a. The following reports should be made to ATC or FSS facilities without a specific ATC request:
At all times.
(a) When vacating any previously assigned altitude or flight level for a newly assigned altitude or flight level…"
Now like all fed regs, there is sufficient room for interpretation, but If cleared to, “descend PD to X,000,” I would consider your current altitude a “previously assigned altitude.” Therefore, according to my interpretation, it is appropriate to inform the controller when you finally leave the altitude. The, “At all times,” would seem to be pretty clear that not only is it appropriate, but it is required.
As for the language, I would think, “Indy Center, Cirrus 123 leaving 9,000 descending 5,000,” or just, “Indy Center, Cirrus 123 descending 5,000,” would both be appropriate.
Still, I would let local practice and frequency congestion prevail.
a. The following reports should be made to ATC or FSS facilities without a specific ATC request:
At all times.
(a) When vacating any previously assigned altitude or flight level for a newly assigned altitude or flight level…"
It sounds to me like this is covered by acknowledging the “descend PD to X thousand” initially. You aren’t vacating a ‘previously assigned altitude’ when you descend, you are simply performing the descent you were previously assigned and have already acknowledged. The PD clearance is sort of like “Descend when you feel like it, and take your time about it if you want, and feel free to stop anywhere along the way”. I think what’s being debated here is an additional “and don’t bother me about it while you do it”.
If controllers are irritated by these reports and don’t need them, why give them? (I couldn’t count how many times I’ve heard a VFR pilot, incorrectly thinking they need to ask permission, say “I’d like to start my descent now” and the weary reply of the controller is inevitably “VFR altitude your descretion”.)
The, “At all times,” would seem to be pretty clear that not only is it appropriate, but it is required.
In 91.183 there’s a list of thing that have to be reported when IFR. Leaving an assigned altitude is not one of these required reports. There is no FAR that requires you to report leaving an altitude. The AIM is advisory, and the cited section pointedly uses the word “should” rather than “shall.” You cannot be busted for dropping the archaic “leaving” phrase because you are not violating any FAR.
In reply to:
Still, I would let local practice and frequency congestion prevail.
Maybe this is a regional thing. I can attest that in busy LA airspace the abbreviated phraseology is predominant and works very well for both pilots and controllers. Maybe I can record and post a CVR segment.
In our mandated Mode C radar environment, the controller knows what altitude you are currently occupying, and the “leaving…” report is redundent and wastes bandwidth.
YMMD. I’d be interested to hear if there are regional differences.
I couldn’t count how many times I’ve heard a VFR pilot, incorrectly thinking they need to ask permission, say “I’d like to start my descent now” and the weary reply of the controller is inevitably “VFR altitude your descretion”.
Part of the problem is that much depends on the controller, the region, and the traffic.
I have heard and/or been involved in all three variants of the following while VFR Flight Following:
pilot does not mention any climb or descent, controller doesn’t complain.
controller explicitly says “advise prior to any altitude changes”, and pilot complies
pilot does not mention any climb or descent (and was not asked to by the controller) and controller calls back “N1234, say altitude” or “N1234, are you changing altitude?” in an irritated voice.
in addition to the scenario you described (pilot “requests” altitude change and ATC says it’s not required).
Nowadays, on those few times I’m using VFR flight following (I go IFR almost everywhere), I “inform” the controller of altitude changes, rather than asking. In other words, I’ll say “Approach, Cirrus 706 descending to 3500” or whatever it may be.
I couldn’t count how many times I’ve heard a VFR pilot, incorrectly thinking they need to ask permission, say “I’d like to start my descent now” and the weary reply of the controller is inevitably “VFR altitude your descretion”.)
Hey Tim!
While VFR’s don’t need permission, I often give them courtesy reports such as “Starting VFR descent” or “Descending 3,500 VFR” when in busy airspace. Usually I just get a grunted “Roger” but sometimes they result in a restriction for traffic so I get the feeling I’m being helpful.
By the way, is descretion a bandwidth-saving contraction of “Descent discretion”? [:)]
In Reply To:
(I couldn’t count how many times I’ve heard a VFR pilot, incorrectly thinking they need to ask permission, say “I’d like to start my descent now” and the weary reply of the controller is inevitably “VFR altitude your descretion”.)
Be careful with this one. I prefer to file and fly VFR with flight following (rather than file and fly IFR) whenever the weather cooperates. When I’m in or near class C or near class B airspace, the controller will invariably issue the instruction “advise before any altitude changes”. At that point, the request you mentioned above is appropriate (its not mandatory, since all you have to do is ADVISE, but the controllers seem more perturbed if I just call up with “N508JS decending or climbing to XXXX”. One time I got “…hold your current altitude. Conflicting traffic…” in a rather nasty tone when I just told them I was starting down instead of asking.
{words in green added later for clarification}
I find a big difference in ATC reaction if they cover an enroute Center sector or a terminal approach sector. And I concur with the phraseology that informs ATC of a VFR descent. Almost always get a “Roger” response, nothing more.
