[dc3flyer]

Okay guys, thanks for beating my head into the asphault. For the record, I have stated that I (me) am new to flying in a jet. I have less than 100 hours in any airplane that is capable of flying in excess of 250 knots. I know the under 250 below 10,000 rule. I didn't (did not) realize that ATC could not allow, or ask you to exceed that speed. It seems that there is also a regulation about altitudes east and west bound, yet ATC often clears me to an odd altitude momentarily when I am flying westbound. Does my accepting that clearnence make me just as ignorant as this?

I know it is one of my responsibilities as the co-pilot to assure the captain doesn't make mistakes. That is why there are two of us. When he didn't slow at 10,000, I assumed (yes, made an ass of me) that since we had been assigned a greater speed, that we were expected to maintain it. It is not a structural issue for this plane, so all is fine with the airplane. When qeustioned about it by ATC, the first words out of the captain's mouth were, "Oh shot, we're at 8,000!" He was obviously not thinking about it for whatever reason. Once on the ground, I asked him about when we should reduce our speed in this situation and he said we should have slowed down at 10,000 as normal regardless of previous requests from ATC. He knew it, and just f'ed up.

I was asked and asked often about speeds and speed restrictions during my training. I am just now at the point of putting that rote knowledge to practical work. At NO POINT in my training, did anyone ever aske me, "Well, when can you exceed 200 within 4 nm at or below 2500' in a Class C or D? When can you exceed 250 below 10,000'?" Until today, I thought the answer to both of those questions was with ATC approval. Obviously, I was wrong. Evidentally at least one more person was too, because Ian posted the regulation and thought that ATC could approve it. We have both been corrected.

I appreciate the knowledge of my captain (him telling me afterward, after he messed up, that we should have slowed) but I know there is an abundance of knowledge here, so I posted the question. I appreciate the "corrective action" I have recieved for it, as well as exactly what I was looking for... somewhere that expounds on the regulation as we read it in Part 91 (The controller response from Omdahl).

Now I know the answer to my question so I can assure it doesn't happen again and maybe more people may have learned from my mistake, error, ignorance, or complete disregard for regulations, whatever you want to call it.