Lost Comms

[roncachamp]

Per our resident Controller/CFII, ATC MUST issue an EFC any time a hold is assigned.

He's wrong.

[SIZE=+1]Order JO 7110.65S Air Traffic Control[/SIZE]​

Chapter 4. IFR

Section 6. Holding Aircraft

4-6-1. CLEARANCE TO HOLDING FIX


Consider operational factors such as length of delay, holding airspace limitations, navigational aids, altitude, meteorological conditions when necessary to clear an aircraft to a fix other than the destination airport. Issue the following:​

a. Clearance limit (if any part of the route beyond a clearance limit differs from the last routing cleared, issue the route the pilot can expect beyond the clearance limit).


PHRASEOLOGY-

EXPECT FURTHER CLEARANCE VIA (routing).

EXAMPLE-

"Expect further clearance via direct Stillwater V-O-R, Victor Two Twenty-Six Snapy intersection, direct Newark."​

b. Holding instructions.


1. Holding instructions may be eliminated when you inform the pilot that no delay is expected.


2. When the pattern is charted, you may omit all holding instructions except the charted holding direction and the statement "as published." Always issue complete holding instructions when the pilot requests them.


NOTE-

The most generally used holding patterns are depicted on U.S. Government or commercially produced low/high altitude en route, area, and STAR Charts.

PHRASEOLOGY-

CLEARED TO (fix), HOLD (direction), AS PUBLISHED,​

or​

CLEARED TO (fix), NO DELAY EXPECTED.​

c.EFC. Do not specify this item if no delay is expected.


1. When additional holding is expected at any other fix in your facility's area, state the fix and your best estimate of the additional delay. When more than one fix is involved, state the total additional en route delay (omit specific fixes).


NOTE-

Additional delay information is not used to determine pilot action in the event of two-way communications failure. Pilots are expected to predicate their actions solely on the provisions of 14 CFR Section 91.185.

PHRASEOLOGY-

EXPECT FURTHER CLEARANCE (time),​

and if required,​

ANTICIPATE ADDITIONAL (time in minutes/hours) MINUTE/HOUR DELAY AT (fix),​

or​

ANTICIPATE ADDITIONAL (time in minutes/hours) MINUTE/HOUR EN ROUTE DELAY.

EXAMPLE-

1. "Expect further clearance one niner two zero, anticipate additional three zero minute delay at Sweet."

2. "Expect further clearance one five one zero, anticipate additional three zero minute en route delay."


2. When additional holding is expected in an approach control area, state the total additional terminal delay.


PHRASEOLOGY-

EXPECT FURTHER CLEARANCE (time),​

and if required,​

ANTICIPATE ADDITIONAL (time in minutes/hours) MINUTE/HOUR TERMINAL DELAY.

3. TERMINAL. When terminal delays exist or are expected, inform the appropriate center or approach control facility so that the information can be forwarded to arrival aircraft.


4. When delay is expected, issue items in subparas a and b at least 5 minutes before the aircraft is estimated to reach the clearance limit. If the traffic situation requires holding an aircraft that is less than 5 minutes from the holding fix, issue these items immediately.


NOTE-

1. The AIM indicates that pilots should start speed reduction when 3 minutes or less from the holding fix. The additional 2 minutes contained in the 5-minute requirement are necessary to compensate for different pilot/controller ETAS at the holding fix, minor differences in clock times, and provision for sufficient planning and reaction times.

2. When holding is necessary, the phrase "delay indefinite" should be used when an accurate estimate of the delay time and the reason for the delay cannot immediately be determined; i.e., disabled aircraft on the runway, terminal or center sector saturation, weather below landing minimums, etc. In any event, every attempt should be made to provide the pilot with the best possible estimate of his/her delay time and the reason for the delay. Controllers/supervisors should consult, as appropriate, with personnel (other sectors, weather forecasters, the airport management, other facilities, etc.) who can best provide this information.


PHRASEOLOGY-

DELAY INDEFINITE, (reason if known), EXPECT FURTHER CLEARANCE (time). (After determining the reason for the delay, advise the pilot as soon as possible.)

