Re: Minimum rate of climb or descent

[Aaron Kahn]

What type of checkride was it? I would have asked the inspector to identify
the regulation that was infracted, or identify how the action compromised
safety.

It's true the controllers have expectations (as mentioned by Joe) but I
don't think that in and of itself constitutes a bust. But, then again, the
FAA isn't asking me.

Aaron
part 121 B1900

"No Spam" > wrote in message
...
> On 7/3/03 07:12, in article ,
> " > wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > No Spam wrote:
> >
> >> The AIM says to give ATC a call if you can't maintain a rate of climb
or
> >> descent of at least 500 fpm. I thought I read somewhere that ATC
expects a
> >> rate of 500 to 1500 fpm until within 1000 feet of level-off altitude.
> >> Anybody know where this guidance is? Is it different for climbs and
> >> descents?
> >>
> >> TIA,
> >>
> >> No Spam
> >
> > AIM 4-4-9 d...read it, you'll find you don't quite have it right.
> >
> Thanks, Joe. I was including the word "minimum" in my search and only came
> up with paragraph 5-3-3.
>
> Now, do you have any idea what "optimum rate" means? Do you know where it
> might say that descents must be at least 1000 fpm?
>
> What started this is our anal POI busted one of our pilots for not
> descending at a rate of at least 1000 fpm. When ATC directs an early
> descent, our FMS will descend at 750 fpm until it intercepts the standard
> descent profile. In the case of our pilot, he didn't override the FMS to
> increase the rate to at least 1000 fpm and the POI busted him for it.
>
> No Spam
>
>
>

[No Spam]

Aaron,

It was an FAA observation ride at the end of IOE. Type rating was obtained
in the sim. The observer is our POI and is as anal as they come. Asking for
a reference would have been my response, but I wasn't there. I haven't had a
chance to ask one of our check airmen about it yet.

No Spam
Part 121 B717



On 7/11/03 00:52, in article , "Aaron
Kahn" > wrote:

> What type of checkride was it? I would have asked the inspector to identify
> the regulation that was infracted, or identify how the action compromised
> safety.
>
> It's true the controllers have expectations (as mentioned by Joe) but I
> don't think that in and of itself constitutes a bust. But, then again, the
> FAA isn't asking me.
>
> Aaron
> part 121 B1900
>
> "No Spam" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 7/3/03 07:12, in article ,
>> " > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No Spam wrote:
>>>
>>>> The AIM says to give ATC a call if you can't maintain a rate of climb
> or
>>>> descent of at least 500 fpm. I thought I read somewhere that ATC
> expects a
>>>> rate of 500 to 1500 fpm until within 1000 feet of level-off altitude.
>>>> Anybody know where this guidance is? Is it different for climbs and
>>>> descents?
>>>>
>>>> TIA,
>>>>
>>>> No Spam
>>>
>>> AIM 4-4-9 d...read it, you'll find you don't quite have it right.
>>>
>> Thanks, Joe. I was including the word "minimum" in my search and only came
>> up with paragraph 5-3-3.
>>
>> Now, do you have any idea what "optimum rate" means? Do you know where it
>> might say that descents must be at least 1000 fpm?
>>
>> What started this is our anal POI busted one of our pilots for not
>> descending at a rate of at least 1000 fpm. When ATC directs an early
>> descent, our FMS will descend at 750 fpm until it intercepts the standard
>> descent profile. In the case of our pilot, he didn't override the FMS to
>> increase the rate to at least 1000 fpm and the POI busted him for it.
>>
>> No Spam
>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Allan9]

This is not regulatory but informational.
Look at Appendix A to 7110.65
Al

"No Spam" > wrote in message
...
> Aaron,
>
> It was an FAA observation ride at the end of IOE. Type rating was obtained
> in the sim. The observer is our POI and is as anal as they come. Asking
for
> a reference would have been my response, but I wasn't there. I haven't had
a
> chance to ask one of our check airmen about it yet.
>
> No Spam
> Part 121 B717
>
>
>
> On 7/11/03 00:52, in article , "Aaron
> Kahn" > wrote:
>
> > What type of checkride was it? I would have asked the inspector to
identify
> > the regulation that was infracted, or identify how the action
compromised
> > safety.
> >
> > It's true the controllers have expectations (as mentioned by Joe) but I
> > don't think that in and of itself constitutes a bust. But, then again,
the
> > FAA isn't asking me.
> >
> > Aaron
> > part 121 B1900
> >
> > "No Spam" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> On 7/3/03 07:12, in article ,
> >> " > wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> No Spam wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The AIM says to give ATC a call if you can't maintain a rate of climb
> > or
> >>>> descent of at least 500 fpm. I thought I read somewhere that ATC
> > expects a
> >>>> rate of 500 to 1500 fpm until within 1000 feet of level-off altitude.
> >>>> Anybody know where this guidance is? Is it different for climbs and
> >>>> descents?
> >>>>
> >>>> TIA,
> >>>>
> >>>> No Spam
> >>>
> >>> AIM 4-4-9 d...read it, you'll find you don't quite have it right.
> >>>
> >> Thanks, Joe. I was including the word "minimum" in my search and only
came
> >> up with paragraph 5-3-3.
> >>
> >> Now, do you have any idea what "optimum rate" means? Do you know where
it
> >> might say that descents must be at least 1000 fpm?
> >>
> >> What started this is our anal POI busted one of our pilots for not
> >> descending at a rate of at least 1000 fpm. When ATC directs an early
> >> descent, our FMS will descend at 750 fpm until it intercepts the
standard
> >> descent profile. In the case of our pilot, he didn't override the FMS
to
> >> increase the rate to at least 1000 fpm and the POI busted him for it.
> >>
> >> No Spam
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

[Robert Moore]

"Allan9" > wrote
> This is not regulatory but informational.
> Look at Appendix A to 7110.65

We don't know what was contained in the Operations Manual
for the Aircarrier involved. Unlike General Aviation pilots,
Aircarrier pilots are bound by the contents of the Company
Operations Manual just as if if were written in Part 91 or
Part 121. I have seen parts of the AIM made regulatory for
Aircarrier pilots by inclussion in the manual by reference.

Bob Moore