Confusion about when it's my navigation, and when it's ATC

"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote

Mxsmanic, Chief Pilot - Circle Jerk Airlines.

He doesn't care about sex, remember?

Personally, I think he has had his balls chopped off.
--
Jim in NC

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
Now, my question is this: If the FMC has a programmed descent in its
route, do I let the FMC start the descent where it sees fit, or do I
force the aircraft to maintain FL290 until ATC explicitly clears me
for my own navigation or for a lower altitude?

The profile in the FMS is for efficiency and does not take other traffic
into account. You must wait until ATC explicitely clears you to another
altitude. If you are about to pass the FMS's descent point, politely prompt
ATC for a lower altitude. Going into LAS, you very well may get vectors off
the planned route so that ATC can adequately space the arrival traffic (in
the real world).

And if ATC's last
instruction had simply been "resume own navigation" or "proceed as
filed," would that mean that I'd be free to begin the descent whenever
the FMC (or I) decides it's best?

No. That would be for lateral navigation only unless explicitely cleared for
different altitudes. Here is an example that one of my colleagues recently
received counseling about. He was cleared via the KORRY 3 arrival into KLGA.
He started to descend according to the profile. ATC asked why he was
descending and to call a number after landing (not good). He was cleared via
the KORRY 3, not cleared to descend via the KORRY 3. Slight difference, but
very important for traffic seperation.

In situations where I can begin the descent at my discretion (assuming
that own navigation implies this), should I tell ATC that I'm leaving
my cruise altitude?

Yes, the Aeronautical Information Manual states that a pilot should advise
when leaving an altitude.

If the FMC has a continuously changing estimate
of lower altitudes in the descent profile, what should I give as my
target altitude? The next fix that has a specific altitude? (Such as
a fix in the arrival procedure)

Yes.

Climbing I think I understand. If I'm told to resume own navigation,
or cleared as filed in the first place, I climb per my flight plan/FMC
profile. If ATC says maintain X, I stay at X until ATC tells me to
resume own navigation or instructs me to change altitudes. But the
descent part still has me a bit confused.

Query ATC for the assigned altitude so that both of you are on the same
page. Climbs are the same as descents. 'resume own navigation' is for
lateral flight. Don't climb unless expicitely assigned a new altitude by
ATC.

D.

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote

Mxsmanic, Chief Pilot - Circle Jerk Airlines.

He doesn't care about sex, remember?

Personally, I think he has had his balls chopped off.
--
Jim in NC


The following is pasted from Mxsmanic's initial post in this thread:

------pasted article begins-------

I fly from KLAX to KLAS, using the FMC to handle most of the flight.
With the routing I put in, the FMC decides on some default altitudes
and includes required altitudes for the arrival and departure
procedures I select. Part of what it does is to create a descent
schedule from the nominal cruise altitude to the arrival procedure.

So I leave KLAX and my last explicit instruction from ATC is "climb
and maintain FL290," which is my programmed and filed cruise altitude.
Now, my question is this: If the FMC has a programmed descent in its
route, do I let the FMC start the descent where it sees fit, or do I
force the aircraft to maintain FL290 until ATC explicitly clears me
for my own navigation or for a lower altitude? And if ATC's last
instruction had simply been "resume own navigation" or "proceed as
filed," would that mean that I'd be free to begin the descent whenever
the FMC (or I) decides it's best?

-------remainder snipped-------

There is obvious potential for enterainment in this simulation!

But there's mo when last we read, he was simulating a B58.
(No, not that one, the kind with two recips... )

Gotta' go ... I hear the beer calling from the fridge ...

Peter bfg

Just out of curiosity, what simulator are you using?

Gus
EGYC

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
news
I fly from KLAX to KLAS, using the FMC to handle most of the flight.
With the routing I put in, the FMC decides on some default altitudes
and includes required altitudes for the arrival and departure
procedures I select. Part of what it does is to create a descent
schedule from the nominal cruise altitude to the arrival procedure.

So I leave KLAX and my last explicit instruction from ATC is "climb
and maintain FL290," which is my programmed and filed cruise altitude.
Now, my question is this: If the FMC has a programmed descent in its
route, do I let the FMC start the descent where it sees fit, or do I
force the aircraft to maintain FL290 until ATC explicitly clears me
for my own navigation or for a lower altitude? And if ATC's last
instruction had simply been "resume own navigation" or "proceed as
filed," would that mean that I'd be free to begin the descent whenever
the FMC (or I) decides it's best?

