"Cross Sharr at 7000..."

[Louie1975]

When IFR, and a controller tells you to cross a certain fix at an altitude that is lower than your current one, are you required to report when you are leaving your current altitude? For example, you are at 12,000, and the controller tells you to "cross Sharr at 7000." My understanding is that you can start your descent anytime you want so as long as you reach Sharr at 7000 feet. But I would also think you would need to report when you decide to leave your current altitude as that would sound like one of the IFR required reports. But I usually dont hear that on the frequency from the airliners above me.

[myron96]

NO, just make sure you cross whatever at 7000

[the_dmn8tr]

Even if it is not required you can always report it. It doesn't hurt anything to quickly say XXXX descending out of 12. If anything it can only help the controller's situational awareness.

[TFaudree_ERAU]

For some reason, it REALLY annoys me when ATC says "descend to cross xxx at xxx" and I read it back and then 3 seconds later after starting the descent the captain says "tell em we're out of xxx for xxx".

They JUST gave us the authorization to descend whenever we want, as long as we make the crossing restriction. Obviously, there is no conflicting traffic ahead, otherwise they would have added some other instruction along with the "cross" clearance, such as "descend and maintain xxx, then cross xxx at xxx". I feel that with the frequency congestion that we all experience every day, there is no need to add anything to it. Remember, for everything you say on the radio, a controller probably has to reply.

[Dugie8]

Check out the AIM guys. It "tells" us to advise ATC anytime we vacate an altitude for a new one, IMO that covers this situation.

[TFaudree_ERAU]

Originally Posted by Dugie8

Check out the AIM guys. It "tells" us to advise ATC anytime we vacate an altitude for a new one, IMO that covers this situation.

Reference?

[Velocipede]

Reporting out of altitude is required in Canada.

[Ralgha]

Originally Posted by TFaudree_ERAU

Reference?

Good lord do they teach you anything at Riddle?

5-3-3. Additional Reports

a. The following reports should be made to ATC or FSS facilities without a specific ATC request:

1. At all times.

(a) When vacating any previously assigned altitude or flight level for a newly assigned altitude or flight level.

[Dugie8]

Originally Posted by TFaudree_ERAU

Reference?

This is gonna come off a little harsh.



If you are flying in a crew enviroment (I assume that from you post about the Captain asking you to report out of an altitude) then you should be able to crack open an AIM and find the appropriate section.

[TFaudree_ERAU]

I knew it was in there, but I couldn't put my finger on it. OK, I was too lazy to look. FWIW, I believe that one should include a reference with any statement made in a debate.

I assume you always report established in a hold too, huh?

Also, notice the time frame in the scenario I described for the communications between ATC, the captain and me. If we were given a crossing restriction 5 minutes before we need to start the descent, I fully agree that we need to advise ATC. However, if it is a bang-bang, then I don't think its necessary, since we're basically starting the descent at the same time I'm reading it back.

[Dugie8]

Yes, I do report established in the hold, just like the book says to do. The "rule" doesn't specify a time frame from reciept of clearance to the actual vacating of the altitude, as stated, leaving an assigned altitude for a new one requires a "read back", no grey, no "I do it this way", it is right there black and white.

Some will argue the conjested frequency "argument", with all the flying I've done in the NE and around London Heathrow, the freq isn't ever THAT conjested that we can disregard the rules. More than once that report has prompted the controller to amend our altitude for traffic.

[BobDDuck]

I always report entering the hold. I'm about 50/50 on the vacating an altitude thing. If it's busy (and despite what Dougie would say, the NorthEast corridor can get a bit of frequency congestion at times) I don't worry about it. If nothing is going on I'll let them know.

My New Years resolution for 2007 (well, not really) was dropping the "for" our of my phraseology. As in Bluestreak XXX Twenty Two Three For Three Zero Zero. I've been pretty good about it. Next year the goal is to say flight number and frequencies the ICAO way and use each digit.

[TFaudree_ERAU]

Originally Posted by BobDDuck

Next year the goal is to say flight number and frequencies the ICAO way and use each digit.

I thought number grouping was authorized, accepted and encouraged for carriers with authorized call signs (AIM 4-2-4)?? Or are you speaking of flying outside the US?

[Bus Driver]

Originally Posted by TFaudree_ERAU

For some reason, it REALLY annoys me when ATC says "descend to cross xxx at xxx" and I read it back and then 3 seconds later after starting the descent the captain says "tell em we're out of xxx for xxx".


I knew it was in there, but I couldn't put my finger on it. OK, I was too lazy to look. FWIW, I believe that one should include a reference with any statement made in a debate.

I assume you always report established in a hold too, huh?

Lazy FOs "REALLY" annoy me. Last month I flew with a new hire who found it was easier to ask someone instead of doing his job and looking things up. That was until he spent 15 minutes looking for the performance data for runway 37L. I also, always report established in a hold, vacating an altitude, and I do use ICAO phraseology.
What does "FWIW" mean?

[surreal1221]

For What It's Worth

[B767Driver]

Originally Posted by Louie1975

But I usually dont hear that on the frequency from the airliners above me.

Yep required. And you hear the report being made more often than not.

[SteveC]

Originally Posted by TFaudree_ERAU

For some reason, it REALLY annoys me when ATC says "descend to cross xxx at xxx" and I read it back and then 3 seconds later after starting the descent the captain says "tell em we're out of xxx for xxx".