EXAMPLE-

"Cleared to Drewe, hold west, as published, expect further clearance via direct Sidney V-O-R one three one five, anticipate additional two zero minute delay at Woody."​

"Cleared to Aston, hold west on Victor two twenty-five, seven mile leg, left turns, expect further clearance one niner two zero, anticipate additional one five minute terminal delay."​

"Cleared to Wayne, no delay expected."​

"Cleared to Wally, hold north, as published, delay indefinite, snow removal in progress, expect further clearance one one three zero."​

 

[poadeleted20]

Holding instructions may be eliminated when you inform the pilot that no delay is expected

May, not shall. So, by the book, you can get holding instructions without an EFC. And it happens. But only when told, "No delay expected." That way if things don't work out as expected, the controller isn't reading you the holding instructions 30 seconds from the fix.

 

[KennyFlys]

He's wrong.

Interesting. He's an ATC trainer with Raytheon and was with the previous training contractor after twenty-four years as a controller.

Between his thought answers and your argumentative answers, guess which one I'm listening to?

Steven, If I argued with my students the way you argue points on here I'd be without any students. There is no way they would want to fly with me if I instructed them in the same tone you're attempting here.

I know dang well not all of my information is perfect and I take every teaching opportunity to learn something for myself. But, when there are those times when the student is working off bad information I certainly won't belittle them with the correct answer. I'm going to put great effort into laying a base for the correct answer and help them understand why their information is wrong and why the correct answer is just that.

If I turn out to be wrong, I humbly apologize and let them know I'm not immune from error. Rarely a lesson goes by where I'm not learning something. If I'm not learning something, I'm probably also shorting my student.

I'm not learning much from this thread. That's sad. I wish I were.

 

[roncachamp]

Interesting. He's an ATC trainer with Raytheon and was with the previous training contractor after twenty-four years as a controller.

What facilities did he work? He could have spent 24 years in VFR towers and never issued a hold.

Between his thought answers and your argumentative answers, guess which one I'm listening to?

The one not supported by documentation.

I'm not learning much from this thread. That's sad. I wish I were.

Try reading it with an open mind.

 

[TangoWhiskey]

May, not shall. So, by the book, you can get holding instructions without an EFC. And it happens. But only when told, "No delay expected." That way if things don't work out as expected, the controller isn't reading you the holding instructions 30 seconds from the fix.

Yet it also says:

c. EFC. Do not specify this item if no delay is expected.

I agree with Kenny: I personally like Ron's approach to teaching and providing answers better--yet Steve has provided the documentation that is required to substantiate his position on the matter, even if we don't like how he's done it.

I think it's his teaching method--asking short stubby questions that come across as abrasive and challenging, rather than just coming out and teaching / explaining his point, that is causing the issue here. I'd like to believe--and I do!--that Steve's intent here is not to start a war, but to educate us a little--and get us to think using questions.

 

[TMetzinger]

...unless ATC said "no delay expected" as part of the holding instruction. In that case, effectively, your EFC is when you get there. If you lose comm before you get there, you blow off the hold and press on down the line. If you lose comm in the hold, you depart the hold immediately upon realizing you've lost comm.

And I can't find where a document published to pilot spells that out, or how a pilot would ever figure that out on his own without participating in a forum like this one - which is an indictment of how the rules and AIM are written (or not), nothing more.

Oh, and nowhere outside of this discussion have I ever heard or read that "hold at xyz, no delay expected" means "Call me when you're five minutes from XYZ and I'll tell you if you really have to hold or not".

I understand all the reasons that ATC would have to issue a hold that they don't think they'll need. I understand the ATC order that permits/encourages them to do that. There's just nothing in the P/CG, IFR test bank, or even the AIM that says "This is what you do if you get told to hold at xyz, no delay expected".

And there should be, somewhere, dammit, if ATC expects pilots to understand the instruction.

 

[KennyFlys]

Try reading it with an open mind.

You make that pretty difficult. The tone was set in Terry's thread.

 

[Clark1961]

I think it's his teaching method--asking short stubby questions that come across as abrasive and challenging, rather than just coming out and teaching / explaining his point, that is causing the issue here. I'd like to believe--and I do!--that Steve's intent here is not to start a war, but to educate us a little--and get us to think using questions.

Steve's abrasive approach is why he will always fail as a teacher in anything but a classroom environment where folks expect to be challenged. In other words: his approach is inappropriate in this forum.

It's too bad about the way Steve likes to "teach" since he could contribute. Oh well...

