Do not exceed xxx knots

[KevinAu 441]

>so my question now after not really getting an answer is, why>would the ATC let an airplane know when they are at 2 thousand>feet, to not exceed 280 knots? IMO that is waiving the speed>restriction. but I guess I would have had to ask the ATC there>if thats what they ment as there obviously is no set in stone>rule regarding that judging by the replies hereThis is getting ridiculous.You've gotten your answer already. At least two of the people who've replied drive airliners in the US for a living. It is obviously not the answer you are looking for. Maybe you should go ask somewhere else.

[Guest]

yes and one of them swears that you would NEVER EVER get to break the speed limitSo my question once again is, WHY would the ATC inform a pilot climbing at 2 thousand feet to not exceed 280 knots???

[Guest]

I don't doubt its a rule, but to deny that it is ever lifted is to deny reality.oh thats right, a "real" captain said it will never be broken. I should just STFU and take that like the word of God

[KevinAu 441]

>"I'm suspecting JohnCi is sitting back there watching the>groundspeed with a GPS or "Airshow" up on the monitors">>Negative,>>On these flights I have listened in to ATC comms which UAL>(and American at one point) made available on in flight audio.> That, and my experience with flight and ATC, makes me believe>I know what I am hearing. The one instance where we were>cleared for faster than 250KIAS was on approach into SFO>several years back, and we had descended below 10,000 ft. Why>we were cleared for the faster speed, I don't know, but it may>have been for some good reason privy only to ATC.>>-JohnThe keywords missing from your first reply was "cleared for." Being cleared to do something is worlds different than "kicking it up a notch." Especially in the context of the original question, since if your pilots are able to kick things up a notch at will, it would probably lead a stubborn, less knowledgeable reader to think their assertion that there is no more 250kt limit below 10000 is true.

[KevinAu 441]

>yes and one of them swears that you would NEVER EVER get to>break the speed limit>>So my question once again is, WHY would the ATC inform a pilot>climbing at 2 thousand feet to not exceed 280 knots???So that he wouldn't have to do it later.

[Jeff Nielsen 1,386]

John,It is possible, but only for the 'safety of the flight' may a controller physically issue a higher speed. The same goes for the PIC. If you're on approach (as in established) also, I would be very scared to have to exceed anything higher than your final approach speed as well. Slowing those big birds down to VRef can be very hard if your above 250 and within 15 miles of the touchdown point.My best 'guess' is that when you mean on approach you were actually on the arrival not the actual approach. Correct me if I'm wrong.Also, depending on where you're coming in from both the Golden4 and MOD arrivals have waypoints with altitude restrictions above 10K and or 10k/250 restrctions or a combo of thereof. They probably wanted you at 280 somewhere above 10K to get to another waypoint along the arrival, meaning still that when you descended below 10K you still need to slow down.It's hard to say since I wasn't there and not knowing the traffic situation either.

[Jeff Nielsen 1,386]

Kevin,Didn't I say that controllers often issue subsequent instructions in the same breath?...lol.

[Guest jrewing]

Yee gads, I'm hesitant to get into this, but ...When I read the U.S. regulation (14 CFR 91.117) it says that no one may operate an aircraft at an indicated air speed of greater than 250 knots when below 10,000 feet MSL. Paragraph (d) allows a higher speed if it is necessary for a particular type of (heavy) aircraft.I fly most every day in and around SFO class B and the only times I've heard anyone going faster than 250 knots below 10,000 feet is when the pilot tells ATC "Our minimum speed today is 265 knots" or something similar after being given a speed restriction by ATC during their climbout.When ATC tells a pilot to maintain best forward speed on approach, it is assumed that the aircraft will resume their normal approach speed after reaching the final approach fix.There was a test program around Houston where aircraft were allowed to go faster than 250 knots below 10,000 feet, but that program has been discontinued.I fear this will only stir the pot, but I had to chime in.

[Jeff Nielsen 1,386]

And para 'd' goes towards the safety of the flight. :-)I believe that para also goes on to say other things about phrases not allowed by controllers, etc. in reference to speed. I think it's that para or one close to it. I was just reading it.Note: It is the PIC's reponsibility for the overal safety of the flight as outlined and allowed in that para. ATC does not initiate the lifting of the speed restriction.

