the learning never stops!

Frequently Asked Questions


images

Photo: Not that smart, (Tennant)

Click photo for a larger image

Oh yes, a caveat. I get things wrong more often than I should. I try to back everything up with primary sources, but sometimes those sources change or are replaced. The aviation world is in a constant state of change. If you see any errors, please let me know. (Hit the contact button on the bottom or top of this page.) If you have a reference to point to, that would be appreciated.

U.S. versus ICAO (SID climbs)

Dear Eddie,

We have a question I’m still researching. Correct me if I’m wrong.

When on a SID in the United States a controller gives you the clearance “climb and maintain FLxxx” you are not required to comply with the SID altitude restrictions unless the controller says “comply with all restrictions “ however when out of the US when ICAO rules apply when given a climb to altitude you MUST comply with the altitude restrictions without the controller specifically telling you. If he doesn’t want you to comply he will say: “delete altitude restrictions.”

Is my understanding correct?

Fred

Fred,

I believe you are correct. Here are the sources.

I hope that helps.

Eddie

U.S.

[AIM, §5-2-8, ¶e.6.(c)] Once established on the depicted departure, to navigate laterally and climb to meet all published or assigned altitude and speed restrictions.

EXAMPLE−

1. Lateral route clearance: “Cleared Loop Six departure.”

NOTE−

The aircraft must comply with the SID lateral path, and any published speed restrictions.

2. Routing with assigned altitude: “Cleared Loop Six departure, climb and maintain four thousand.”

NOTE−

The aircraft must comply with the SID lateral path, and any published speed restriction while climbing unrestricted to four thousand.

ICAO

[ICAO Doc 4444, ¶4.6.4] The flight crew shall comply with published SID and STAR speed restrictions unless the restrictions are explicitly cancelled or amended by the controller.

The Case of Different Approach Plate Minimums

Dear Eddie,

Any idea why the visibility minimums on the attached approach charts are different then the minimums listed on the 10-9S chart?

Fred

images

Photo: GVSV RNAV(GNSS) Rwy 7, Jeppesen page GVSV, 12-1.

Click photo for a larger image

images

Photo: GVSV Minimums, Jeppesen page GVSV, 10-9

Click photo for a larger image

Fred,

Here is what I got from Jeppesen: "The reason for the differences is the use of different minima concepts. On the approach charts of GVSV the minima were determined in accordance with Jeppesen's ECOMS. Whereas on the 10-9S pages the minima are always in accordance with the European minima concept (currently EASA AIR OPS)."

Of course this begs the question why they can't be based on the same concepts. But they were good enough to provide a few documents to help:

Eddie

References

Aerodrome Operating Minimums on Jeppesen Charts

Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM)

EASA Aerodrome Operating Minimums

Explanation of ECOMS Minimums

ICAO Doc 4444 - Air Traffic Management, 16th Edition, Procedures for Air Navigation Services, International Civil Aviation Organization, October 2016

JAR OPS Minimums on Jeppesen Charts

Revision: 20180202
Top