250 below 10K internationally?

[Beetle007]

So I've always heard people say we can do 250 below 10K when we are 12 miles offshore. Most controllers even seem to expect it on some arrivals into airports like Ft. Lauderdale.

This FAA legal interpreation (dated 2007) seems to say otherwise: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...tations/data/interps/2007/Shacknai interp.pdf

Has anyone had any issues with this or has the FAA ever issued a violation since this 2007 interpretation?

Can the FAA even issue a violation for something that happens in international airspace?

 

[rumpletumbler]

I was up front descending into Frankfurt in a Lufthansa A-340 a few years ago and I was surprised to see the guy doing 320 at like 7 grand. I was glad we weren't over Florida.

 

[Beetle007]

I was up front descending into Frankfurt in a Lufthansa A-340 a few years ago and I was surprised to see the guy doing 320 at like 7 grand. I was glad we weren't over Florida.

A birdstrike might hurt at 320kts. I've "heard" of people that do 340kts at 2000 ft when flying internationally. Probably not that fuel efficient either =)

 

[Looking]

Even though 250 KIAS is adapted by the ICAO as the international standard bellow 10000' and also written into rules by most of the ICAO member countries; the respective countries has also given ATC the sole authority to waive this restriction as they see at any given time.
Some European airports has made the 250 KIAS permanent below 10000' , others have made it only within certain FIRS and bellow certain altitudes, while others again have made it "free speed" unless otherwise informed by ATC or ATIS.

 

[Cardinal]

That letter is ridiculous. "Yes, a metric crapload of FAA documentation refers to the accepted practice of no speed limit beyond the FIR, but we feel 91.117 is sacred as God and the Administrator intended."

 

[Fly4$]

Anybody know the exact reason for the 250 restriction? I thought it was just to make the speeds more manageable for ATC.

Don't see any reason why we need to be restricted when flying well outside the coast.

 

[Beetle007]

Anybody know the exact reason for the 250 restriction? I thought it was just to make the speeds more manageable for ATC.

Don't see any reason why we need to be restricted when flying well outside the coast.

The short answer is Bird Strikes.

"In 1997 the FAA began a test at the Houston Intercontinental Airport, allowing for speeds in excess of 250 KIAS on departure."

"In 1999 the NTSB expressed their concern to the FAA regarding the safety of high-speed flight at low altitude due to the bird strike hazard (Hall, 1999). Since the test could not be proven to be as safe as the former procedure the FAA terminated the test."http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=birdstrike2005

This is what happend to an Airbus that hit a bird at 250 kts. Imagine hitting one at 340 kts:​

"In 1989 an A-320 aircraft, operating at 2,500’ and 250 knots indicated airspeed (KIAS), collided with a vulture (~10 pound) just above the cockpit windscreen. Although the windows were not penetrated, sufficient energy was imparted onto the airframe to destroy 4 of the 6 cockpit display units (CRTs) and loosen a fire button, causing the shutdown of one engine."

 

[Wino]

The short answer is Bird Strikes. Hitting a bird at 300 kts vs 250 kts will resule in 44% greater impact forces.

Ummm, NO, 100 percent wrong. The short answer is ANCESTOR WORSHIP

The reason the reg was enacted was because of a collision between two 4 engine aircraft over brooklyn in the early 60s.

On the 16th of Dec 1960 a United DC-8 over ran its clearence limit while entering a holding pattern and ran into a TWA Connie.

The 8 didn't have DME as it wasn't required at the time and was busy trying to do crossing radials at 300 plus knots near the ground.

The net result of the collision (other than dead people splattered over NYC) was the 250 below 10 rule and DME became mandatory. (remember Rickenbacker used to order the aircraft for Eastern Airlines without autopilots... He paid his pilots to FLY!)

Cheers
Andrew Weingram

PS. 250 below 10 COSTS fuel. Don't believe me? Set up econ on your FMS, and delete the speed limits. You will be suprised at the result. You will Climb at a much higher speed. You will come down slower, However...

 

[Beetle007]

Ummm, NO, 100 percent wrong. The short answer is ANCESTOR WORSHIP

Yes..the FAA originally established 250 kts due to mid-air collision avoidance. But, the FAA wanted to allow some airports to waive the 250 kt restriction (like Houston, Memphis, Atlanta, etc..). The FAA abandoned this test when the NTSB was concerned about bird strikes. To tell me that I am 100 percent wrong is just ignorant.

