discussion.

Nice try, though.

You would be ignoring the clearance as well as clear AIM guidance. If that isn't "wrong" by your standards perhaps boating is a more appropriate past time.

Wrong again. And I love boating.

 

[VicariousLiving]

We're talking about comm failure in IMC here.

I am anxiously awaiting specific examples, relevant to this discussion.

Nice try, though.

Which of the following don't you find "relevant"?

1. You have AIM telling you to climb at the time specified. There are a myriad of NTSB cases upholding violations of 91.13 ("Careless and Reckless") when pilots deviate from the recommendations contained in AIM.
2. 14 CFR 91.185(c)(2) tells us that the EFC altitude applies "for the route segment being flown". Anyone who understands time-space relationship will understand that a future time is the equivalent of specifying a unique point in space. Anyone who's flown a departure will know that the odds of crossing at least one fix (and thereby placing the aircraft on a different route segment) within 10 minutes are quite great. IOW, the route segment you are on as you depart is not the route segment you will be on 10 minutes later and therefor the EFC altitude doesn't necessarily apply to the current segment.
3. 14 CFR 91.3 allows a pilot to deviate from the rules "to the extent required to meet that emergency"--climbing because you can't understand the regulations or have a contempt for AIM guidance will not justify an unwarranted climb.
4. If you climb when ATC isn't expecting and if in that unexpected climb you create a "deal" and put the controller in a position of defending his/her certification or pushing the paper work to bust you, count on you wearing the donkey's tail.

But by all means, don't take my word for it--instead, send a letter to your favorite regional counsel and ask for a legal interpretation of 91.185 with respect to a clearance, "...expect xx thousand in yy minutes".

 

[EatSleepFly]

You know what, you refuse to see where I'm coming from, so forget it. Add to that you're being a jerk about it, so I'm not going to waste my time on this thread.

I know what the regs say, I know what the AIM says, and I know that how I interpret them would not earn me a violation or jeopardize safety. That's all I care about.

The end.

 

[ColMustard]

"I would venture to say that you would be wrong."

Read the AIM, cause if i'm wrong then the AIM is wrong. They make it pretty clear in there that you wait till the spot or time that you were told to expect before using the expected altitude if it is the highest.

P.S. How do you get the post to block out the quote?

AIM is non-regulatory, the FAR IS regulatory. Period!

BTW, I think the quote in brackets needs to be at the beginning and the end of the quote you are attaching.

-ColM

 

[ColMustard]

Any ATCs out there that could help us on this one please??!!

-ColM

 

[meritflyer]

Any ATCs out there that could help us on this one please??!!

-ColM

Talking with my IPC DE again today, he said that you would initiate the climb immediately after losing comms. Within the 10 minute clearance limit you dont know when per say you'd lose comms. ATC expects you to begin your climb immediately after losing comms. In his words, anyone who doesnt do this has no assurance of terrain and other traffic since during IMC you are usually provided with traffic and terrain clearance during radar vectors. He mentioned, only an idiot would sit down at that altitude for 10 minutes awaiting CFIT, weather, or traffic. In the words of a United Captain and DE with over 25 years experience with the FAA, I think he's right.

 

[meritflyer]

Which of the following don't you find "relevant"?

1. You have AIM telling you to climb at the time specified. There are a myriad of NTSB cases upholding violations of 91.13 ("Careless and Reckless") when pilots deviate from the recommendations contained in AIM.
2. 14 CFR 91.185(c)(2) tells us that the EFC altitude applies "for the route segment being flown". Anyone who understands time-space relationship will understand that a future time is the equivalent of specifying a unique point in space. Anyone who's flown a departure will know that the odds of crossing at least one fix (and thereby placing the aircraft on a different route segment) within 10 minutes are quite great. IOW, the route segment you are on as you depart is not the route segment you will be on 10 minutes later and therefor the EFC altitude doesn't necessarily apply to the current segment.
3. 14 CFR 91.3 allows a pilot to deviate from the rules "to the extent required to meet that emergency"--climbing because you can't understand the regulations or have a contempt for AIM guidance will not justify an unwarranted climb.
4. If you climb when ATC isn't expecting and if in that unexpected climb you create a "deal" and put the controller in a position of defending his/her certification or pushing the paper work to bust you, count on you wearing the donkey's tail.

But by all means, don't take my word for it--instead, send a letter to your favorite regional counsel and ask for a legal interpretation of 91.185 with respect to a clearance, "...expect xx thousand in yy minutes".

Sorry buddy, you are wrong. I see where you are coming from but with my research today they do expect you to initiate your climb right after your lost comms since ATC really has no way other than your xponder of knowing you have lost comms. Once receiving your 7600, they expect you to initiate your climb.

 

[wheelsup]

Within the 10 minute clearance limit you dont know when per say you'd lose comms.

Right - 10 minutes after departure, you climb. If you flew for 5 minutes without ATC talking to your (unlikely) then you fly another 5 minutes then climb.

since during IMC you are usually provided with traffic and terrain clearance during radar vectors.

ATC doesn't provide terrain clearance* until you are "radar contact". If you radios fail, say, at 500' AGL, and you just keep climbing, there's going to be a problem. Try that in New York...

*Unless given a heading to fly on t/o.

The intital altitude that is given, like ESF said, is what the controller giving you the clearance is able to assure traffic seperation. Will there be traffic above you? Maybe in the AZ desert there won't be, but in PHL, DCA, BOS, ATL, etc. etc. there most definately WILL be.

My guess is the initial time period (5, 10 minutes) is how long ATC has to clear the area above and ahead of your aircraft for your unrestricted climb.

He mentioned, only an idiot would sit down at that altitude for 10 minutes awaiting CFIT, weather, or traffic.

1) CFIT - this is covered in the reg - if there is a higher minimum altitude for IFR ops, you climb to that.
2) Weather - a little confused here. I'm definately not sure what you mean by that. Icing is the only thing I can think of, in that case if it's bad enough (ie severe) that you're in it right after takeoff, you climb by exercising your emergency authority IMO.
3) Traffic - if OTHER people follow the rules, you won't hit any traffic. You'll be in IMC otherwise I can assume you're VFR so you've proceeded VFR, and in that case traffic avoidance is on you.

In the words of a United Captain and DE with over 25 years experience with the FAA, I think he's right.

Did you show him the AIM section that specifically mentions this procedure?

In all honestly, I haven't given this stuff much though, I thought it was pretty cut and dry. However, my biggest point I think is that WHY DOES THE AIM SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THIS SITUATION???

ESF - your decision to climb goes totally against what the AIM specifically mentions you SHOULD NOT do. It addresses this situation, verbatium, and yet you still disregard it. Why?

One more thing - from the controllers handbook, 4-3-2 (mimics the AIM):

a.The altitude or flight level assigned in the last ATC clearance received.
b.The minimum altitude (converted, if appropriate, to minimum flight level as prescribed in 14 CFR Section 91.121(c)) for IFR operations. (This altitude should be consistent with MEAs, MOCAs, etc.)
c.The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.
2. If the expected altitude is the highest of the preceding choices, the pilot should begin to climb to that expected altitude at the time or fix specified in the clearance. The choice to climb to the expected altitude is not applicable if the pilot has proceeded beyond the specified fix or if the time designated in the clearance has expired.

So, ATC expects you to stop at the intial altitude. IMO, that's a safety hazard AND it's asking for a violation if you continue the climb "because you want to". Contacting the ground has been covered - if you're above the minimum safe altitude you shouldn't climb until the appropriate (sp?) time IMO.

 

[wheelsup]

I see double...

(please delete)