IFR: Balance Unchanged

[ImmaPilot96]

I fly pipeline inspection aircraft in the Edmonton area and whenever I am flying out of Edmonton I hear the clearance/ground controller tell an aircraft that their "balance is unchanged". I assume this is coupled with an amendment to a clearance but I was wondering what it meant exactly. I am currently not instrument rated but I am just curious what it means.
Thanks

[FL_CH]

Basically means “the rest of the [previous] clearance is unchanged”

[wordstwice]

It’s exactly as you predicted, theres an amendment to the IFR clearance and instead of giving the whole clearance again, just give the part that’s changed and say “balanced unchanged”.

[RexKrammer]

To add to what the other replies have stated with an example.

Say someone on the ground is given an IFR Clearance out of CYQF departing Runway 35 for CYVR.
Upon getting release from the IFR controller the Tower controller is given the amendment, "turn left heading 270".
The Tower controller would then relay this to the pilot as "Amendment to your clearance, on departure turn left heading 270, balance unchanged."

Any other altitude restrictions such as initial climb and further waypoints and airways routings remain the same as what was previously given to the pilot. The pilot would fly heading 270 instead of the SID heading.

[Rees.Crerar]

The annoying thing about this topic is I cannot find any reference to this in the AIM, the Pilot and ATC definitions advisory circular or the ATC Phraseology guide. I hold an instrument rating and I was never taught this and have never read anything about this.

[DHC-1 Jockey]

It's approved phraseology in our MATS (Manual of Air Traffic Services). As controllers, MATS is our rulebook.

Example: Amending an altitude in a previously issued SID departure clearance: AIR CANADA SIX-ONE-SIX, AMENDMENT TO YOUR SID, CLIMB TO SEVEN THOUSAND, BALANCE UNCHANGED.

I can't find the reference "balance unchanged" anywhere else either (TC AIM, CARS, TC Instrument Procedures Manual, etc), but since MATS is approved by Transport Canada, it's a valid instruction.

[digits_]

It's approved phraseology in our MATS (Manual of Air Traffic Services). As controllers, MATS is our rulebook.

Example: Amending an altitude in a previously issued SID departure clearance: AIR CANADA SIX-ONE-SIX, AMENDMENT TO YOUR SID, CLIMB TO SEVEN THOUSAND, BALANCE UNCHANGED.

I can't find the reference "balance unchanged" anywhere else either (TC AIM, CARS, TC Instrument Procedures Manual, etc), but since MATS is approved by Transport Canada, it's a valid instruction.

It's great to have an instruction that's only defined on the ATC side of things.

Seems like a completely superflous unnecessary addition. What information does it really add? Nothing.

[Mayor_McCheese]

I don't understand how this is confusing, or superfluous. The OP was right in his assumption.

"balance of your clearance is unchanged" meaning "everything in your clearance that I didn't just change stays the same".

I have never had a pilot question this.

[digits_]

I don't understand how this is confusing, or superfluous. The OP was right in his assumption.

"balance of your clearance is unchanged" meaning "everything in your clearance that I didn't just change stays the same".

I have never had a pilot question this.

Does that mean if ATC doesn't add that particular statement, your whole clearance would have been void?

[NJ]

I don't understand how this is confusing, or superfluous. The OP was right in his assumption.

"balance of your clearance is unchanged" meaning "everything in your clearance that I didn't just change stays the same".

I have never had a pilot question this.

Never had an issue. In MATS if something isn't spelled out, we are supposed to use clear and concise language. "Balance unchanged" is clear and concise.

[DHC-1 Jockey]

It's great to have an instruction that's only defined on the ATC side of things.

Seems like a completely superflous unnecessary addition. What information does it really add? Nothing.

It adds that we are amending the SID that we previously issued you (altitude, heading and/or route), but the rest of your clearance remains the same. For example, maybe the SID transition was changed, but that new transition also leads into your flight planned route. As a pilot, you may be wondering if anything else in your route changed beyond that new transition point. To inform you that it hasn't, we say "balance unchanged."

I flew for 15+ years on the 704/705 side before becoming a controller, and never once did I feel the need to ask what "balance unchanged" meant, nor have I ever heard of a pilot need clarification on what it meant.