 

[poadeleted20]

Oh, and nowhere outside of this discussion have I ever heard or read that "hold at xyz, no delay expected" means "Call me when you're five minutes from XYZ and I'll tell you if you really have to hold or not".

That's because it doesn't mean that. If you hear "hold at xyz, no delay expected" (actually, you need to hear more, since there more to the minimum required info in a holding clearance), it is not required to call ATC back five minutes prior to the fix. It would be prudent, but it's not required. Likewise, while the controller is supposed to let you know five minutes out, frequency congestion, traffic problems, etc, could result in you not receiving further instructions in that time frame or even before you get to the fix. In that case, assuming you still have a working radio, you enter holding as instructed on arrival at the fix. If you lose comm before you get there, you press on through, and if you lose comm in the hold, you depart the hold.

The purpose of this is to ensure that if the reason for possibly having to hold doesn't clear as expected, you aren't trying to copy the holding instructions just as you arrive at the fix.

And please -- let's all remember that this is about procedures, not personalities.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Oh, and nowhere outside of this discussion have I ever heard or read that "hold at xyz, no delay expected" means "Call me when you're five minutes from XYZ and I'll tell you if you really have to hold or not".

Read carefully, Tim... I think Steven's latest example was for a "Cleared to XYZ" (where XYZ is not the destination), where he'd call 5 minutes prior to XYZ for further instructions.

That said, the "Hold at XYZ, no delay expected" as Steven says is a non-radar procedure. How often do you fly in a non-radar environment?

There's just nothing in the P/CG, IFR test bank, or even the AIM that says "This is what you do if you get told to hold at xyz, no delay expected".

And there should be, somewhere, dammit, if ATC expects pilots to understand the instruction.

I tend to agree, but I don't think it's feasible to have every last little nuance of ATC in the AIM. Maybe that's why the 7110.65 is available for public consumption.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Interesting. He's an ATC trainer with Raytheon and was with the previous training contractor after twenty-four years as a controller.

Raytheon? Training contractor?

Sounds like a contract tower thing, and a tower isn't going to be issuing holds.

Between his thought answers and your argumentative answers, guess which one I'm listening to?

I'd be interested in what he says when you show him the part of the 7110.65 that Steven posted. Whoever you "believe" that is the official FAA documentation, so it's gotta be right.

 

[Clark1961]

And please -- let's all remember that this is about procedures, not personalities.

That's right. And a deliberately chosen "teaching" procedure is not a personality trait. Now there may be some personality problems behind the selection of "teaching" procedure but I think we're not here to treat serious illness.

 

[TMetzinger]

Read carefully, Tim... I think Steven's latest example was for a "Cleared to XYZ" (where XYZ is not the destination), where he'd call 5 minutes prior to XYZ for further instructions.

That said, the "Hold at XYZ, no delay expected" as Steven says is a non-radar procedure. How often do you fly in a non-radar environment?



I tend to agree, but I don't think it's feasible to have every last little nuance of ATC in the AIM. Maybe that's why the 7110.65 is available for public consumption.

You're right, but whether it's a hold or a clearance to a point other than an airport (which implies a hold if you are given an EFC time) is irrelevant.

If ATC clears a pilot to anything other than an airport, the pilot needs to know what to do when he gets there.
Giving an EFC is clear - he gets there, and if lost comm, he holds until his EFC time and goes from there.
Without an EFC, even with "no delay expected", is less clear in the event of lost comm (except for ATC gurus). And while the PHAK and AFH and all the pilot stuff is available, we don't expect ATC to have read them and understand all our procedures.

 

[KennyFlys]

Raytheon? Training contractor?

Sounds like a contract tower thing, and a tower isn't going to be issuing holds.

Nope, he retired from the FAA at the mandatory retirement age of 56 then took a position with a training contractor. I can't recall the name of that company. A couple months ago, Raytheon picked up the contract and so was he.

The TSA require those guys to have all the requisite security clearances and necessary IDs and access cards. When they were replaced under Raytheon's name, we were discussing if the same clearances would give him ramp access should the TSA get their paws on GA access.

 

[roncachamp]

And I can't find where a document published to pilot spells that out, or how a pilot would ever figure that out on his own without participating in a forum like this one - which is an indictment of how the rules and AIM are written (or not), nothing more.

Oh, and nowhere outside of this discussion have I ever heard or read that "hold at xyz, no delay expected" means "Call me when you're five minutes from XYZ and I'll tell you if you really have to hold or not".

