Maintain 7'000 (I'm at 11'000)

[cre8flyer]

2 days ago, while en-route at 11'000, Albuquerque Ctr cleared me to "Cross Buckeye, maintain 7'000".

Confused, I requested clarification. Did he mean: Descend and maintain 7'000? The response to my query was "Just cross Buckeye, maintain 7'000". I read back "Descend and maintain 7'000, cross Buckeye at 7'000". No response from ATC, and 7'000 is above the MEA, so I descended to 7'000 and didn't hear from ATC again until I was passed Buckeye.

Was this correct? The pilot/controllers glossary didn't help me understand. I would have preferred to stay at 11'000 as long as possible (tailwind).

Any comments would be helpful.

[triple7]

My interpretation is that he wanted you to cross buckeye at 7....he didnt care when you started down, just as long as you crossed buckeye at 7. I got that alot when I was flying in FL.

[falconvalley]

Yeah, because of the type of response you were probably expecting, you were understandably confused. If they had merely said "maintain 7000", it would be easier, but they added a fix in there. I would clarify too, because they stopped at saying "...cross Buckeye". Then what? Perhaps, an explanation would have been better, because I would have been thinking:

Ok...did they mean cross Buckeye at 7, or descend to 7000 and cross Buckeye??

I hear "maintain xxx" all the time, but by itself. Personally, I clarify multi-part instructions that are ambiguous like that and could have multiple meanings.

[SteveC]

They meant that you can stay at 11 as long as you want as long as you are down to 7 by Buckeye. That kind of descent clearance is very common on Arrivals into the larger airports or busier airspace.

[Doug Taylor]

Originally Posted by cre8flyer

2 days ago, while en-route at 11'000, Albuquerque Ctr cleared me to "Cross Buckeye, maintain 7'000".

Cross Buckeye at 7K. Otherwise, he'd have said, "Cleared direct Buckeye, descend and maintain 7000 feet" or vice versa.

Just wait until you start getting "pilot's discretion to FL 250, transition at 280 knots cross "whatever" at 12,000, "wherever" altimeter 30.18, contact approach on 128.5" in the same sentence.

BEHOLD! I AM THE MASTER OF THE MD-90 MODE CONTROL PANEL.

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by cre8flyer

Any comments would be helpful.

Non-standard phraseology. Consider calling the watch supervisor on duty when this happened. The controller's unwillingness to clarify when you queried him suggests a poor attitude, IMO. We shouldn't have to guess what they mean.

[wheelsup]

or how they do it in canuckville: "Descend to 10,000, cross linng level"

eh?

and I agree, this should have been "cross Buckeye at 7,000".

[SteveC]

What would be correct phraseology? "Cross Buckeye at, and maintain, seven thousand"?

[B767Driver]

The clearance was basically to cross Buckeye, a fix on your route, at 7000'. The descent is entirely at Pilot's Dicsr. Start descent when you want...level off intermediately if you want...use whatever rate of descent you want....just cross Buckeye at 7.

[daveatc]

Originally Posted by SteveC

What would be correct phraseology? "Cross Buckeye at, and maintain, seven thousand"?

That's what he should have said. No confusion there. The way he originally said it sounds a bit ambiguous. Lazy.

[surreal1221]

Originally Posted by B767Driver

The clearance was basically to cross Buckeye, a fix on your route, at 7000'. The descent is entirely at Pilot's Dicsr. Start descent when you want...level off intermediately if you want...use whatever rate of descent you want....just cross Buckeye at 7.

[mikecweb]

Originally Posted by tgrayson

Non-standard phraseology. Consider calling the watch supervisor on duty when this happened. The controller's unwillingness to clarify when you queried him suggests a poor attitude, IMO. We shouldn't have to guess what they mean.

Yeah I'm not gonna bust a controllers balls if he gives me PD on down. Especially since I talk to the same guys every damn day.

[Bumblebee]

The controller gave you a crossing restriction. I hear the same phraseology every time. We are at FL230 and the controller wants us to be at 11000 when we cross Pt. Reyes. "SkW 6501 cross Pt. Reyes at maintain 11,000." If you asked for clarification the controller should have been more clear with you. Additionally, you should advise ATC when you vacate your altitude for the descent. ATC . . . 123AB leaving FL230.