Now that I'm a controller, I've never had a pilot ask what it meant. It's pretty obvious, is plain language and the likelihood of misunderstanding is non-existent. Hence, there's no need to "define" it anywhere.

[digits_]

It's great to have an instruction that's only defined on the ATC side of things.

Seems like a completely superflous unnecessary addition. What information does it really add? Nothing.

It adds that we are amending the SID that we previously issued you (altitude, heading and/or route), but the rest of your clearance remains the same. For example, maybe the SID transition was changed, but that new transition also leads into your flight planned route. As a pilot, you may be wondering if anything else in your route changed beyond that new transition point. To inform you that it hasn't, we say "balance unchanged."

I flew for 15+ years on the 704/705 side before becoming a controller, and never once did I feel the need to ask what "balance unchanged" meant, nor have I ever heard of a pilot need clarification on what it meant.

Now that I'm a controller, I've never had a pilot ask what it meant. It's pretty obvious, is plain language and the likelihood of misunderstanding is non-existent. Hence, there's no need to "define" it anywhere.

I understand what it means, but I don't see what information it adds. It seems a bit like the ACTPA equivalent of ATC.

Could you explain the difference in these 2 instructions:

AIR CANADA SIX-ONE-SIX, AMENDMENT TO YOUR SID, CLIMB TO SEVEN THOUSAND, BALANCE UNCHANGED.

or

AIR CANADA SIX-ONE-SIX, AMENDMENT TO YOUR SID, CLIMB TO SEVEN THOUSAND.


As a pilot, I would do the exact same thing in both these circumstances. Would you expect me to do something different?

I don't think the FAA has an equivalent to 'balance unchanged', neither does EASA. Why does Canada require that statement? Genuinely curious what's different here.

Now that I'm a controller, I've never had a pilot ask what it meant. It's pretty obvious, is plain language and the likelihood of misunderstanding is non-existent. Hence, there's no need to "define" it anywhere.

Just because they don't ask, doesn't mean they fully understand what it means. It might be obvious to English speaking folks, but aviation is quite internationally and 'balance unchanged' is quite abstract terminology for non native speakers. It's likely classified under the 'it's something they say in Canada'-category. At the very least it should be defined in some pilot publications if you/ATC/the government is serious about its usage.

[Mayor_McCheese]

I don't think the FAA has an equivalent to 'balance unchanged', neither does EASA. Why does Canada require that statement? Genuinely curious what's different here.

It's not a requirement. It doesn't need to be read back. I say it as a clarification so there is no confusion. We could also say "what i just said is the only part of your clearance that changed"

At the very least it should be defined in some pilot publications if you/ATC/the government is serious about its usage.

As stated above, it is clear and concise language that doesn't need to be defined anywhere. "Balance" = remainder "unchanged" = unchanged.

[digits_]

I don't think the FAA has an equivalent to 'balance unchanged', neither does EASA. Why does Canada require that statement? Genuinely curious what's different here.

It's not a requirement. It doesn't need to be read back. I say it as a clarification so there is no confusion. We could also say "what i just said is the only part of your clearance that changed"

But what confusion could there be if you didn't say it? The irony is you're making things more confusing by using phraseology that isn't defined anywhere on the pilot side of things and seems completely unnecessary/meaningless. I even tried to look it up in MATS, but that document doesn't seem to be publicly accessible anywhere...

Would it not confuse you if suddenly a pilot started adding their clearance limit to every readback? Just as a clarification.

- CGABC, climb 8000 ft
Climb 8000 ft, clearance limit CXYZ, CGABC

At the very least it should be defined in some pilot publications if you/ATC/the government is serious about its usage.

As stated above, it is clear and concise language that doesn't need to be defined anywhere. "Balance" = remainder "unchanged" = unchanged.

It wasn't clear to the OP, and it wasn't clear to me either when I first heard it.

Oxford doesn't define this particular meaning anywhere: https://www.oed.com/dictionary/balance_ ... e#29246810

Merriam Webster does, as one of 16 possible meanings: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/balance
And when lacking the context, it's not obvious which one exactly you might mean.

'balance' was only used in the context of 'balanced field length' during pilot training for example. That's where my mind wandered off to when I first heard it. Not that that made much sense.

