>200 knots within 10 miles

[BEFAN5]

It is daily practice for us to blow into a said control zone at speeds exceeding the 10nm/3000ft rule. It is said we can do this because we have an "unofficial policy with ATC" in our city who would tell us to slow down if they want us too.

Any tower controllers care to comment on how they feel about this, and whether or not you actually enjoy having aircraft if your 5-7nm zone doing 230 knots?

[ahramin]

Interesting. The company may have this unofficial agreement with ATC, but do the pilots have a written official agreement with TC enforcement? Why open yourself up to fines/licence suspension?

Anyone put this through the company SMS?

No birds around this airport? 90% of bird strikes are below 3000'.

[tower controller]

Well I see this just about everyday I'm working and here it's not because of any agreement with ATC, unofficial or otherwise. I don't like it and the first time an incident or god forbid and accident happens I feel this will be brought up as a contributing factor. There are a bunch of factors at play here:
- it's pretty easy for us or anybody else who happens to be in the tower to tell how fast you are grounding, it's right there on the radar
- just because the tower doesn't know about it doesn't mean there isn't any traffic there. In this area there are quite a few float planes that don't have transponders, or don't have them turned on that don't talk to us, and one helicopter in particular that quite frequently skirts the edge of our zone without ever talking to us. He must use GPS because he stays exactly 1 mile from the edge and arcs around our zone then continues on his was without even checking in.
- We've got several training areas around us and although the school tells us which ones they are using quite often they"ll stray outside them and next thing you know you've got somebody heading right at them at 250 or so.

I know it's see and avoid outside the zone, but we all know that the slower you're going the better chance you have of seeing and avoiding the traffic.

I'm reluctant to write somebody up for speeding however in the event of an accident or incident the powers that be are going to look at the radar playback and see how fast you were going, and in the case of a scheduled carrier they can look as far back as thirty days to see if it's a habit.

just my thoughts and sorry for the long post but you did ask.

[HavaJava]

Tower Controller,

Do you have an accurate method of obtaining spot winds at the position and altitude where these aircraft are showing a "speeding groundspeed". I would think that it would be hard to write up a pilot without knowing exactly what the winds are. Also, IAS (which the speed limits are based on) will usually be slightly slower than TAS (groundspeed with no wind) even at 3000 feet.

[husky]

When you work traffic all day you might not know the winds aloft to the nearest knot but it's not that hard to tell who is indicating way over 200 knots.

[HavaJava]

Just saying...I think it would be difficult to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt unless the pilot fesses up to it.

[tower controller]

HavaJava

No we don't have anyway of knowing what the winds aloft are unless we ask someone else on the approach and then we only know what they're telling us they are so their are inherent inaccuracies in what our determination of how the winds are affecting a particular aircraft at a particular time. So yes there would be problems with writing up a pilot for violating the speed restriction, and I wouldn't do it anyway...

Having said that, if there was a problem/incident where speed was a factor it wouldn't surprise me that the investigators would look at the history including all the radar tapes from the last 30 days to determine if a particular operator has a reputation of ignoring the speed order. You have to agree that it would be unlikely for the winds to cause an aircraft to be 30 to 50 knots over the speed limit every day for the last month.

I think pilot's in general think that ATC write up a lot more than we actually do. In 25 years I can count on one hand the number of pilots I've violated for something other than weather, (with weather violations we don't really have a lot of discretion).

I've never written up anyone for the speed order and have been asked by TC why I didn't, and my answer was I only know what his groundspeed was I don't knowwhat his TAS was. Incidentally the aircraft they questioned wasn't involved in the event, they just saw it in the associated radar playback.

Yeah Husky is right, we may not know but we have a damn good idea.

Tower Controller

[AuxBatOn]

Lately, after asking "Speed my discretion below 10 000'" or "Speed my discretion below 3000'", I have been told "I cannot approve that. What is up with that? What if I need to keep the speed up, or want to for the sake of getting there faster? Who should I ask?

[Braun]

Because we don't have authority to override CAR's. It's not an ATC rule!

[AuxBatOn]

Then why was it approved before (and still is by most controllers)? I'll have to look it up, but I believe our rules (GPH204) does say that with ATC approval, we can bust those speeds.

[Big Pistons Forever]

A CF18 came through my home drome lately. He asked for the speed restriction to be waived for his join and break. The reply from the controller "You can go as low and as fast as you want "

[AuxBatOn]

A CF18 came through my home drome lately. He asked for the speed restriction to be waived for his join and break. The reply from the controller "You can go as low and as fast as you want "

Let me guess, Victoria

[Braun]

I didn't say it doesn't happen! But it is definately not our job to enforce that rule. I give 190 or better within 10nm of the field and after that I let the pilot do his thing and don't ask questions!