[kellwolf]

If you ever fly for a regional/major, etc, this will be a daily occurrance on multiple levels. Cross POLAR at 12, cross HOLLY at 10, cross MIZAR at 12, etc, etc. I don't think there's an arrival into DTW or MEM that DOESN'T have one of these. Granted, the first time you get it in your career, it'll throw you for a loop. Just another good reason to get lots of experience before getting in a jet job. Why? This is another one of those things they don't teach you at CAPT or in ground school. Sure, you can fly the airplane on one engine with a fire, but which do you think comes up more? That or non-standard ATC phraseology?

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by mikecweb

Yeah I'm not gonna bust a controllers balls if he gives me PD on down. Especially since I talk to the same guys every damn day.

I don't view it as "busting his balls". Perhaps daveatc might say how it might be handled, but I bet that the supe would probably have a friendly chat with him and let it go at that. If it's a facility-wide problem, then there might need to be more widespread retraining. Airplanes have crashed because of similar sloppiness. And if he had a "deal" because of using non-standard phraseology, his job might be on the line. The OP had to deal with this problem because no one prior to him had seen fit to solve it.

[daveatc]

Originally Posted by tgrayson

I don't view it as "busting his balls". Perhaps daveatc might say how it might be handled, but I bet that the supe would probably have a friendly chat with him and let it go at that. If it's a facility-wide problem, then there might need to be more widespread retraining. Airplanes have crashed because of similar sloppiness. And if he had a "deal" because of using non-standard phraseology, his job might be on the line. The OP had to deal with this problem because no one prior to him had seen fit to solve it.

I don't think there is anything wrong at all with getting on the phone to get clarification on what you think was something sloppy, non-standard, unsafe, etc. I think that two-way communication is really important, and I wouldn't call it ball-busting at all. I encourage it. As a sup, I want to know what my people are doing. In a busy area, I might not hear every single transmission coming from the line controllers. I always encourage it.

Also, look at it this way. Maybe it was a one-off for this controller. It just popped out of his mouth. He NEVER does it that way, but it just came out like that. It happens. So, the Sup ignores it, lesson learned etc. Fine. However, what if this controller is a chucklehead, always does this, is consistently sloppy with his phraseology. You need to add to that guy's record by getting on the phone and making sure someone somewhere knows this is happening. That is very important. It is HARD to get rid of people, even when they definitely should NOT be there. It might not be just you who's calling on that guy, and that is a pattern that definitely needs to be recognized. I always encourage people calling in. We need more of that. I pretty much have zero tolerance for unsafe controllers, so we all need to be part of policing that, since, like I said, I can't hear everything all the time. I've asked pilots to call me when they get a chance, both for something I think they did wrong, but more importantly, when I think I or one of my controllers did something wrong. I think the latter is more important. I want to know how my actions or the actions of my team looked from the cockpit. Definitely need more of that. Don't hesitate to pick up the phone.

My only side note. Make sure you have your stuff together when you call. Know what time it was. Know what freq you were on. Etc. Just makes things easier.

[asl]

I think he shoulda said
"Descend pilot discretion, cross Buckeye at 7000', maintain 7,000' after Buckeye, report leaving present altidude"

That is clear and without question.

He could have also said "Descend and maintain 7,000'" the problem is that means do it NOW!

But could he have got round it with "Descend and maintain 7,000' by Buckeye, advise leaving"....it's not as clear, but fairly good.

It's the old problem, when the frequency is busy you tend to look for shortcuts - problem is it creastes queries and actually slows things down.

[daveatc]

Originally Posted by asl

I think he shoulda said
"Descend pilot discretion, cross Buckeye at 7000', maintain 7,000' after Buckeye, report leaving present altidude"

That is clear and without question.

He could have also said "Descend and maintain 7,000'" the problem is that means do it NOW!

But could he have got round it with "Descend and maintain 7,000' by Buckeye, advise leaving"....it's not as clear, but fairly good.

It's the old problem, when the frequency is busy you tend to look for shortcuts - problem is it creastes queries and actually slows things down.

That's really not the proper phraseology, as per the 7110.65. The most correct would have been 'Descend at pilot's discretion. Cross Buckeye at and maintain 7,000.'

[queeno]

a crossing restriction IS a discretionary decent as long as the pilot crosses the fix at the alt stated.

saying " at pilots discrection cross XXX at YYY" is like saying " i killed him dead"