Speeds once cleared for the approach

pstan

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
168
Display Name

Display name:
Stan
Spent some time perusing far 91 and the aim, but no luck on this situation. Lets say previously you've been instructed to track the localizer and maintain 180 kts, which you are now doing. Well prior to the faf you are "cleared approach".

When can you start to slow? immediately?

Does the controller have the authority to re-state the 180 speed restriction? Or to instruct you to cross the faf at 180 kts?

References appreciated. thanks.

Hawk
 
From the AIM 4-4-12(f)

Approach clearances supersede any prior speed adjustment assignments, and pilots are expected to make their own speed adjustments, as necessary, to complete the approach. Under certain circumstances, however, it may be necessary for ATC to issue further speed adjustments after approach clearance is issued to maintain separation between successive arrivals. Under such circumstances, previously issued speed adjustments will be restated if that speed is to be maintained or additional speed adjustments are requested. ATC must obtain pilot concurrence for speed adjustments after approach clearances are issued. Speed adjustments should not be assigned inside the final approach fix on final or a point 5 miles from the runway, whichever is closer to the runway.
 
From the AIM 4-4-12(f)

Two key things. First the AIM is advisory in nature and second the operative word 'should' was used in this statement; "Speed adjustments should not be assigned inside the final approach fix on final or a point 5 miles from the runway"

Coming into STL last Jan I was given an approach clearance that had a speed restriction to maintain best speed until the threshold. Given the length of the runway, the fact my max speed was like 120kts and the 757 behind me was doing at least 140 to 180 kts I figured it was best to head that clearance as it was reasonable.

So it can happen.

But to the OPs point, once you have been given you approach clearance the previous speed restriction no longer applies.
 
Coming into STL last Jan I was given an approach clearance that had a speed restriction to maintain best speed until the threshold. Given the length of the runway, the fact my max speed was like 120kts and the 757 behind me was doing at least 140 to 180 kts I figured it was best to head that clearance as it was reasonable.

So it can happen.
It can happen but most likely wouldn't have if you has actually been in instrument conditions. Besides, you could have declined.

But to the OPs point, once you have been given you approach clearance the previous speed restriction no longer applies.
The normal thing you will hear is, "Maintain [speed] until [intersection which is usually the FAF], cleared for the approach."
 
Wow, thanks for the quick replies, I missed that in the AIM. I doubt controllers read the aim, so I'm thinking they must have some guidance in their manuals that say the same. So...controllers....do you have the same "should" terminology, and is the remainder worded the same (faf, 5 miles, pilot's concurrence etc)?
 
The normal thing you will hear is, "Maintain [speed] until [intersection which is usually the FAF], cleared for the approach."

I understand what you're saying, but this is in direct conflict with

"ATC must obtain pilot concurrence for speed adjustments after approach clearances are issued. "

Maybe I'm nitpicking here....
 
I understand what you're saying, but this is in direct conflict with

"ATC must obtain pilot concurrence for speed adjustments after approach clearances are issued. "

Maybe I'm nitpicking here....
I would say that if you accept the clearance you are concurring...
 
Greg and Everskyward; Well, considering the example given by Everskyward, while the approach clearance does say "cleared", the speed instruction doesn't. Sounds more like an instruction to maintain 180 kts. But I understand what you're saying.

However, nowhere else in the AIM (?) does it say that a controller must (that's MUST) get the pilots concurrence when he issues an instruction. So....there seems to have been a definite effort to make this case a distinction.
 
Two key things. First the AIM is advisory in nature and second the operative word 'should' was used in this statement; "Speed adjustments should not be assigned inside the final approach fix on final or a point 5 miles from the runway"

Coming into STL last Jan I was given an approach clearance that had a speed restriction to maintain best speed until the threshold. Given the length of the runway, the fact my max speed was like 120kts and the 757 behind me was doing at least 140 to 180 kts I figured it was best to head that clearance as it was reasonable.

So it can happen.

When it happens, the controller has erred.


Order JO 7110.65S Air Traffic Control

Section 7. Speed Adjustment

5-7-1. APPLICATION


Keep speed adjustments to the minimum necessary to
achieve or maintain required or desired spacing.
Avoid adjustments requiring alternate decreases and
increases. Permit pilots to resume normal speed when
previously specified adjustments are no longer
needed.

