Altitude your discretion

Bill Watson said:
I’m thinking that really only happens when an altitude is requested:
“…4500 requesting 6500”

Instead of stated:
“…4500 climbing 6500”

When the altitude is in fact, at the pilot’s discretion.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...
Yeah. It does usually start with requesting instead of telling. I guess my post was kinda ‘snotty’ in itself. My bad, edited:(
 
MajorTurbulence said:
Let’s say I’m in class E and on FF and controller said altitude at your discretion. There is a ceiling at 5.5K as I’m traveling eastbound. I’m 4.5 AGL. I call ATC and ask if it’s OK if I stay at 5K eastbound because of the ceiling and he said it’s OK. Does that make it legal to fly inspite of the VFR altitude rule?
Click to expand...




§ 91.159 VFR cruising altitude or flight level.
Except while holding in a holding pattern of 2 minutes or less, or while turning, each person operating an aircraft under VFR in level cruising flight more than 3,000 feet above the surface shall maintain the appropriate altitude or flight level prescribed below, unless otherwise authorized by ATC:

“OK” is not in the Pilot /Controller Glossary. If the controller issued “Maintain 5000”, it would be legal. Good luck finding a controller who will assign you an IFR altitude at your request in Class E.
 
Clip4 said:
§ 91.159 VFR cruising altitude or flight level.
Except while holding in a holding pattern of 2 minutes or less, or while turning, each person operating an aircraft under VFR in level cruising flight more than 3,000 feet above the surface shall maintain the appropriate altitude or flight level prescribed below, unless otherwise authorized by ATC:

“OK” is not in the Pilot /Controller Glossary. If the controller issued “Maintain 5000”, it would be legal. Good luck finding a controller who will assign you an IFR altitude at your request in Class E.
Click to expand...
Otherwise authorized and otherwise assigned are different. I don’t think that the word “ok” was literally what he meant. ‘Approved as requested’ is a legitimate phraseology. If the controller said ‘yeah, that’s cool, go ahead and do it’ the pilot would probably be off the hook if it became a thang judicially. Controller gonna have some splainin’ to do though.
 
Larry in TN said:
Too bad more of them don't read the AIM so they'd know what pilots are told to do.
Click to expand...
When I re-read my post, quoted above, I realized that it could easily been misinterpreted. I wasn't intending to criticize controllers for not reading the AIM. It was a sarcastic comment about how the AIM and 7110.65 are not always perfectly aligned. I don't expect non-pilot controllers to know the AIM.

I do expect CFIs to know, and teach, the AIM. I would like to see pilots heading first to the AIM, and the other FAA resources, when questions come up instead of gathering a lot of "What I do is..." opinions online. Having each pilot invent their own preferred procedures does not make for an ideal system.
 
Larry in TN said:
When I re-read my post, quoted above, I realized that it could easily been misinterpreted. I wasn't intending to criticize controllers for not reading the AIM. It was a sarcastic comment about how the AIM and 7110.65 are not always perfectly aligned. I don't expect non-pilot controllers to know the AIM.

I do expect CFIs to know, and teach, the AIM. I would like to see pilots heading first to the AIM, and the other FAA resources, when questions come up instead of gathering a lot of "What I do is..." opinions online. Having each pilot invent their own preferred procedures does not make for an ideal system.
Click to expand...
I agree it would be a bit much to expect Controllers to read the entire AIM. There are places in the Controllers book, the 7110.65, where references to the AIM are made. Below an example on a different subject. Maybe a reference on this subject might reduce the number of snarky comebacks Pilots get sometimes when telling Controllers they are changing altitude. Granted, it’s more often when a pilot ‘requests’ altitude change rather than just advising of it. Or at least FAA management could do a better job of getting the word out to Controllers that pilots are expected to do this and give a little attitude adjustment to those Controllers who throw a hissy fit over it.