[DHC-1 Jockey]

It wasn't clear to the OP, and it wasn't clear to me either when I first heard it.

Oxford doesn't define this particular meaning anywhere: https://www.oed.com/dictionary/balance_ ... e#29246810

Merriam Webster does, as one of 16 possible meanings: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/balance
And when lacking the context, it's not obvious which one exactly you might mean.

'balance' was only used in the context of 'balanced field length' during pilot training for example. That's where my mind wandered off to when I first heard it. Not that that made much sense.

Would you instead like us to say “Remainder of your IFR clearance is unchanged?” Or will you then just complain that the word “remainder” could be confused with what you’re left over with after doing long division?

For the thousands of times this phrase has been used and no misunderstanding has come of it, you’re making a mountain out of a mole hill. It’s impossible to have a definition/glossary of every possible word used by ATC.

[digits_]

It wasn't clear to the OP, and it wasn't clear to me either when I first heard it.

Oxford doesn't define this particular meaning anywhere: https://www.oed.com/dictionary/balance_ ... e#29246810

Merriam Webster does, as one of 16 possible meanings: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/balance
And when lacking the context, it's not obvious which one exactly you might mean.

'balance' was only used in the context of 'balanced field length' during pilot training for example. That's where my mind wandered off to when I first heard it. Not that that made much sense.

Would you instead like us to say “Remainder of your IFR clearance is unchanged?” Or will you then just complain that the word “remainder” could be confused with what you’re left over with after doing long division?

For the thousands of times this phrase has been used and no misunderstanding has come of it, you’re making a mountain out of a mole hill. It’s impossible to have a definition/glossary of every possible word used by ATC.

Other than this particular phrase then apparently, everything ATC says has a reason. You can't generally omit anything, without changing the meaning of the message. It's weird that this particular phrase does not have a purpose, and that it's commonly being used by ATC without having any reference to it in pilot publications. I have a suspicion that a lot of international pilots and new pilots just ignore the statement, or keep quiet that they don't know what it means. Which is not a good mindset to have when it comes to clearances.

If you use it every day, it might become obvious. But to some users it most certainly is not.

If you'd like to test the clarity of the instruction, go fly in the US and after a clearance amendment read back ask them 'Confirm balance unchanged?'.

It’s impossible to have a definition/glossary of every possible word used by ATC.

Isn't that what MATS is for on your side of things? There's always exceptions for emergencies, but standard phraseology is very much defined in most of the world, precisely because English is *not* the primary language of the majority of the population.



If TC doesn't deem it worthy to explain its meaning anywhere to the pilots, and the statement doesn't mean anything (no difference in clearances with or without it), perhaps it's time to drop it?

[wordstwice]

I can’t believe this is even a discussion topic. Do you really need guidance on the phrase “Balanced unchanged”?

If so, where does it end?

[digits_]

I can’t believe this is even a discussion topic. Do you really need guidance on the phrase “Balanced unchanged”?

Yes.

If so, where does it end?

Right there I can't come up with another commonly used sentence or statement that is not defined, explained, or even mentioned in any pilot publication.

[Mayor_McCheese]

If you'd like to test the clarity of the instruction, go fly in the US and after a clearance amendment read back ask them 'Confirm balance unchanged?'.

I don't need to. I've said this phrase thousands of times to both foreign and domestic flight crews. 99% of them have read it back, and 0% have ever asked for clarification.

Isn't that what MATS is for on your side of things? There's always exceptions for emergencies, but standard phraseology is very much defined in most of the world, precisely because English is *not* the primary language of the majority of the population.

No, you'd be surprised how few phrases are actually defined. MATS says to use "standard phrases or plain language". This falls into plain language.

If TC doesn't deem it worthy to explain its meaning anywhere to the pilots, and the statement doesn't mean anything (no difference in clearances with or without it), perhaps it's time to drop it?

Perhaps. You should probably take it up with TC then. I'll be eagerly waiting for their response....

[DHC-1 Jockey]

I can't come up with another commonly used sentence or statement that is not defined, explained, or even mentioned in any pilot publication.

What about "after departure?" We say that all day every day. Ex. "Right turn out after departure, cleared takeoff RWY XX." I hope you understand what that means.