NOTE-
It is the pilot's responsibility and prerogative to refuse
speed adjustment that he/she considers excessive or
contrary to the aircraft's operating specifications.


a. Consider the following when applying speed
control:

1. Determine the interval required and the point
at which the interval is to be accomplished.

2. Implement speed adjustment based on the
following principles.

(a) Priority of speed adjustment instructions
is determined by the relative speed and position of the
aircraft involved and the spacing requirement.

(b) Speed adjustments are not achieved
instantaneously. Aircraft configuration, altitudes,
and speed determine the time and distance required to
accomplish the adjustment.

3. Use the following techniques in speed control
situations:

(a) Compensate for compression when
assigning air speed adjustment in an in‐trail situation
by using one of the following techniques:

(1) Reduce the trailing aircraft first.

(2) Increase the leading aircraft first.

(b) Assign a specific airspeed if required to
maintain spacing.

(c) Allow increased time and distance to
achieve speed adjustments in the following
situations:

(1) Higher altitudes.

(2) Greater speed.

(3) Clean configurations.

(d) Ensure that aircraft are allowed to operate
in a clean configuration as long as circumstances
permit.

(e) Keep the number of speed adjustments per
aircraft to the minimum required to achieve and
maintain spacing.

b. Do not assign speed adjustment to aircraft:

1. At or above FL 390 without pilot consent.

2. Executing a published high altitude instrument
approach procedure.

3. In a holding pattern.

REFERENCE-
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 4-6-4, Holding Instructions.


4. Inside the final approach fix on final or a point
5 miles from the runway, whichever is closer to the
runway.


c. At the time approach clearance is issued,
previously issued speed adjustments shall be restated
if required.

d. Approach clearances cancel any previously
assigned speed adjustment. Pilots are expected to
make their own speed adjustments to complete the
approach unless the adjustments are restated.

e. Express speed adjustments in terms of knots
based on indicated airspeed (IAS) in 10-knot
increments. At or above FL 240, speeds may be
expressed in terms of Mach numbers in 0.01 increments
for turbojet aircraft with Mach meters
(i.e., Mach 0.69, 0.70, 0.71, etc.).

NOTE-
1. Pilots complying with speed adjustment instructions
should maintain a speed within plus or minus 10 knots or
0.02 Mach number of the specified speed.


2. When assigning speeds to achieve spacing between
aircraft at different altitudes, consider that ground speed
may vary with altitude. Further speed adjustment may be
necessary to attain the desired spacing.


REFERENCE-

FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 5-7-2, Methods.
 
It can happen but most likely wouldn't have if you has actually been in instrument conditions. Besides, you could have declined.
I was IMC at the time. Broke out shortly after the FAF. I thought the request reasonable. I was heading into a class B airport with lots of big jets. I had the room to stop. I had gotten similar requests while VMC at other airports so knew what to do.
 
Wow, thanks for the quick replies, I missed that in the AIM. I doubt controllers read the aim, so I'm thinking they must have some guidance in their manuals that say the same. So...controllers....do you have the same "should" terminology, and is the remainder worded the same (faf, 5 miles, pilot's concurrence etc)?

Go to www.faa.gov. Type "7110.65S" in the search box. That will take you to the Air Traffic Control Handbook, which is the controller's bible. Read it and you will know what controllers know.

Bob Gardner
 
I understand what you're saying, but this is in direct conflict with

"ATC must obtain pilot concurrence for speed adjustments after approach clearances are issued. "

Maybe I'm nitpicking here....

That speed restriction was issued at the time of the approach clearance.
 
I was IMC at the time. Broke out shortly after the FAF.
That really isn't that low, but if you got the speed adjustment inside the FAF but before you broke out I think that was unreasonable even if it wasn't a big deal for you to execute. You might not have had any problem with it but other pilots might have and the controller didn't know that. Then looking at Roncachamp's post from the controller handbook it seems that they are not supposed to do it anyway.
 
That really isn't that low, but if you got the speed adjustment inside the FAF but before you broke out I think that was unreasonable even if it wasn't a big deal for you to execute. You might not have had any problem with it but other pilots might have and the controller didn't know that. Then looking at Roncachamp's post from the controller handbook it seems that they are not supposed to do it anyway.
I got the speed request with the approach clearance. And yes it was pretty light IMC. Just a thin layer of scud
 
Back
Top