IFR Lost Comm Question

Marshall, why then do you think the clearance includes a time limit? If what you say is true, why do they bother adding the "...in ten minutes" part of the clearance???

:confused:
 
Just got off the phone with a center controller. He says that they will be expecting you to level off until 10 min. after departure (or whatever other number of minutes was given), but also that they will clear the traffic all the way up to your expected altitude once they see you're squawking 7600.

So like I said, you all are right, I am wrong.

Taking the reg as it is written, I still don't think you'd get violated for climbing up to your expected altitude and I still think there might be times when you'd want to. The reg makes no mention of time, only route segment, which is not, and cannot be defined by time.

Good grief... someone haul this horse off to the glue factory.
 
meritflyer said:
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.
Click to expand...

It sounds like this issue has been partly resolved, but just a note. Does ATC really need any other indication than your transponder to know that you're lost comms? If they see you squwaking 7600, are they going to wait for you to climb to make sure you're lost comms? I doubt it.

An EFC time is just that. You aren't cleared to that fix or altitude until that time unless ATC advises otherwise.
 
I would ask one of my fellow instructor - ATC at DTW tracon. I would like to hear his interpretation.

adreamer
 
[FONT=&quot]Just to complicate things a bit. I had sent a question about this to the AOPA Pilot Assist to get their interpretation of this part of 91.185. Here is my question and their response.

[/FONT]
The question specifically has to do with 91.185 (2) which states:

(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 Sec. 91.121(c)) for IFR operations; or
(iii) The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.

The question is hypothetical, but if you lose communications after departure while in IMC and have been told by ATC to expect a particular altitude in 10 minutes do you wait until the end of that 10 minutes before you climb or do you climb right away? This assumes that in this case the expected altitude is the highest altitude (from i, ii, & iii).

The regulation makes no mention of waiting like with a leave clearance limit so it is a bit vague as to what is proper.
Click to expand...
The AOPA response:
Thanks for your email. You actually answered your own question in your last paragraph, and the answer lies within the rule. The rule, 91.185(c), does not require that you wait the 10 minutes; rather, it states that the pilot shall fly the expected altitude (c2iii). Although ATC has given you 10 minutes, 91.185 pre-empts that during a communications failure, and mandates a climb.
Click to expand...
 
Acadia said:
[FONT=&quot]Just to complicate things a bit. I had sent a question about this to the AOPA Pilot Assist to get their interpretation of this part of 91.185. Here is my question and their response.

[/FONT]
The AOPA response:
Click to expand...

I PM'd a controller on another forum with a situation a few days ago. The first is my question/situation, and then his response:
-------------------------
Hey,

I know you're a controller, not sure if you have any operational experience with lost comms or not.

We're having a debate about the 91.185, specifically the altitude section of climbing to the highest of the minimum safe, cleared, or expected.

Here's the clearance -
"Maintain 5000'; expect 12,000 10 minutes after depature"

Situation -
Cleared for takeoff. At 500' you get hit by lightening and it burns your radios.

There is someone who, immediately after takeoff, would climb all the way up to 12,000 feet. His argument is that the FAR's specifically say to climb to the highest of the 3 mentioned above. He totally disregards the AIM and mentions that it is not regulatory.
Click to expand...

Here's his response (he added emphasis):
-------------------------


He's a knucklehead. The way everyone else interprets that you won't begin climb until the time or fix specified in the original clearance.

That includes my bosses. My handbook says:

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.


me said:
What are your thoughts? Why is there a 5, 10 minute "expect" time?
Click to expand...


The expect higher at time (or fix) is there strictly for lost comm reasons - exactly so we know how you are going to behave if you do lose comms. In many cases, the "expect" is printed right on the DP. An example of the 10 minutes after variety is here. An example using a fix is here: Page 1, Page 2. Other that that it will be issued verbally.


me said:
Would you, as a controller, bust someone for climbing intially to the higher altitude? Is there a safety issue with just climbing all the way up (from a traffic standpoint)?
Click to expand...


Heck yeah there's a safety issue! Let's take where I work now, Honolulu. Initial climbs off HNL are to 5,000. The expect highers are printed on the DP. You are stopped 5,000 because other traffic is being vectored to a downwind, right across your nose at 6,000. If you want to get real friendly with the arrival traffic, go ahead and climb.

Similar situations are the rule, not the exception, at most busy airports. Even at smaller airports, if you are stopped at a lower altitude on departure, it's not just for the heck of it, it's because there are other aircraft out there.
-------------------------



IMO, if the controllers are expecting you stop a climb (see also ESF's post), I'm stopping a climb. I would also follow the AIM - going directly against it just doesn't make much sense...(IMO).
 
Looks like the ATCs are voicing in against the immediate climb. Glad to finally have a practical application to this situation.

I think this could have been resolved a little sooner without the bickering about who is right and wrong, though there were some good underlying points brought to light. Lets try to keep the conversation a little more productive instead of jumping on someone about their quality as a pilot or human. (off my soapbox now :))

BTW who says that the AIM is regulatory, because it is NOT. It certainly includes very good operational practices to be used, but no one has ever been violated for going against a section in the AIM, UNLESS it was in reference to the FARs. Lets get that straight first, its an INFORMATION manual, not REGULATORY.

Glad to have this issue resolved.

-ColM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top