I understand all the reasons that ATC would have to issue a hold that they don't think they'll need. I understand the ATC order that permits/encourages them to do that. There's just nothing in the P/CG, IFR test bank, or even the AIM that says "This is what you do if you get told to hold at xyz, no delay expected".

And there should be, somewhere, dammit, if ATC expects pilots to understand the instruction.

There are documents published to pilots that spell this out. Admittedly, these documents are rather obscure to some pilots, but they are out there, and they're available free online. They're called the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) and the Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs). Here are a couple of excerpts:


Aeronautical Information Manual
Official Guide to Basic Flight Information and ATC Procedures

Chapter 6. Emergency Procedures

Section 4. Two-way Radio Communications Failure

6-4-1. Two-way Radio Communications Failure

[nonpertinent portion deleted]

(c) Leave clearance limit.

(1) When the clearance limit is a fix from which an approach begins, commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible to the expect further clearance time if one has been received, or if one has not been received, as close as possible to the Estimated Time of Arrival (ETA) as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC) Estimated Time En Route (ETE).

(2) If the clearance limit is not a fix from which an approach begins, leave the clearance limit at the expect further clearance time if one has been received, or if none has been received, upon arrival over the clearance limit, and proceed to a fix from which an approach begins and commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time en route.


Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)

Title 14: Aeronautics and Space

CHAPTER I--FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SUBCHAPTER F--AIR TRAFFIC AND GENERAL OPERATING RULES
PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES

Subpart B—Flight Rules

Instrument Flight Rules

91.185 IFR operations: Two-way radio communications failure.(a) General. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each pilot who has two-way radio communications failure when operating under IFR shall comply with the rules of this section.


(b) VFR conditions. If the failure occurs in VFR conditions, or if VFR conditions are encountered after the failure, each pilot shall continue the flight under VFR and land as soon as practicable.


(c) IFR conditions. If the failure occurs in IFR conditions, or if paragraph (b) of this section cannot be complied with, each pilot shall continue the flight according to the following:


(1) Route. (i) By the route assigned in the last ATC clearance received;


(ii) If being radar vectored, by the direct route from the point of radio failure to the fix, route, or airway specified in the vector clearance;


(iii) In the absence of an assigned route, by the route that ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance; or


(iv) In the absence of an assigned route or a route that ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance, by the route filed in the flight plan.


(2) Altitude. At the highest of the following altitudes or flight levels for the route segment being flown:


(i) The altitude or flight level assigned in the last ATC clearance received;


(ii) The minimum altitude (converted, if appropriate, to minimum flight level as prescribed in §91.121(c)) for IFR operations; or


(iii) The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.


(3) Leave clearance limit. (i) When the clearance limit is a fix from which an approach begins, commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible to the expect-further-clearance time if one has been received, or if one has not been received, as close as possible to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time en route.


(ii) If the clearance limit is not a fix from which an approach begins, leave the clearance limit at the expect-further-clearance time if one has been received, or if none has been received, upon arrival over the clearance limit, and proceed to a fix from which an approach begins and commence descent or descent and approach as close as possible to the estimated time of arrival as calculated from the filed or amended (with ATC) estimated time en route.


[Doc. No. 18334, 54 FR 34294, Aug. 18, 1989; Amdt. 91–211, 54 FR 41211, Oct. 5, 1989]




The AIM is available here:
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/ATPubs/AIM/aim.pdf

The FARs are available here:
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex...8&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14tab_02.tpl

 

[KennyFlys]

Steven... Dude, that's just plain uncalled for. I've had enough of your condescending tone.

Ron, I'm sorry to disagree with your earlier post but how he's going about things just isn't right.

 

[roncachamp]

You're right, but whether it's a hold or a clearance to a point other than an airport (which implies a hold if you are given an EFC time) is irrelevant.

If ATC clears a pilot to anything other than an airport, the pilot needs to know what to do when he gets there. Giving an EFC is clear - he gets there, and if lost comm, he holds until his EFC time and goes from there.
Without an EFC, even with "no delay expected", is less clear in the event of lost comm (except for ATC gurus).

(And those that are familiar with the publications made available to pilots on these subjects.)

And while the PHAK and AFH and all the pilot stuff is available, we don't expect ATC to have read them and understand all our procedures.

What do those publications say about holds and EFCs?