 

[Cardinal]

A few aircraft (all Embraers?) are limited to 250 down low anyway on account of the birdstrike risk.

 

[Wino]

yep, and that is why the test failed. You can't move more traffic down a highway at higher speed unless everyone goes faster.

15 years ago the test would have succeded. But not now with all the airway cloggers out there...

Also, the FAA NEVER removes a rule, no matter how rediculous once it has been enacted. Witness the attemp to raise the masks required limit when one crew member gets up, Raise the retirement age etc...

The FAA makes rules, they dont rescind them. Its just not in their nature.

Cheers
Wino

 

[rjacobs]

A few aircraft (all Embraers?) are limited to 250 down low anyway on account of the birdstrike risk.

Most of the 145's are, every model except the XR. The XR could do 300 below 10 before hitting the barber pole. I would guess the other models could as well with a software revision to change the barber pole.

 

[GCD]

The B-747 is required to climb at speeds greater than 250 KIAS when it is taking off at heavy weights. Becasue of this operational need, Boeing installed three inch thick windscreens for birdstrike protection. During the IAH test, ALPA was rightfully concerned with the safety factor that not all aircraft windscreens are required to meet birdstrike protection above 250 KIAS .

The US just requires the verbage "request high speed climb." The UK now requires the PIC to request a specific speed to be used during the climb.

Some countries will require 250 KIAS @ 10,000', not below (Japan comes to mind). Some countries require 250 KIAS as high as 11,000' for climb and descent.

Miami routinely asked arrivals to keep their speed up to the 12 mile point, but, as this post points out, the FAA Legal interprets OPS SPECS of a carrier requires that carrier to maitain 250 KIAS below 10,000', regardless if in international airspace or any other country, unless there is an operational need for a speed above 250 KIAS.

I've heard a lot of boneheads ask for a high speed descent below 10,000' in order to get down. I call them boneheads because it is so much easier to get a heavy airplane down faster if it goes slower...Something about kinectic energy being greater than potential energy...Just read that book about flying the big jets and you will understand what I mean. It works for RJ's as well.

 

[AKAAB]

It's in our FOM, so there's nothing to debate. It says anytime we're below 10k we have to stay at 250 or less.

 

[CaptSeth]

The Vzf in the DC10 can be as high as 287. Let 'er rip!

 

[Floatplane]

Quite simply, most airlines now restrict 250 kias below 10K in their FOM's or SOP's. I believe the reg's state you must comply with your companies FOM, SOP's, or the FAR's whichever is the most restrictive. Thus, 250 kias below 10K should be a non-topic unless your company does not specifically restrict it.

 

[Poahi]

The only way this is going to get settled is by someone being violated by the FAA and challenging it.

 

[GCD]

Poahi,

I don't understand why you say that. It's pretty clear cut. We don't need a violation to prove anything.

Not more than 250 KIAS below 10,000' unless operationally necessary...anywhere, US, UK, EU, international airspace or Zimbabwe, if you have a US Ops Specs.

Operationally necessary means; a heavy airplane with flaps up speed greater than 250 KIAS, or; let's say, a smaller jet speeding up to shed ice; or let's say, a B-747 with a turbulence penetration speed of 290-310 KIAS. If it is operationally necessary, with the concurrence with ATC, then speed'er up. Let'er rip!

 

[Beetle007]

Quite simply, most airlines now restrict 250 kias below 10K in their FOM's or SOP's.

What does this mean in an FOM?

"Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator (or by ATC in the case of operations in Class
A airspace), no person may operate an aircraft below 10,000 feet MSL at an indicated airspeed​

of more than 250 knots"

Is there such a thing as class A airspace below 10,000 MSL?

 

[macdu]

yep, and that is why the test failed. You can't move more traffic down a highway at higher speed unless everyone goes faster.

15 years ago the test would have succeded. But not now with all the airway cloggers out there...

Also, the FAA NEVER removes a rule, no matter how rediculous once it has been enacted. Witness the attemp to raise the masks required limit when one crew member gets up, Raise the retirement age etc...

The FAA makes rules, they dont rescind them. Its just not in their nature.

Cheers
Wino

OOPPS, gotcha.