250 below 10K internationally?

[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.