They JUST gave us the authorization to descend whenever we want, as long as we make the crossing restriction. Obviously, there is no conflicting traffic ahead, otherwise they would have added some other instruction along with the "cross" clearance, such as "descend and maintain xxx, then cross xxx at xxx". I feel that with the frequency congestion that we all experience every day, there is no need to add anything to it. Remember, for everything you say on the radio, a controller probably has to reply.

Here is where experience and teamwork come into play. If I am the Pilot Not Flying when we receive a crossing restriction or a discretionary descent, I will usually know if we are in a position where either an immediate descent is warranted, or if we can stay at altitude for a while longer, or if we are in an area where the PF could make the call either way. As ATC is making the initial call my first move is to the altitude preselect to dial in the new altitude at the same time that I am turning and looking directly at the PF. The PF will usually give some kind of an indication if he is planning to start down immediately, either by simply pointing down (in response to my looking at him, in effect asking the question "what is your plan?"), or he will be reaching for the appropriate autopilot mode selector to start the descent. With either one of those cues I will be replying to ATC with something like "N12345 vacating FL320, discretion FL240" or "N12345 vacating FL320, SHARR FL240". Short, to the point, and includes the information that we are leaving an altitude. If the PF has made no indication that he plans to start down immediately, or signals that he is staying put for the moment (hand flat, moving side to side), or if he reaches for the FMS to do some calculation to decide when to start down I will simply reply to ATC with "N12345 discretion FL 240" or "SHARR at FL240, N12345." Then when we do begin our descent I will call ATC with "N12345 leaving FL320", unless the frequency is so busy that I can't easily make the transmission (actually a pretty rare occurrence, even on the east coast).

It's all about teamwork and CRM. With experience a good team can easily communicate their intentions to each other before ATC is done with the original transmission.

[Cruise]

Originally Posted by Dugie8

Yes, I do report established in the hold, just like the book says to do. The "rule" doesn't specify a time frame from reciept of clearance to the actual vacating of the altitude, as stated, leaving an assigned altitude for a new one requires a "read back", no grey, no "I do it this way", it is right there black and white.

Some will argue the conjested frequency "argument", with all the flying I've done in the NE and around London Heathrow, the freq isn't ever THAT conjested that we can disregard the rules. More than once that report has prompted the controller to amend our altitude for traffic.

[nosehair]

Originally Posted by TFaudree_ERAU

If we were given a crossing restriction 5 minutes before we need to start the descent, I fully agree that we need to advise ATC. However, if it is a bang-bang, then I don't think its necessary, since we're basically starting the descent at the same time I'm reading it back.

"Reading it back" is not reporting leaving.

I know that is the current philosophy of the radar / transponder only type pilots today, so I understand your confusion.

But, simply enough, the AIM does not read that way: it says "anytime you vacate", so a proper readback would include the phrase, "leaving xxx thousand".

I know it's old school, but I've been doing it so long, I aint gonna quit - it comes as natural as saying the word "leaving" in the readback as long as you are simultaneously pulling throttes back and pitching down in the readback.

Even with the ol' trusty altitude encoder and watchful controller, I am still more comfortable with a descent in IMC when I tell the controller that's what I'm doing.

But hey,that's just an Old Timer's way...whadda I know?

[Ian J]

Originally Posted by nosehair

"Reading it back" is not reporting leaving.

I know that is the current philosophy of the radar / transponder only type pilots today, so I understand your confusion.

But, simply enough, the AIM does not read that way: it says "anytime you vacate", so a proper readback would include the phrase, "leaving xxx thousand".

I know it's old school, but I've been doing it so long, I aint gonna quit - it comes as natural as saying the word "leaving" in the readback as long as you are simultaneously pulling throttes back and pitching down in the readback.

Even with the ol' trusty altitude encoder and watchful controller, I am still more comfortable with a descent in IMC when I tell the controller that's what I'm doing.

But hey,that's just an Old Timer's way...whadda I know?

Just out of curiosity - how do you personally read it back. If you're at 7,000 and told to descend and maintain 3,000.

"Leaving 7,000 descending 3,000." ?

[Stone Cold]

Originally Posted by Ian J

Just out of curiosity - how do you personally read it back. If you're at 7,000 and told to descend and maintain 3,000.

"Leaving 7,000 descending 3,000." ?

Myself personally, it's "vacating 7,000 descending 3,000".

[Ian J]

Originally Posted by Stone Cold

Myself personally, it's "vacating 7,000 descending 3,000".

"Myself personally"????

You have any time to read a book on grammar in that fancy jet of yours?



(You know I'm playing!)

[Stone Cold]

Originally Posted by Ian J

"Myself personally"????

You have any time to read a book on grammar in that fancy jet of yours?



(You know I'm playing!)

I never claimed to be a writer, or speak properly, or anything. I make an attempt every once in a while, but for the most part, I'm a college edumacated person who majored in flight. What more do you expect???

[Ian J]

Originally Posted by Stone Cold

I never claimed to be a writer, or speak properly, or anything. I make an attempt every once in a while, but for the most part, I'm a college edumacated person who majored in flight. What more do you expect???

I hear ya, brother man. You don't even wanna know what I majored in - people make fun of flight degrees, but mine is REALLY worthless.

[Stone Cold]

Originally Posted by Ian J

I hear ya, brother man. You don't even wanna know what I majored in - people make fun of flight degrees, but mine is REALLY worthless.

Let me guess...Art??? Where's JH...how about Philosophy?

Alright, I know there are some purposes behind those degrees, but I had to go there...