Cleared for an approach, then given a different altitude assignment

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

My knowledge and experience as a pilot can tell me whether *I* think I
can safely complete the approach or not. They cannot tell me whether
my clearance to do so has been revoked.


This isn't that hard. If you can comply with the restriction and still
complete the approach your clearance hasn't been revoked. That should be
obvious to you.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 22:20:51 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


....Nothing which appears below. Please use a bit more care with what you
snip when replying to a message.



But, how do I tell, just from what the controller says, if it will
prevent the completion of the approach or not? It seems reasonable in
the scenario under discussion, that "cross PAGAR at or above 4000"
should not be a problem. But what about "Cross ELESE at or above
4000", or "Cross NADSY at or above 4000", or "Cross PAGER at or above
15,000"? Do any of those imply "cancel previous approach clearance?


How about just asking the controller?

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Today I was practicing a GPS approach and had been cleared for the
approach with the normal, "Cessna XXX, cross ELESE at 3,000, cleared
GPS 15 approach."

A minute or so later the controllers switched positions and another one
took over that slice of airspace.

The new one came on frequency and called my aircraft with, "Cessna XXX,
traffic one o'clock, 2,500 and two miles, southbound" (the traffic was
was crossing my path right to left underneath me).

I replied, "Negative traffic" to which he responded, "Maintain 3,000."

Being momentarily confused, I called to clarify the altitude
restriction. The controller responded rather tersely that he wanted me
at 3,000 for traffic avoidance.

Should the controller have canceled my approach clearance first, then
issued the altitude restriction?

The controller should have complied with the phraseology requirements of
FAAO 7110.65P Chapter 4-5-7 (Posted below):



f. When the "pilot's discretion" portion of a climb/descent clearance is
being canceled by assigning a new altitude, inform the pilot that the new
altitude is an "amended altitude."

EXAMPLE-
"American Eighty Three, amend altitude, descend and maintain Flight Level
two six zero."

NOTE-
American Eighty Three, at FL 280, has been cleared to descend at pilot's
discretion to FL 240. Subsequently, the altitude assignment is changed to FL
260. Therefore, pilot's discretion is no longer authorized.



Your approach clearance involved a pilot's discretion descent when you were
cleared to cross ELESE at 3000 and cleared for approach. Subsequently, ATC
ammended your altitude assignment, thus cancelling your PD descent (and also
your approach clearance). Whether or not ATC actually had legitimate
traffic for you (airspace class and traffic rules VFR/IFR), in this case you
still received an ammended altitude clearance. If the controller had simply
complied with his own language requirements, you would likely have been
much clearer on the situation. You could have replied "Cessna XXX,
maintaining 3000, standing by for the GPS approach clearance" or something
like that.



Chip, ZTL