PD climb/descent

[MATC4N64]

I have a quick question I have heard some different things on- In a PD climb or descent, can the vacated altitude rule be used as a form of separation?

 

[Acquired Taste]

I have a quick question I have heard some different things on- In a PD climb or descent, can the vacated altitude rule be used as a form of separation?

No. The vacated altitude rule takes a/c performance and characteristics into account and is meant to anticipate the you will still maintain your separation standards for the most part. With PD, there's no guarantee you can maintain it as a pilot has every right to descend 100 feet and then maintain that altitude. Technically, they would have vacated the other altitude but still might be the same altitude as another plane due to slight variance in an altimeter or something similar.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

That doesn't sound super positive.

 

[Dialoutmfer]

No. The vacated altitude rule takes a/c performance and characteristics into account and is meant to anticipate the you will still maintain your separation standards for the most part. With PD, there's no guarantee you can maintain it as a pilot has every right to descend 100 feet and then maintain that altitude. Technically, they would have vacated the other altitude but still might be the same altitude as another plane due to slight variance in an altimeter or something similar.

Well said, I would just add to remember that both crossing restrictions and descend via are also pilot’s discretion descents so don’t use it then. I know of a controller who forgot to take that into account and got rung up.

 

[32andBelow]

You can’t use the altitude vacated rule if the descent is PD.

For altitude vacated While you should always take ac characteristics in to account. If you lose 1000 feet it’s not a deal. It’s a non radar rule. So what the mode c says is irrelevant

 

[Dialoutmfer]

You can’t use the altitude vacated rule if the descent is PD.

For altitude vacated While you should always take ac characteristics in to account. If you lose 1000 feet it’s not a deal. It’s a non radar rule. So what the mode c says is irrelevant

Wrong. It’s not a non radar rule as it is 5-5-5 which is radar separation. Also mode C is not irrelevant as that is one of the two ways the altitude is made available, valid mode C observed leaving ( and that is the one of the two ways that is used the vast majority of the time )

 

[CaptainObvious]

Wrong. It’s not a non radar rule as it is 5-5-5 which is radar separation. Also mode C is not irrelevant as that is one of the two ways the altitude is made available, valid mode C observed leaving ( and that is the one of the two ways that is used the vast majority of the time )

Center updates are way behind. Report altitude leaving/reaching all the time mfer

 

[32andBelow]

Wrong. It’s not a non radar rule as it is 5-5-5 which is radar separation. Also mode C is not irrelevant as that is one of the two ways the altitude is made available, valid mode C observed leaving ( and that is the one of the two ways that is used the vast majority of the time )

You use altitude leaving all the time in non radar.

 

[Dialoutmfer]

You use altitude leaving all the time in non radar.

Correct but it is technically a radar rule, also you said mode c is irrelevant which is not correct, it’s 5-5-5, you can reread it if you want, it’s in the radar chapter

Center updates are way behind. Report altitude leaving/reaching all the time mfer

With 5-5-5 report reaching does not apply, report leaving works all day. I just mentioned that in my experience observing an aircraft out of an altitude then assigning an altitude to a second aircraft happens much more often, it becomes second nature after a point and happens without even thinking.

 

[32andBelow]

Correct but it is technically a radar rule, also you said mode c is irrelevant which is not correct, it’s 5-5-5, you can reread it if you want, it’s in the radar chapter

With 5-5-5 report reaching does not apply, report leaving works all day. I just mentioned that in my experience observing an aircraft out of an altitude then assigning an altitude to a second aircraft happens much more often, it becomes second nature after a point and happens without even thinking.

6-6-1

 

[Dialoutmfer]

6-6-1

I stand by my 5-5-5 but acknowledge your 6-6-1 good sir. They duplicated the rule in the radar and non radar section but added the mode c option for the radar chapter. Thanks, good to know.

 

[32andBelow]

I stand by my 5-5-5 but acknowledge your 6-6-1 good sir. They duplicated the rule in the radar and non radar section but added the mode c option for the radar chapter. Thanks, good to know.

Non radar rules are super efficient in some applications.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Yeah people don’t apply the non-radar over radar for operational advantage as much as they should

 

[32andBelow]

Yeah people don’t apply the non-radar over radar for operational advantage as much as they should

And then you get people in the area freaking out when you have non radar separation but maybe not radar separation

 

[COWTOWN]

What's everyone's take on vacated altitude with ILS approaches?

 

[32andBelow]

What's everyone's take on vacated altitude with ILS approaches?

Approaches are pilots discretion so no.

 

[COWTOWN]

Approaches are pilots discretion so no.

Good to know... already do it anyways with 1-200 extra ft of cushion and a cross fix at restriction.