Report Leaving Assigned Altitude?

Well, lets ask the controllers here (rather than AIM, which we all have access
to). On a cruise clearance, for example Cruise 6000, you observe (mode C) an
aircraft has descended from 6000 to 4000. There is another aircraft which
could use the 6000 altitude. You've received no communications from the
aircraft on a cruise (except the acknowlegement of the clearance). Do you
consider the 6000 foot alititude vacant?

Same question, but the cruise aircraft has reported descending to 4000. Has
his report of a descent vacated the 6000 foot altitude? (no bobbing back up)

Same question, but instead of a cruise question, it's a "descend at pilot's
discretion to 2000". The pilot acknowleges the clearance, and later is
observed at 4000 feet, having not reported the descent.

Same question, same airplane, but in this case the pilot reported descending
from 6000 to 4000.

So, in which cases does 6000 no longer belong to the pilot, in your eyes and
actions?

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

Why would that behavior displease ATC?

I didn't say it would. I just said the lack of complaint is no
indication either way.

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...

Well, lets ask the controllers here (rather than AIM, which we all have
access to). On a cruise clearance, for example Cruise 6000, you
observe (mode C) an aircraft has descended from 6000 to 4000.
There is another aircraft which could use the 6000 altitude. You've
received no communications from the aircraft on a cruise (except the
acknowlegement of the clearance). Do you consider the 6000 foot
alititude vacant?


No, the aircraft is entitled to climb back to 6000 if so desired. 6000
becomes available when the aircraft verbally reports leaving 5000.



Same question, but the cruise aircraft has reported descending to 4000.
Has his report of a descent vacated the 6000 foot altitude? (no
bobbing back up)


No, a pilot may not return to an altitude that he's verbally reported
leaving, verbally reporting that he's descending to an intermediate altitude
does nothing.



Same question, but instead of a cruise question, it's a "descend at
pilot's
discretion to 2000". The pilot acknowleges the clearance, and later is
observed at 4000 feet, having not reported the descent.


5000 and 6000 are now available for other aircraft.



Same question, same airplane, but in this case the pilot reported
descending from 6000 to 4000.


No change.

wrote in message ...


No. That is what the black letters all in a row that translate to
"pilot
discretion" mean. I've done hundreds of them in small aircraft and
heavy
(450,000+ lbs).

I have a similar background. When I was flying the air carrier aircraft,
the
company I worked for had as policy that its crews would report leaving a
previously assigned altitude, whether PD or not.

There reasoning was it removed any possibility of ambiguity.

When there are two options, and there is any doubt as to which is right
(or
wrong) exercise the option that has the least cost if wrong.

I agree Sammy. I was just responding to Richard's question about whether
I'd ever received a "complaint" from ATC by starting a PD a few minutes
after receiving it wtihout notifying the controller. I usually did make a
brief "XYZ departing 190" call for precisely the reason you're speaking
about. But when I didn't, due to radio congestion, I never had any
controlling agency ask why.

JB

"Greg Esres" wrote in message
...

I didn't say it would. I just said the lack of complaint is no
indication either way.


And I didn't say that you said it would. Let me rephrase the question, how
could the pilot's behavior, that is, not reporting leaving a previously
assigned altitude on a discretionary descent, possibly displease ATC?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

wrote in message ...

I have a similar background. When I was flying the air carrier
aircraft,
the company I worked for had as policy that its crews would report
leaving a previously assigned altitude, whether PD or not.

There reasoning was it removed any possibility of ambiguity.


Where was ambiguity possible?

In the real world to which most of us belong, ambiguity is not just
possible, it is likely. Busy people doing somewhat stressful work forget
things all the time.


When there are two options, and there is any doubt as to which is
right (or wrong) exercise the option that has the least cost if wrong.


What is the cost?

What is the cost to you as a controller in responding "copy" or whatever
(whatever can = no response at all) to a call of "XYZ departing FLABC",
especially if the radio is not busy? I know the cost to me as the pilot is
a nagging uncertainty that the controller isn't paying full attention,
doesn't know I've started, and will run someone into me. Silly? Unlikely?
Very probably so. But what is the cost for the above radio exchange and my
peace of mind? You (generic) being ****y because I gave you some info on an
otherwise clear radio freq? I can live with that.

JB

"Jim Baker" wrote in message
...

In the real world to which most of us belong, ambiguity is not just
possible, it is likely. Busy people doing somewhat stressful work forget
things all the time.


Swell, but where is ambiguity possible?



What is the cost to you as a controller in responding "copy" or whatever
(whatever can = no response at all) to a call of "XYZ departing
FLABC", especially if the radio is not busy?


None. So what is the cost of not reporting?



I know the cost to me as the pilot is
a nagging uncertainty that the controller isn't paying full attention,
doesn't know I've started, and will run someone into me. Silly?
Unlikely? Very probably so. But what is the cost for the above radio
exchange and my peace of mind?


How does that give you peace of mind?



You (generic) being ****y because I gave you some info on an
otherwise clear radio freq? I can live with that.


Me be ****y?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:


Where was ambiguity possible?

More than once at my airline a PD descent clearance was issued, then a handoff
subsequently made to another sector. The receiving controller did not know
about the PD clearance.




When there are two options, and there is any doubt as to which is
right (or wrong) exercise the option that has the least cost if wrong.


What is the cost?

See first answer above.

wrote in message ...

More than once at my airline a PD descent clearance was issued, then
a handoff subsequently made to another sector. The receiving
controller did not know about the PD clearance.


But where's the ambiguity?



See first answer above.


It's not answered above.

"Teacherjh" wrote in message =
...
Well, lets ask the controllers here (rather than AIM, which we all =
have access
to). On a cruise clearance, for example Cruise 6000, you observe =
(mode C) an
aircraft has descended from 6000 to 4000. There is another aircraft =
which
could use the 6000 altitude. You've received no communications from =
the
aircraft on a cruise (except the acknowlegement of the clearance). Do =
you
consider the 6000 foot alititude vacant?
=20
Same question, but the cruise aircraft has reported descending to =
4000. Has
his report of a descent vacated the 6000 foot altitude? (no bobbing =
back up)
=20
Same question, but instead of a cruise question, it's a "descend at =
pilot's
discretion to 2000". The pilot acknowleges the clearance, and later =
is
observed at 4000 feet, having not reported the descent.
=20
Same question, same airplane, but in this case the pilot reported =
descending
from 6000 to 4000.
=20
So, in which cases does 6000 no longer belong to the pilot, in your =
eyes and
actions?
=20
Jose
=20

In my experience, if the controller needs an altitude I will be =
vacating,
I'll either not get a Pilot's Discretion descent, or else I'll get a =
request to
"Report leaving altitude or flight level".
I like it that way. There's less opportunity to misconstrue intentions.
---JRC---