REFERENCE−
FAA Order 8260.3, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS).
P/CG Term – Cold Temperature Compensation.
AIM, Para 5-1-17, Cold Temperature Operations.
AIM, Para 5-5-4, Instrument Approach.
 
luvflyin said:
I agree it would be a bit much to expect Controllers to read the entire AIM. There are places in the Controllers book, the 7110.65, where references to the AIM are made. Below an example on a different subject. Maybe a reference on this subject might reduce the number of snarky comebacks Pilots get sometimes when telling Controllers they are changing altitude. Granted, it’s more often when a pilot ‘requests’ altitude change rather than just advising of it. Or at least FAA management could do a better job of getting the word out to Controllers that pilots are expected to do this and give a little attitude adjustment to those Controllers who throw a hissy fit over it.

REFERENCE−
FAA Order 8260.3, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS).
P/CG Term – Cold Temperature Compensation.
AIM, Para 5-1-17, Cold Temperature Operations.
AIM, Para 5-5-4, Instrument Approach.
Click to expand...
Most good controllers don't throw hissy fits!
 
Former Controller here. Having told a VFR aircraft "Altitude your discretion" only means that I have no reason to place a restriction on it, However I'm still expecting a valid VFR altitude. However that does not preclude me from authorizing something non-standard. In OPs case, had the pilot asked to maintain 4k until past the clouds (perhaps so they had less of a climb) I may very well approve it, as long as it safe to do so.

Bottom line, don't assume, just state your intentions or non-standard request to the controller. They will help you out if they can.
 
Last edited:
Jeremy S said:
Former Controller here. Having told a VFR aircraft "Altitude your discretion" only means that I have no reason to place a restriction on it, However I'm still expecting a valid VFR altitude. However that does not preclude me from authorizing something non-standard. In OPs case, had the pilot asked to maintain 4k until past the clouds (perhaps so they had less of a climb) I may very well approve it, as long as it safe to do so.

Bottom line, don't assume, just state your intentions or non-standard request to the controller. They will help you out if they can.
Click to expand...
Awesome! Thanks for that Jeremy. As you may have read earlier, I was very wrong about it and asked my old instructor. Your explanation was clearer to me.
 
Clip4 said:
If I am under traffic advisories, what other regulations am I authorized to violate?
Click to expand...
I think you are looking at it wrong. The situation is a VFR flight with ATC flight following, the pilot descends to avoid clouds above. In order to clear those clouds he ends up at 4000 feet instead of 4500. There are more clouds below him so he can't descend further, at least not right now. He has informed ATC of his situation and has been granted altitude your discretion. My interpretation is he can stay there until the clouds give way, either above or below, and then assume appropriate altitude when able. The key here is to keep ATC informed. With clouds above and below doing anything else would be entering IMC and is definitely wrong, unless going IFR from there. Circumstances have forced the pilot into this action and this is the safest and best move for now. Since the PIC is the final authority regarding safety of flight according to FAA regulations, and other options are unavailable at this time, and ATC is aware of the situation... I think any review of the pilots action will not result any sanctions from the FAA.
 
You have now presented an emergency scenario under 91.3 (b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency. Which isn’t the scenario we were discussing, but if the controller has to start re-routing IFR arrivals because he believes you are a VFR pilot in distress, you may hear about it.

c) Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under paragraph (b) of this section shall, upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
§ 91.159 VFR cruising altitude or flight level.
Except while holding in a holding pattern of 2 minutes or less, or while turning, each person operating an aircraft under VFR in level cruising flight more than 3,000 feet above the surface shall maintain the appropriate altitude or flight level prescribed below, unless otherwise authorized by ATC:

“OK” is not in the Pilot /Controller Glossary. If the controller issued “Maintain 5000”, it would be legal. Good luck finding a controller who will assign you an IFR altitude at your request in Class E.
Click to expand...
This scenario was real and not particularly uncommon, but I was purposefully vague regarding the controller’s response as I don’t remember. It could have been “OK”, “Roger” or something more affirmative. I felt comfortable knowing that this controller would have been handling IFR traffic at 5K. If it was OK with him, it was OK with me. It’s not unusual to be on an VFR altitude on FF and given a vector to avoid IFR traffic they were controlling. They could do the same thing if I was at 5K in my scenario as they knew the reason I was there, and under their control should they make the command.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top