Anyone know if planes on VFR flight following cause altitude alerts when they change altitude by more than 300 feet, which is what I was told happens when an IFR flight deviates from assigned altitude?
Nowadays, on those few times I’m using VFR flight following (I go IFR almost everywhere), I “inform” the controller of altitude changes, rather than asking. In other words, I’ll say “Approach, Cirrus 706 descending to 3500” or whatever it may be.
Steve,
Concur. My words under those circumstances are slightly different - “Cirrus Four Mike Romeo descending VFR 3500”. I leave out “Approach” (I’m already talking to them), leave out “to” for reasons previously mentioned, and add the “VFR” for no really good reason that I can think of right now! I guess I feel I have to say something instead of “to”.
Anyone know if planes on VFR flight following cause altitude alerts when they change altitude by more than 300 feet, which is what I was told happens when an IFR flight deviates from assigned altitude?
Rick,
I’ve been in the ATC business for a while and don’t remember seeing any way for a controller to set an altitude limit for deviation purposes unless there’s a loss of separation (Conflict Alert or MSAW). I know that center has snitch software when there’s a loss of separation.
You can read about this from a couple of my IFR Magazine buddies herehere. Two good reads. Oh by the way, did you see this?
By the way, is descretion a bandwidth-saving contraction of “Descent discretion”?
Good question - dunno. If I’m told “Descend Pilot’s Discretion…”, I’ll usually respond “Descend Pee Dee…” - Pi-lot’s-Dis-cre-tion (or even just Dis-cre-tion) being more syllables than Pee-Dee.
Could we possibly be any more anal? [:P]
While VFR’s don’t need permission, I often give them courtesy reports such as “Starting VFR descent” or “Descending 3,500 VFR” when in busy airspace.
Hi, Curt,
You make a good point - where the airspace is busy, like descending through the SJC final approach corridor north of WVI, I tend to do the same, but phrased as a report rather than as a request. I guess it’s probably the slightly confused VFR pilot out in the middle of nowhere who gets that response from controllers.
Radios very often clip the first one or two syllables of every transmission.
I think you’re blaming the radio for poor pilot technique. Proper technique is that you pause after keying the mic to prevent just this problem.
In reply to:
Not so much with altitudes, but headings and airspeeds can be confused; a readback of “140 120 301” doesn’t tell him much about what you understood.
I agree, and I never would say it that way. Headings and airspeeds are both three digit numbers (unless you’re in an SR71!) and are subject to ambiguity, but altitudes are not. I always preface headings with “heading” and follow airspeeds with “knots.” So I’d reply “Heading one four zero, one two zero knots, five thousand, two papa lima.”
When I have been assigned a heading and am handed off to a new sector, I use the word “assigned” in the callup, as in “SoCal, Cirrus three two two papa lima, five thousand, heading three two zero assigned.” This resolves the ambiguity as to whether you are flying the heading because you want to as opposed to having been instructed to by the previous controller. It also puts the new controller on alert that you are on vectors and not your own nav, and thus is one more jog that at some point he has to give you normal nav or another vector or something rather than letting you plow into some hill.
and add the “VFR” for no really good reason that I can think of right now!
Mike,
You add “VFR” to confirm to the controller that you know you are not IFR. And because when you don’t add it they always come back to you with “Remain VFR” or some other chide.
Many pilots I know have their non-pilot spouses work the radios, and most are pretty good at it. But I submit that unless they hold a restricted radotelephone operator’s permit, it’s illegal for non-pilots to use the radios.
You add “VFR” to confirm to the controller that you know you are not IFR. And because when you don’t add it they always come back to you with “Remain VFR” or some other chide.
Many pilots I know have their non-pilot spouses work the radios, and most are pretty good at it. But I submit that unless they hold a restricted radiotelephone operator’s permit, it’s illegal for non-pilots to use the radios.
Interesting question. We (pilots) don’t have to have these permits anymore, but just what are the requirements to operate the radios? I still carry my dog-eared permit, and I remember getting my $6 back when they refunded the fee about 20 years ago.
When I’m in or near class C or class B airspace, the controller will invariably issue the instruction “advise before any altitude changes”. At that point, the request you mentioned above is appropriate (its not mandatory, since all you have to do is ADVISE…
True for Class C, but not Class B. In Class B all heading and altitude assignments are mandatory.
Mike: You’re right, this has hit the zenith of anal retentiveness!
But, the good thing is that we are all very, very close. We’re down to discussing the differences in syllables.
The key point is that we are trying to communicate with ATC. Understanding is the issue. In areas where congestion is an issue, try to be as clear and concise as possible. Also, It is difficult to be faulted for following the AIM.
Now to up the anality (is that a word?) one notch: don’t FCC regs require that all two way radio transmission begin with the identifier of the station being called and then the station calling? (OK, OK, there is a rhetoric element to that question.)