Nowhere in MATS is the term "after departure" defined. I looked and it's not defined in the CARS or the TC AIM either. It's plain language and understood. You won't find it "defined, explained or even mentioned in any pilot publication."

Unless you have some sort of weird rationale or excuse why a foreign pilot may misunderstand what "after departure" means, this example shows your argument is invalid.

[digits_]

If you'd like to test the clarity of the instruction, go fly in the US and after a clearance amendment read back ask them 'Confirm balance unchanged?'.

I don't need to. I've said this phrase thousands of times to both foreign and domestic flight crews. 99% of them have read it back, and 0% have ever asked for clarification.

That doesn't mean they fully understand its meaning. As I mentioned above, after a while it can easily become 'just something Canadians say'.

If you want to test the hypothesis that it's a clear instruction to someone who has never heard it before, look for a native speaker in aviation that has never used it before, such as US or UK ATC, use that particular phrase, and see if they understand what you're trying to say/ask.

If you're using it daily, I can easily see why you might become biased and it might seem super obvious to you.

I have some trouble understanding why the ATC folk here seem to be defending the statement so much. There's a report that at least 2 pilots (OP and me) did not understand what the phrase meant when we first heard it and a 3rd was looking for a reference. And the reply is 'it's clear language!'. Well ok then...

What about "after departure?" We say that all day every day. Ex. "Right turn out after departure, cleared takeoff RWY XX." I hope you understand what that means.

Nowhere in MATS is the term "after departure" defined. I looked and it's not defined in the CARS or the TC AIM either. It's plain language and understood. You won't find it "defined, explained or even mentioned in any pilot publication."

Unless you have some sort of weird rationale or excuse why a foreign pilot may misunderstand what "after departure" means, this example shows your argument is invalid.

Page 26 in the VFR phraseology guide lists it as an example: https://www.navcanada.ca/en/vfr-phraseology.pdf

But you're right that it's not a definition. Yet the 'balance unchanged' isn't even used in the phraseology guides. Even worse...

[DHC-1 Jockey]

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. It's impossible to define/explain every possible phrase we use to the nth degree. Sometimes common sense and plain language has to prevail. As you said, "after departure" isn't defined anywhere, so who knows that could mean?!

[digits_]

It's impossible to define/explain every possible phrase we use to the nth degree.

For daily standard operations, it's absolutely possible. How do you think people in non-native English speaking countries train their pilots and controllers?

I often wonder if native English speakers fully appreciate the enormous advantage they have when it comes to aviation. Not having to learn a new language to fly an airplane internationally is a big perk. But that advantage comes with a responsibility: to stick to the standard phraseology that has been internationally agreed upon. Every country still has the right to adjust the international rules to their liking, but if you do, please be mindful of the rest of Earth's population. At the very least define those deviations somewhere. Once could say the international ICAO language is not English, it's Aviation English.

The 'cool' pilot slang is the most common example of deviations. Things as 'fishfinder', 'in the box', climbing 'two point five' or the famous 'ACTPA'.
The 'balance unchanged' is the first example I've encountered on the ATC side of things where they seem to come up with new phrases without a clear definition or reason. And that's a shame. I really like the very consistent Canadian ATC. The US is much worse in this regard. Especially if you listen to some of the New York examples online.

As you said, "after departure" isn't defined anywhere, so who knows that could mean?!

At first glance there's absolutely some ambiguity in that instruction. But start a different topic about that if you'd like to discuss it, to prevent a further thread drift on this one.

[Braun]

I get your point and would usually err on the side of using standardized phraseology but in this case I do not recall ever hearing or hearing of the usage of ''balance unchanged'' leading to confusion or any sort of nav error.

To me it's one of those thigns that is plain enough and if something seems off or the crew doesn't understand it they should ask to clarify.

[kevenv]

To the people who object or complain about "balance unchanged", I suggest you complain to TC and NavCanada about it. That is the only way you will see a change assuming your complaint is deemed valid. Controllers have phraseology checked at least annually. Remedial checks are performed if you fail to meet the standard. They can be pretty anal about what they deem acceptable or not but "balance unchanged" has never met that threshold and until there are complaints it probably never will.