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"My best 'guess' is that when you mean on approach you were actually on the arrival not the actual approach. Correct me if I'm wrong.Also, depending on where you're coming in from both the Golden4 and MOD arrivals have waypoints with altitude restrictions above 10K and or 10k/250 restrctions or a combo of thereof. They probably wanted you at 280 somewhere above 10K to get to another waypoint along the arrival, meaning still that when you descended below 10K you still need to slow down.It's hard to say since I wasn't there and not knowing the traffic situation either."You are probably right--the flight was a number of years back and I only recall the controller asking the pilot to pick up the speed because I thought it an odd request given the rather rough weather in SFO at the time.I didn't mean for this to become a big blown up affair. Perhaps I heard wrong or remember wrong--it's been some years since the flight. Anyone rushing to my defense should do so knowing the risk that, like the Captain of the Titanic, I may be going down with the ship :) (Especially when it comes to relying on my memory)

[Guest Will__UK]

An interesting topic this.I've just checked with a guy who's just completing his ATPL and he said that "no speed restriction" means there is no speed restriction until told otherwise by ATC, doesn't matter about Flight Level. He flies with his dad out of Gatwick occasionally. I can't comment on other airports or other country rules or regulations as I know nothing :(.I always thought that the following applied unless clearly stated:Maintain 250kts below FL100 (due noise proceedures and a/c spacing)I have heard ATC stating "no speed restriction" but I have often wondered if this applied to below FL100 or after passing through the FL100 itself. - saying this, I have seen a/c climbing out of Gatwick on the SFD8P SID flooring it some days. This could give a false impression on some days i guess, due weather conditions (less dense air on warm days requiring greater groundspeed for a set IAS) or weight of a/c (thrust applied) and what a/c type it is.Maybe it's the UK's way of implying "GET OFF MY LAND!" (in old UK farmer voice LOL!)Just to also state that inflight displays for passengers give Groundspeed - totally different to ATC "IAS" instructions.Sorted!So there we go... factual info!

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"You've gotten your answer already. At least two of the people who've replied drive airliners in the US for a living. It is obviously not the answer you are looking for. Maybe you should go ask somewhere else."Kevin--please tone it down a bit.-John

[Jeff Nielsen 1,386]

John,LOL, there's nothing wrong with stating what you heard and asking if it was correct. It's an interesting topic and often times even real pilots get easily confused and can even break FAR's.I've done it myself. I forgot to call when entering the upper part of south end of the Class B while on a flight plan. I caught myself pretty quickly and called them before they called me, stated 'sorry for the late call' and they said 'no problem--have a nice flight--would you like service?"It's hard for non-pilots to understand that when they hear multiple instructions given in the same breath, what is actually going on. You have to almost be there.

[KevinAu 441]

>>There was a test program around Houston where aircraft were>allowed to go faster than 250 knots below 10,000 feet, but>that program has been discontinued.>I actually got to do that a bunch of times. It was fairly novel at first doing 300kts right off the runway, but then you start to realize it was kind of pointless, dangerous and inefficient for many reasons, so they decided the experiment was a failure.1. No appreciable increase in aircraft departure rate was noticed by the statisticians.2. A birdstrike would occur at a higher speed and cause more damage.3. People were getting violated for busting the speed limit. Yes, that's right. Because we would climbout shallow to accelerate to high speed, people would punch out the sides of the Class B and end up doing in excess of 250 both below 10000 and below Class B. The speed exemption only applied inside Houston's Class B. So now you were both outside the protected airspace, below 10000, and going faster than the regular speed limit, punching through the areas where uncontrolled GA planes would be. Not a good combination.4. Burned up lots more gas. You spent more time lower and faster, both of which compounds your fuel burn. Unthinkable nowadays.Towards the end, few of us actually accelerated that fast when given the clearance, since it was just too much work and risk trying to stay within the protected airspace in our aircraft.

[Guest]

>Kevin,>>Didn't I say that controllers often issue subsequent>instructions in the same breath?...lol.sorry I just don't buy it. I guess I asked the wrong forum.