[Shadowfax]

I don't have the latest "speed order" handy but here is the old one - I trust the intent is still the same:

Airspeed Limitations

602.32 (1) Subject to subsection (2), no person shall
(amended 2010/11/10; previous version)

(a) operate an aircraft at an indicated airspeed of more than 250 knots if the aircraft is below 10,000 feet ASL; or
(amended 2010/11/10; previous version)

(b) operate an aircraft at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots if the aircraft is below 3,000 feet AGL within 10 nautical miles of a controlled aerodrome unless authorized to do so in an air traffic control clearance.

Seems to me the intent of this order was to avoid planes (mostly Military but also F28's) screaming into busy airports and royally screwing up ATC AND increasing the risk of collision (IFR to VFR). (and now birds ). At a busy controlled airport, if ATC says "go fast", or "best speed to the marker" etc I think this rule is toast. If you've ever worked an F5 or 104 the "normal" approach speeds and spacing patterns with civilian traffic are toast anyway.....

[WJ700]

I had a controller tell me that when we slow up fast (IE throwing both anchors out) the radar sweep doesn't update fast enough and can sometimes show us going faster than we are below 10,000 feet for about 7 seconds. Is that possible with the 3000 / 200 knots because we have more drag available in that speed range and can slow up even faster.

[Braun]

I stand corrected! I must of forgotten that exemption....good to know

[crazy horse]

I believe that exemption has changed. But something tells me military can still do it.

[Shadowfax]

A little tricky to find the new version - but it's very public. Check out the link - it has all the rationale for the change:

http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2010/ ... 9-eng.html

2. Section 602.32 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

602.32 (1) Subject to subsection (2), no person shall

(a) operate an aircraft at an indicated airspeed of more than 250 knots if the aircraft is below 10,000 feet ASL; or

(b) operate an aircraft at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots if the aircraft is below 3,000 feet AGL within 10 nautical miles of a controlled aerodrome unless authorized to do so in an air traffic control clearance.

(2) A person may operate an aircraft at an indicated airspeed greater than the airspeeds referred to in subsection (1) if the aircraft is being operated in accordance with a special flight operations certificate – special aviation event issued pursuant to section 603.02.

(3) If the minimum safe airspeed for the flight configuration of an aircraft is greater than the airspeed referred to in subsection (1), the aircraft shall be operated at the minimum safe airspeed.

Description

This amendment to section 602.32, Airspeed Limitations, of the Canadian Aviation Regulations removes the possibility to operate an aircraft on departure at an indicated airspeed greater than 250 knots below 10 000 feet above sea level, and, unless authorized to do so by an air traffic control clearance, at indicated airspeeds greater than 200 knots, below 3 000 feet above ground level within 10 nautical miles of a controlled aerodrome.

Seems pretty clear - never above 250 and only above 200 if allowed/asked by ATC

[AuxBatOn]

I didn't say it doesn't happen! But it is definately not our job to enforce that rule. I give 190 or better within 10nm of the field and after that I let the pilot do his thing and don't ask questions!

So you can violate someone for doing something, but you cannot authorize someone to do it. Something tells me it doesn't make sense....

Eighter way, I think I'm just going to tell ATC what I am doing and let them deal with it. If they want me to do something else, they can tell me!

[Braun]

We report only, Nav Canada does not penalize or anything of the such.

[cyeg66]

From Shadowfax's post:

(3) If the minimum safe airspeed for the flight configuration of an aircraft is greater than the airspeed referred to in subsection (1), the aircraft shall be operated at the minimum safe airspeed.

I left it up to the Hornet drivers to determine whether it was "safe to fly" at about 2000 AGL at 500 kts at 11 pm over Sherwood Park. All I said was "I have no speed restrictions for you" and they obliged.... To my surprise, no phone calls came in.

[snowbear]

102.01These Regulations do not apply in respect of:

(a) military aircraft of Her Majesty in right of Canada when they are being manoeuvred under the authority of the Minister of National Defence

Military pilots are not required to follow the CAR's. They do so only as a good public relations gesture. They can not be taken to task by Transport Canada for a violation of the CIVILIAN aviation regulations.
The latest amendment to the speed limit rules was to align Canada with ICAO. 250 below 10000 and 200 below 3000 are world wide standards.

[AuxBatOn]

We may not be subjected to CARs, however we are subjected to our own regulations which are, oddly enough, very similar to the civilian rules...... Actually.... This rule is almost the exact same. And yes, ATC can report us and yes, we sometimes get violated.

[bcflyer]

It is daily practice for us to blow into a said control zone at speeds exceeding the 10nm/3000ft rule. It is said we can do this because we have an "unofficial policy with ATC" in our city who would tell us to slow down if they want us too.

Any tower controllers care to comment on how they feel about this, and whether or not you actually enjoy having aircraft if your 5-7nm zone doing 230 knots?

Can you explain why you would want to break the rules? Doing 230 vs 200 only saves you about 30 sec at the very most over 7-10 miles. All legalities aside, is saving 30 sec really worth the extra workload, wear and tear on the airplane, and potential safety risks?

[BEFAN5]

Because in my seat, my name isn't on no flight plan.