In situations where I can begin the descent at my discretion (assuming
that own navigation implies this), should I tell ATC that I'm leaving
my cruise altitude? If the FMC has a continuously changing estimate
of lower altitudes in the descent profile, what should I give as my
target altitude? The next fix that has a specific altitude? (Such as
a fix in the arrival procedure)

Climbing I think I understand. If I'm told to resume own navigation,
or cleared as filed in the first place, I climb per my flight plan/FMC
profile. If ATC says maintain X, I stay at X until ATC tells me to
resume own navigation or instructs me to change altitudes. But the
descent part still has me a bit confused.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Peter Dohm writes:

There is obvious potential for enterainment in this simulation!

I agree. But it is a learning experience as well, and good practice.

But there's mo when last we read, he was simulating a B58.

A Baron 58, yes. One tail number is the Baron, the other is a Boeing
Business Jet 2 (the private-aircraft version of a 737-800).
Obviously, I was flying the latter when I was having trouble dealing
with the FMC, as the Baron is not so equipped.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Morgans writes:

He is flying a simulator "game," so he isn't really flying anything, and has
no consequences to whatever he does.

The consequences are slightly different; IFR flight, however, is the
same, with the same rules and procedures, with a few very minor
exceptions imposed by technical constraints (not applicable in the
context of this discussion).

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic,

He is flying a simulator "game," so he isn't really flying anything, and has
no consequences to whatever he does.

The consequences are slightly different; IFR flight, however, is the
same, with the same rules and procedures, with a few very minor
exceptions imposed by technical constraints


How would you know? Many here can make a direct comparison - and have. You can't.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Capt.Doug writes:

The profile in the FMS is for efficiency and does not take other traffic
into account. You must wait until ATC explicitely clears you to another
altitude.

So it would probably be best to set the MCP to prevent any descent
until I'm cleared, then?

If you are about to pass the FMS's descent point, politely prompt
ATC for a lower altitude.

"Request descent," or something, I presume.

Going into LAS, you very well may get vectors off
the planned route so that ATC can adequately space the arrival traffic (in
the real world).

In simulation, too, even though traffic is sometimes too light to
justify it (the ATCs need practice as well). In fact, it seems that I
almost never follow the arrival procedure as published. Often just as
I'm beginning it, ATC gives me other instructions. I suppose it's a
bit of a relief as then all I have to do is follow their instructions,
rather than try to follow the arrival chart (but if the FMC is doing
it, it's easy).

No. That would be for lateral navigation only unless explicitely cleared for
different altitudes.

Is there a specific phrasing that means "you can do your own lateral
AND vertical navigation"? Or does ATC as a rule never let IFR flights
select their own altitudes?

Here is an example that one of my colleagues recently
received counseling about. He was cleared via the KORRY 3 arrival into KLGA.
He started to descend according to the profile. ATC asked why he was
descending and to call a number after landing (not good). He was cleared via
the KORRY 3, not cleared to descend via the KORRY 3. Slight difference, but
very important for traffic seperation.

Hmm. I just assumed that since the plates usually indicate altitudes,
"cleared via the KORRY 3" would necessarily mean following both the
course and altitude indications. What does ATC say if they want you
to follow everything on the plate, including the indicated altitudes?

Did your colleague get into significant trouble?

Yes, the Aeronautical Information Manual states that a pilot should advise
when leaving an altitude.

OK.

Yes.

OK, so should I say something like "leaving FL290 for 12000 at CLARR,"
assuming I'm already cleared to descend at my discretion?

Query ATC for the assigned altitude so that both of you are on the same
page. Climbs are the same as descents. 'resume own navigation' is for
lateral flight. Don't climb unless expicitely assigned a new altitude by
ATC.

So there is no equivalent of "resume own navigation" for altitude,
like "resume own altitude," or whatever?

If ATC regularly overrides the plates and (apparently) doesn't often
clear anyone to follow the altitude indications on the plates, why do
all the approach plates seem to mention altitudes? Just for radio
loss? (Except they often seem to have separate procedures for
communications loss.)

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Gus Cabre writes:

Just out of curiosity, what simulator are you using?

Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004.

However, I use the PMDG 737-800 add-on aircraft, which is equipped
like the real thing (practically a different world as compared to the
default 737 in the simulator). I also use the Dreamfleet Baron 58
add-on, which, again, is also in a category of its own. Both are
renowned for their uncompromising realism with respect to the real
aircraft.

I also have a separate joystick and throttle, and rudder pedals.
Anything fancier is hard to justify at this time.

I fly a mixture of VFR and IFR on the Baron, and mostly IFR on the
737. I also use VATSIM, the leading virtual flight network, so that I
can interact with other human pilots and controllers by radio, rather
than just interact with the computer-generated stuff provided by MSFS
when it is in offline mode.

All in all, the realism is striking, and much better than some
detractors like to believe.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

All in all, the realism is striking, and much better than some
detractors like to believe.

How do you know?